Opinions on Yesterday and Today

[Roy B.]

Now I'm hoping people don't start dumping on me , just asking an opinion on how yesterday compares to today's judging.And remember I do support NCRS 100%.

Remember when NCRS first started and used the word (ORIGINAL) remember =there were NO repro parts being made.

It's not the fault of owners if they had to use repro parts , but it's getting harder to see real original parts and a person that has taken the time and more money to use original parts should be recognized when judged .
I get dumped on when I say the judging sheet should be

Original= original part!
Replacement= part
Condition=then judge it.

That would alert owners that a judge knew original from a repro and sharpen judges and have the owner learn how to tell a replacement part . Then the Condition would be judged,
WE all have seen what some people will pay to have the correct original bolt marking. And I think many will agree original parts will get harder to locate and more replacement parts will be seen as time goes by. Look at the price BJ Corvettes get having every award it can get to verifie it's original or having a low mileage Corvette with original parts.
So I'm asking should todays judging sheet separate (Original) from (Replacement) judging??

[Arland D.]

Re: Opinions on Yesterday and Today

Roy,

Remember when NCRS first started judging and there were no reproduction parts there was no Bowtie program either. The Flight and Bowtie programs have different names because they have different judging requirements, thresholds, and expectations. What you are alluding to is a melding of the two separate disciplines.

[Patrick H.]

Re: Opinions on Yesterday and Today

...and, originality is already judged as one column, the other being condition. As has been stated, if it is undetectable from an original (but happens to be a reproduction) then it should receive full credit.

Now, there are times when the "originality" category is only worth 2 points. The appearance is 90% correct; do you deduct?
I usually don't, but I sure do note in my comments how it differs from an original.

[Joe L.]

Re: Opinions on Yesterday and Today

...and, originality is already judged as one column, the other being condition. As has been stated, if it is undetectable from an original (but happens to be a reproduction) then it should receive full credit.

Now, there are times when the "originality" category is only worth 2 points. The appearance is 90% correct; do you deduct?
I usually don't, but I sure do note in my comments how it differs from an original.

Patrick------


Understanding that I do no judging, at all, I agree 100% with your approach. Until such time as "fractional" point deductions are allowed, I think that if a part has only 2 originality points associated with it and it's 90% correct, it should receive no deduction. There are MANY other scenarios where this should apply, too.

[Roy B.]

Re: Opinions on Yesterday and Today

The Bowtie award is great and I see only 170 have passed. But most owners go for the "top flight" so don't it still make sense to determine if their Corvette has the original parts ? Is it not that thresholds and expectations under the (original) column.

( stated) Now, there are times when the "originality" category is only worth 2 points. The appearance is 90% correct; do you deduct?
I usually don't, but I sure do note in my comments how it differs from an original.

I also do the same because there is no other way to note a replacement part, yes if it cant be determined it's a replacement it get full points.

[Gene M.]

Re: Opinions on Yesterday and Today

If the judging had a line item for every single part on the car an original/replacement would mean something. But being realistic it would take all day to do one car.

Take bolt heads as an example. Almost every reproduction can be distinguished from an original. One must be very acute to the differences but they are there. Most judges I judge with just make a note and move on.

Take a replacement frame as another example. Only the differences that deviate from an original are scored. The remainder of the frame is scored as "good as" an original. The treatment would be the same for an original frame with sections replaced and repaired. Only the deviations from a good original will be deducted. The rest is good.

Something like a reproduction distributor cap would work as original/replacement system. Same could be said for window glass, tires, fan belts, seal beam, and batteries. Almost anything a restorer would just purchase and not restore the original piece could be original/replacement scored.

I would suggest to go a step farther than Roy and not bother to score anything that could not possibly be original to the car (assuming it was driven). Such items would include battery, tires, wiper blades, seal beams, plugs and plug wires. Extra credit could be awarded if these parts were deemed original.

My take is the current judging is sorta like that just as it is. The only difference is we do not indicate it as original or not. Just deviations are noted.

[Patrick H.]

Re: Opinions on Yesterday and Today

But most owners go for the "top flight" so don't it still make sense to determine if their Corvette has the original parts ? Is it not that thresholds and expectations under the (original) column.

No. That is not the threshold, and there is where you continue to be misguided.

The threshold is "How much does it appear to be like the original part" and is not "Is it the original part."

Big difference.

Once you understand that, Roy, you'll understand the Top Flight game.

Oh, and those with original parts - they'll garner more points than those who stick to the repros.

[Roy B.]

Re: Opinions on Yesterday and Today

No. That is not the threshold, and there is where you continue to be misguided.

The threshold is "How much does it appear to be like the original part" and is not "Is it the original part."

Big difference.

Once you understand that, Roy, you'll understand the Top Flight game.

Oh, and those with original parts - they'll garner more points than those who stick to the repros.

That's a good point and if one looks at it that way it makes better sense. Believe me I don't mean to be difficult, I just think in right and wrong and now have a better sense of how to look at the JM..Thanks

[Patrick H.]

Re: Opinions on Yesterday and Today

That's a good point and if one looks at it that way it makes better sense. Believe me I don't mean to be difficult, I just think in right and wrong and now have a better sense of how to look at the JM..Thanks

Roy,

Bowtie Judging is right and wrong, or black and white.

Flight Judging has a heck of a lot of gray area.
The game is learning to get as close to black and white as you can.

Patrick

[Brandon T.]

Re: Opinions on Yesterday and Today

I wish original parts did gain you points for example valve covers. I spent more money having my original chrome pieces in the engine bay re-chromed that I coulda went and bought repro ones for.

[Patrick H.]

Re: Opinions on Yesterday and Today

I wish original parts did gain you points for example valve covers. I spent more money having my original chrome pieces in the engine bay re-chromed that I coulda went and bought repro ones for.

They do.
However, if you have significantly changed the appearance by having them show chromed and polished then you may lose just as many points as if you'd purchased the repro.