duplicate the W on mufflers

[Dale C.]

Re: duplicate the W on mufflers

How big of a judging hit would it be using that service replacement? Say with a 87 date, (about the closest thing to real that you can get now) then you cut that extra mounting bracket off (cleanly) and welded it to the mid pipe then added the black out? No way to reproduce the original but its GM & NOS.
Dale

[Paul O.]

Re: duplicate the W on mufflers

Dale the biggest problem with non GM mufflers is Configuration, then Date and finally Finish. Most lose 60% of available points but a GM service replacement with the date stamped in the body would lose 40% due to Config due to the stamping and then the Date. Some judges may only take 20% for the Date only and not for the Config. issue of the additional stamping.


Paul 18046

[Mark D.]

Re: duplicate the W on mufflers

But is it a real deal side pipe car? We may have issues here.

I must admit it does have a dubious owner history with Stan and Chuck being two of them. It probably does warrant further review.

[Mark D.]

Re: duplicate the W on mufflers

You might recite your squawk list to the ATC guys on one of your night flights to keep them awake .

Hinck,

That would put them to sleep, for sure.

[Paul O.]

Re: duplicate the W on mufflers

I must admit it does have a dubious owner history with Stan and Chuck being two of them. It probably does warrant further review.

With the people involved I would recommend a very detailed inspection by at least 10 others before continuing.


Paul 18046

[Dale C.]

Re: duplicate the W on mufflers

Paul
Thanks, so probably the GM replacement is slightly more point correct. I also like having a NOS GM part back on the car.
Dale

[Joe L.]

Re: duplicate the W on mufflers

Paul
Thanks, so probably the GM replacement is slightly more point correct. I also like having a NOS GM part back on the car.
Dale

Dale------


Yes, I think the GM replacement is the best overall. However, they were discontinued a long time ago, are difficult to find nowadays and always expensive when you do.

[Jean B.]

Re: duplicate the W on mufflers

Dale------


Yes, I think the GM replacement is the best overall. However, they were discontinued a long time ago, are difficult to find nowadays and always expensive when you do.

What about Gardner Exhaust Systems ??

JF

[Paul O.]

Re: duplicate the W on mufflers

Jean the Gardner exhaust has been discussed many times here but one more time. On 2 1/2 pipes and mufflers.

1. Front pipes Config is typical but Finish and Date are not 40% deduct.
2. Rear pipes Config, Date and Finish are not typical 60% deduct.
3. Mufflers Config, Date and Finish are not typical 60% deduct.

I have not seen a replacement exhaust system other then original GM (Walker) systems score any better the this. Some are 60% across the board. Have seen over the counter GM service replacement rear pipes and muffler if welded in a craftsman manner pass with full credit. But this must be done so you do not see the added weld from the muffler pipe to the rear pipe. But it can be done.

As Joe stated finding the pipes and mufflers is getting a lot harder and at a high expense to the buyer. They can be found last year at Corvettes at Carlisle I found 2 over the counter "W" only service mufflers used but in great condition for about $100 but that was luck.

Paul 18046

[Patrick H.]

Re: duplicate the W on mufflers

Paul,

On exhaust, how do you take off date on a part that originally did not have a date? I usually do not unless a part is obviously from an era not associated with the original car. One might be able to state that the Gardner may qualify as "appearing like" it may have been of the dates 70-72.

Patrick

[Terry M.]

Re: duplicate the W on mufflers

Paul,

On exhaust, how do you take off date on a part that originally did not have a date? I usually do not unless a part is obviously from an era not associated with the original car. One might be able to state that the Gardner may qualify as "appearing like" it may have been of the dates 70-72.

Patrick

Or a finish is not of the era associated with the car -- such as aluminized pipe that was not used on Corvettes in the 1960s or 1970s. So one can say the finish is not of the era, ergo the part os not of the era. Capiche?

[Patrick H.]

Re: duplicate the W on mufflers

Or a finish is not of the era associated with the car -- such as aluminized pipe that was not used on Corvettes in the 1960s or 1970s. So one can say the finish is not of the era, ergo the part os not of the era. Capiche?

I'm not sure that I'd personally cross reference finish with date especially since we generally consider them different axes.

Using that line of thought does that mean that if you powder coat an original part it would lose date too?

Patrick

[Paul O.]

Re: duplicate the W on mufflers

Patrick

I agree with the powder coating of parts if undetectable as powder coat but with the exhaust pipes if they are Aluminized that was not the finish for exhaust pipes they were natural steel. Hence the deduct for the date of that part. My opinion and understanding on this is Config is primary driver to calculate date but Finish of the part can also be used as a secondary source.

Not on all parts but individual ones that are known aftermarket service replacements parts that have a finish issue. But I am open to change if the team leader and judges have a different view point.

Paul 18046

[Terry M.]

Re: duplicate the W on mufflers

I'm not sure that I'd personally cross reference finish with date especially since we generally consider them different axes.

Using that line of thought does that mean that if you powder coat an original part it would lose date too?

Patrick

Paul said it more precisely. Configuration is the primary driver of date issues if there is no actual date or date code on the part, but I believe finish can also be a driver or date. That is why we are now judging Configuration first.

[Patrick H.]

Re: duplicate the W on mufflers

Patrick

I agree with the powder coating of parts if undetectable as powder coat but with the exhaust pipes if they are Aluminized that was not the finish for exhaust pipes they were natural steel. Hence the deduct for the date of that part. My opinion and understanding on this is Config is primary driver to calculate date but Finish of the part can also be used as a secondary source.

Not on all parts but individual ones that are known aftermarket service replacements parts that have a finish issue. But I am open to change if the team leader and judges have a different view point.

Paul 18046

I'm just thinking it's a "double deduct" by doing it that way.

Imagine you buy the carbon steel pipes available from Corvette Central. In your line of reasoning that would allow the owner the possibility of gaining points in both finish and date axes, though the actual configuration of the system is the same. I'm not sure that it "flies" in my calculation. I usually think "could this part have been made at this time in history" more than whether or not it was actually made.

Patrick