Judging Manual Clarification Questions

[mike cobine]

I'll start with saying I have an old one. It has a card that says it is good through 12/88 and I got this in '89. It is the "Summer, '85 - First Edition, First Printing" and they sold this to me in the summer of '89. One interesting item is that the Concours Judging specifies the area is open to 1953-1967 Corvettes only (in the '68 & '69 guide).

At least my '63 & '64 manual was a bit newer, being the "Spring, 1988 - Second Edition, Third Printing" even though many pages say "Summer, '83". However, it agrees pretty much with the '68 & '69 guide.

So I'm sure a lot has been clarified in newer editions.

In 2.6.1 Engine Blocks, there are four categories for 100%, 75%, 50%, and 0% on the Originality Credit.

For 100%, it says:
"Correct casting number; casting date precedes approximate vehicle assemby date by no more than 6 months; engine plant stamping date follows casting date but precedes approximate vehicle assembly date by no more than 6 months; horsepower suffix correct; late 1960 and later Corvettes have last 5 digits of VIN stamped onto same pad."

I don't mean to pick on items like the "5 digits" which is not correct for '68 & '69 but rather what this says.

It says that the items must be stamped to get 100% originality points. It doesn't say they have to be original.

In 2.4 Reproduction or Remanufactured Parts, it says that any part made outside of General Motors control "(i.e., reproduction parts) shall not face a penalty on originality points".

Reading those two sections, it appears that if you restamp a block, then it is a reproduction, and is subject to NOT being penalized just because a judge knows it is a reproduction and not the original item manufactured by GM.

It appears from the four categories for Originality points that a reproduction block of the correct casting numbers and with the correct stamped information (Plant, assembly date, horsepower suffix, and partial VIN) should be subject to 100% of the Originality credit.

If the numbers are the wrong font, numbers are wrong size, the broaching is only 100 lines vs 1100 lines, and so on, this would fall into the CONDITION, not the ORIGINALITY since they are indeed present as stated in the requirements.

However, in this old issue, there are no condition points for the block so wrong fonts, sizes, and placement wouldn't count against you.

The Questions:
----------------

1. So has this changed, and there are now condition points on the block that the judges have been checking on the stamp pad?

2. Is there now a section on the stamp pad that isn't in these copies?

3. There is nothing in these old ones about broach marks which was not fully understood them, but is now. Is there a section on judging the broach marks now?

4. Or have people been judging something that is really outside the guidelines of the Judging Manual?

5. The use of visual enhancement has been discussed but from these old guides, that doesn't seem to be an issue. If the 10x or 20x scope shows the item is a reproduction, so what? Reproductions are allowed and do not stop the originality points. Has this not been the case?

6. Are we talking about the awards for restored cars or surviving original cars in these heated questions on broach marks, restamping, BC/CC, and so on?

-------------

It would be a non-issue to me except that there has been a LOT of discussion about stampings, engines, judging, and new standards in the last few days on this board. This could be cleared up if I had a new copy of the judging standards, but I don't, and not likely to get one in the next couple of days. So please don't simply say get a new manual. I'd like to know now and that is why I ask.

Thanks.

[Dick W.]

Re: Judging Manual Clarification Questions

Yes, there is a newer edition of the JM/TG. Blocks, pads, stamps are addressed. For at least ten years, and maybe longer, if newer technical information was published by NCRS in one of their publications, the information could be used on the field.

Most of all, it assumes that judges/car owners have a little common sense about what is supposed to be right

[Larry P.]

Re: Judging Manual Clarification Questions

I have seen posts from very respected members explaining ways to reproduce or change another part to pass judging. You can purchase new glass and have it"Date coded". It's exceptable to fake every other part on the car. If you create a "correct block" I can't see the problem with NCRS Judging. Why is the block differant from all other parts? Some believe the problem is with selling the car. Is this not two separate issues?
Larry

[Dick W.]

Re: Judging Manual Clarification Questions

"Restoration" blocks blocks are acceptable. As long as it fits what you would expect to see in typical factory production (sorry for the borrowed term) broach marks, characters, spacing, etc. As long as it is restored to what it is supposed to be.

[mike cobine]

Re: Judging Manual Clarification Questions

Do these items get deducted from the Originality or from the Condition column?

What does the TIM&JG say in the current versions on the engine?

[Terry M.]

Re: Judging Manual Clarification Answers

Mike,

The answers:

1) Yes, the judging of engines has changed since the manuals you have, but there still are no condition points. There are now 350 originality points assigned to the entire cylinder case.

2) Yes, there are now 138 (part of the 350 mentioned above) points assigned to the stamp pad. 100 points to the stamped characters and 38 points to the broach marks.

3) See answer to #2.

4) Seems like a rhetorical question, unless I am missing the point.

5) There is no mention of any tools in the judging guides. My observations at many meets (a practice I recommend, observing that is) is that judges will use whatever tools they find necessary to do their job, short of inflicting harm on the car or owner.

6) You would have to ask each poster which award is discussed in that post, but the only awards considered in the TIM&JG (Technical Information Manual & Judging Guide - the books you cited) are Flight Awards. Cars presented for Bowtie judging are assessed differently.

I highly recommend attending a regional or national meet and spending some time observing the judging. Anyone who is registered for the event can volunteer to Observer Judge (OJ) with the judging team of his or her choice. There is also a basic judging school at most of these meets (generally lasts an hour or two, on the evening proceeding judging) that is open to all meet registrants. There is no substitute for these learning experiences, especially observing the items the judges are assessing, hearing their comments, and seeing the points they award.

Terry McManmon

[mike cobine]

Thanks, Terry - Just what I was looking for

Obviously, if we are having long ongoing discussions that seem to dig deep into many different feelings, we need to know what the rules really are. I know the '68&'69 CJG and '63&'64 CJG that I have are quite out of date, but I wondered how much they had changed. This helps a lot.

> 1) Yes, the judging of engines has changed since the manuals you
> have, but there still are no condition points. There are now 350
> originality points assigned to the entire cylinder case.

The lack of condition points bothers me. In most categories where there are reproduction parts used, there are condition points so that you can have the item and it have all the parts it should (paint, shape, numbers, etc.) so you get originality points based on whether or not it includes all of the items the piece requires.

Then you have condition points to access how well the reproduction was executed and the quality it is in.

For example, two reproduced cross flags emblems, one done very well, the other pretty sloppy. One has spot-on paint, the other has K-Mart colors that fall into the same color name only, like red or white, not even close in shade. One is a thin casting, the other fat and looking like the 10th generation copy.

Then if all the parts are there, they would both get the originality points, but the nice one would have a lot more condition points.

> 2) Yes, there are now 138 (part of the 350 mentioned above) points
> assigned to the stamp pad. 100 points to the stamped characters
> and 38 points to the broach marks.

As above, I would think that this would apply to the condition of the stamps rather than the originality. Originality is whether it is the same part or a reproduction of that part which originally was on this car.

Condition would judge how well the part has aged and how well the reproduction was executed.

So if the VIN is stamped, the plant and assembly information stamped, then originality is not a question. However, if they stamped it with Harbor Freight specials, then it is a Condition that gets deducted.

> 3) See answer to #2.

> 4) Seems like a rhetorical question, unless I am missing the point.

I just wanted to be sure they were not judging items that were not spelled out in the TIM&JG. The first rule of any competition is to follow the rules. If it isn't in the rules, then it doesn't count. That goes for both sides.

If the restorer follows the rules, but the judges are judging based on what they know outside the rules, what is in Corvette Fever, or what is in Vette Vues Fact Book, and those items are not referenced in the TIM&JG, then the rules are not being fairly applied.

And example could be John Hinckley's '67 owner's manual. Is it in the TIM&JG that the April manual wasn't in June cars or is it in some obscure reference in Spring 1976 Corvette Restorer or did someone see it in a May 1989 Vette Vues?

Granted it is only one point, but it is the principle.

And if judging is truly a learning experinece, the judge should have informed him why it wasn't correct. Not "we don't expect to see this in these cars" but rather something like "the printer didn't print these until May even though there was an April date, and held them until payment was received in June. The earliest ones made it to the factory July 12th and weren't unpacked until July 14th. So the earliest possible car was July 15th."

Instead, John broke a rule, and has no idea what the rule is, and can't find it.

Or maybe he didn't. Is it in the TIM&JG? Is it referenced by the TIM&JG?

> 5) There is no mention of any tools in the judging guides. My
> observations at many meets (a practice I recommend, observing
> that is) is that judges will use whatever tools they find
> necessary to do their job, short of inflicting harm on the car
> or owner.

I think the others have a valid point on "appears" as it seems that very few items get the scrutiny that the stamp pad gets. Much of it seems to be intent on determining the QUALITY of restoration, then deducting that from ORIGINALITY, which appears to be to be in violation of Section 2.4. Reproduction Parts.

If used only in Bow Tie judging where the intent is originality, then I don't see any problem.

> 6) You would have to ask each poster which award is discussed
> in that post, but the only awards considered in the TIM&JG
> (Technical Information Manual & Judging Guide - the books you
> cited) are Flight Awards. Cars presented for Bowtie judging
> are assessed differently.

Bottom line, I think the use of "Originality" in the judging is a misdomer and used incorrectly. Since Reproduction items and replacement parts are allowed in place of original parts, then Originality would be zero on any of those.

But the rules clearly state that these are allowed.

Maybe a better set of points columns would be "Configuration" and "Condition" where configuration means it has all the pieces as the original did.

[Todd H 26112]

Re: Thanks, Terry - Just what I was looking for

...seem to dig deep into many different feelings

My advice is to keep things both objective and in perspective.

Condition would judge how well the part has aged and how well the reproduction was executed.

Yes to 'aged' but I'm 'thinking' (not sure) that how well it was executed is part of Originality as in configuration and/or finish etc...

Granted it is only one point, but it is the principle.

I prefer to never say 'only 1 point' because it may translate to 100s of points over the course of a season on many cars and it may sets precedents that can translate into 1000s of points over time. No 1 point is beneath scrutiny or discussion I say.

I think the others have a valid point on "appears" as it seems that very few items get the scrutiny

Indeed. Is it as it appears to the human eye under ideal conditions or as it appears to a device or technology well in excess of 20/20? Other examples include trim tags and fake plastic wood panels. I'm sure there are other examples of items held to an enhanced vs un-enhanced appearance standard. (not higher, but enhanced)

I do believe judges can and do apply their own personal bodies of knowledge in excess of what is in the manual but A) they should explain such extra-manual observations to the owner as part of the process and B) future editions should be getting updated/improved. But neither A nor B always happens. In fact judges may disagree amongst themselves and in such a case of either/or you are essentially subject to the vagaries of chance as to who judges your car. That's the way it goes.

During the judging process when 'extras' are learned - there should be space and perhaps the owner can politicely request of the judge 'could we make a note of that on the sheet?' just to serve as a reminder later to both the judge and the owner. Normally this is SOP but if not...

As far as inside knowledge of the subject car (say a judge helped you find a substitute part or work on the car) that inside knowledge should theoretically be checked at the door as much as is possible I believe. (Or the judge could recuse him or herself perhaps?) E.g. the car starts out in judging w/ no prior 'history' and is a blank sheet. My $0.02.

(Then again, based on my 'fan club' emails I seem to generate from this board - I'm told I would be a fool to ever consider having a car judged in the future )

[Terry M.]

[Todd H 26112]

Where does one get the 1 pg laminated ref sheet?

There used to be a 1-page front/back laminated summary or guideline or whatever around. I used to have a couple of these (which I'm sure are around here somewhere). But folks might also be interested in those. I don't know off hand if they are given out at judging schools or sold or are even still available. It's not a manual but a handy high level basic reference printed front/back and laminated.

[Terry M.]

Re: Where does one get the 1 pg laminated ref shee

John Woods, formerly coordinator of judging training and quality assurance, made those and distributed them at his "Judging 101" classes. With John's passing those classes are no more, and neither are those handouts.