63 Rear suspension finishes

[Dale M.]

Re: 63 Rear suspension finishes

WOW, hope we can get some answers.

[Michael H.]

Re: 63 Rear suspension finishes

Michael -

It would be instructive if someone on the Revision Team could enlighten us as to the logic used to re-write history again, in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Well, John, since you and I, Jorjorian, Midkiff and a few others that have commented here are kinda new to the Corvette hobby, maybe we should just let the TL handle this. Maybe we can learn something about these cars.

[Michael H.]

Re: 63 Rear suspension finishes

Michael

I have to say that it’s very frustrating to me that after all the work we put into documenting and correcting all the errors in the 5^thedition of the guide, less than half of them were actually implemented in the 6^thedition.
Ken

Ken,

I probably should wait a few hours and cool down before I reply with my thoughts. If I don't, I'll definitely wind up with another 99 year suspension.

[Michael G.]

Re: 63 Rear suspension finishes

Ken, there is NO "misunderstanding" about what once was correct. Page 146 of the 5th edition said:

"Note: Evidence of blackout paint is not unusual on all rear suspension components. Some original 1963 models may have the entire rear suspension assembly, including the half shafts and differential, painted semi-gloss black."

This sentence is a VERY clear documentation by the writers of the 5th edition that "Some", if not all, original 1963 cars had the entire rear suspension painted semi-gloss black. This information combined with photos similar to the ones posted here, was the impetus for my painting a freshly restored rear suspension semi-gloss black. As I was then a fairly new member, in doing so I depended on the available Judging Guide as well as several of the most knowledgeable experts in the field to determine the best course of action. Given the facts presented, what other reasonable course was there? Candidly, I find having to disassemble the whole rear suspension and spend hours cleaning black paint off of freshly restored components a monumental waste of time and money, and, to say the least, extremely annoying.

[Kenneth S.]

Re: 63 Rear suspension finishes

Mike,
Sorry, I missed that note in the 5^th edition. I just compared the wording for the Driveshaft, Half Shafts and Strut Rods and didn’t read far enough. And you are correct; the entire note was deleted in the 6^thedition. What I posted earlier as submitted by our sub-group was to further clarify how the blackout was done at the factory. I totally understand your frustration.
Ken

[Michael G.]

Re: 63 Rear suspension finishes

Thanks, Ken, I didn't mean to take my frustration out on you, I'm just a bit peeved that we can't figure out how to correctly restore a car, when more than 20.000 were built and a few still exist in factory condition...oh well

[Tracy C.]

Re: 63 Rear suspension finishes

Mike,

I know your already into removing the finish, but every owner has the option to appeal to the team lead first and then to the National judging chairman if not satisfied. This is the year of the "63" at the National convention and no doubt there will be unrestored Bowtie examples for the model year 63 on site to look at. One of which I believe will be the Z06 convertible that once upon a time "didn't exist" either. No better time to make a point.

Nobody likes to make waves, but when you're right....you're right.
tc

[Robert Y.]

Re: 63 Rear suspension finishes

Ken...just now jumped on DB after not viewing for several months - I thought our "Unofficial Revision Team" consisting of 6 very bright '63 guys (names previously noted on this board), had it down pat on the 20 some odd pages we submitted as "proved" items that should be changed in the new JG. It included the rear suspension "blackout" noted in above threads, and was detailed in full by John Hinkley.....along with our always-required PROOF of submitted items. So much for that - I will ask the question that was submitted previously in this thread - Where is this PROOF that the suspensions were UNPAINTED? A couple of ORIGINAL pictures would do. Same goes for that stupid '63 horn deal (there was only ONE way the horns were built and installed, and it is NOT like the artist's rendering shown in the first pic of the 5th edition of the JG!). When our "unofficial Revision Team" was working on this section, I requested ONE picture of an ORIGINAL car showing that configuration...never was provided to me!!!

On another note, seems that the "official" Revison Team for the '63-4 JG made this decision for the "no-black-out" in the 6th Edition - wonder who they are? I can guess who the Team (member) is, and the team is singular, but.....

Maybe I should consult our "Unofficial Revision Team" and make available to all the REAL WAY '63-4's were built...all proven? Bob Young

[Alan D.]

Re: 63 Rear suspension finishes

Well; "but every owner has the option to appeal to the team lead first and then to the National judging chairman"
Believe I mentioned the team leader would not listen (had photo's), as for National Judging Chairman - already gone!
The whole subject, in my opinion, has gone way past an argument of facts - it's "he who has the gold makes the rules"

Exactly who is involved I have no idea however the subject is now hurting our NCRS.

[Michael H.]

Re: 63 Rear suspension finishes

Ken...just now jumped on DB after not viewing for several months - I thought our "Unofficial Revision Team" consisting of 6 very bright '63 guys (names previously noted on this board), had it down pat on the 20 some odd pages we submitted as "proved" items that should be changed in the new JG. It included the rear suspension "blackout" noted in above threads, and was detailed in full by John Hinkley.....along with our always-required PROOF of submitted items. So much for that - I will ask the question that was submitted previously in this thread - Where is this PROOF that the suspensions were UNPAINTED? A couple of ORIGINAL pictures would do. Same goes for that stupid '63 horn deal (there was only ONE way the horns were built and installed, and it is NOT like the artist's rendering shown in the first pic of the 5th edition of the JG!). When our "unofficial Revision Team" was working on this section, I requested ONE picture of an ORIGINAL car showing that configuration...never was provided to me!!!

On another note, seems that the "official" Revison Team for the '63-4 JG made this decision for the "no-black-out" in the 6th Edition - wonder who they are? I can guess who the Team (member) is, and the team is singular, but.....

Maybe I should consult our "Unofficial Revision Team" and make available to all the REAL WAY '63-4's were built...all proven? Bob Young

If you missed Bob's original post, it's here at the link below.

https://www.forums.ncrs.org/showthre...uide-is-in-BUT

[Bob J.]

Re: 63 Rear suspension finishes

Bob ,somebody has mentioned selling the revisions that never get published on ebay for the price of postage. Bob

[Michael H.]

Re: 63 Rear suspension finishes

I think we've all spent enough time collecting/showing documentation. We have more than enough.

Now, the question is, what to do with it? Posting it here is good but I don't think it's going to get the job done as we haven't heard from Roy or Carlton. (yes, I know... it's not required that a TL visit this forum)

I think the next step is to contact Roy with all of the proof to get the manual corrected and inform all of the judges of the correction/change for upcoming events. I don't think Carlton is interested. Hopefully, Roy will be as he's been involved in corrections the past.

Who wants the task of the next step? (I don't think I would be a good choice)

[Andy C.]

Re: 63 Rear suspension finishes

Hello Guys; Too say that I am at a loss for words is an understatement! I have been a 63 corvette onwer since 1988 and have owned a number of them. I have dedicated myself to 63's and only 63's as I love them so much. I was part of the revision team and together with 5 other 63 lovers we came up with about 26 pages of DOCUMENTED revisions of which very little was used on the new manual, why BOB YOUNG and the revision team will never know. There is NO way that a 63 came off the line with NO black paint on the rear end assembly. I agree 100% with Phil Castaldos reply as to how the rear end was painted prior to being installed in the chassis. I restored my Z06 tanker and painted the rear end as it should be , but lost points at the Altoona show last year. There is a lot I would like to say here, but will refrain from doing so. This is suppose to be a hobby and it is suppose to be FUN and bring enjoyment to those who partake in the restoration of these beautifull corvettes. It seems to bring much aggravation instead and I wish it could be fixed.......Andy

[Kenneth S.]

Re: 63 Rear suspension finishes

Bob Young asked me to post that he is out of town for the next couple of weeks and unable to participate in the discussion board. First I’ve heard of selling the revisions on eBay, what needs to be done is for NCRS to publish a 63-4 Judging Guide without errors so members can restore their cars correctly and have them judged without arguments. As you know, we identified 170 errors in the 5^th edition but only 84 of them were made to the 6^th edition, so there are still many items where the car owner has to decide, “Do I make it correct or do I make it like the guide?”
Ken