1966 windshield

[Gary B.]

Thanks Reba; standard deduction

As Reba notes, there are standard deductions for windshield judging, including:

15% incorrect date (but presumably otherwise correct/original GM)
25% for an OEM brand or later service replacement with correct tinting
50% for replacement with another brand
90% for incorrect or excessive tinting

Based on the above, I'm still not clear on the deduct (25% or 50%?) for a replacment windshield from OEM Glass if the lettering is detectably different, but the tinting is correct. Would glass from OEM Glass qualify as an OEM brand? If yes, then incorrect lettering or font would seem to qualify for a 4 pt deduct. If not, then the deduct would be 8 pts, which would qualify as getting hammered in my book, especially given the price of a new windshield.

Gary

[Gary B.]

Thanks Reba; standard deduction

As Reba notes, there are standard deductions for windshield judging, including:

15% incorrect date (but presumably otherwise correct/original GM)
25% for an OEM brand or later service replacement with correct tinting
50% for replacement with another brand
90% for incorrect or excessive tinting

Based on the above, I'm still not clear on the deduct (25% or 50%?) for a replacment windshield from OEM Glass if the lettering is detectably different, but the tinting is correct. Would glass from OEM Glass qualify as an OEM brand? If yes, then incorrect lettering or font would seem to qualify for a 4 pt deduct. If not, then the deduct would be 8 pts, which would qualify as getting hammered in my book, especially given the price of a new windshield.

Gary

[Chuck S.]

Re: Thanks Reba; standard deduction

Sorry, Gary, it's 50%. The 25% deduction is for an LOF replacement. In this case, "OEM" does not mean OEM Glass; it means GM...or Ford if we were judging Mustangs.

[Chuck S.]

Re: Thanks Reba; standard deduction

Sorry, Gary, it's 50%. The 25% deduction is for an LOF replacement. In this case, "OEM" does not mean OEM Glass; it means GM...or Ford if we were judging Mustangs.

[Chuck S.]

That Is...

If it's detected as a reproduction. Otherwise, it would be judged as original glass if there is nothing to give it away. It all depends on the judges skill.

[Chuck S.]

That Is...

If it's detected as a reproduction. Otherwise, it would be judged as original glass if there is nothing to give it away. It all depends on the judges skill.

[Lyle Chamberlain]

Re: Standard Deduction

I would not use the standard deduction in this case.It is for the old school long before the John Woods 5 points of originalty. Using the 5 point system you have etched lettering 20% but that would include if the shape and spacing of the letters is correct. I could see a deduction of one to three depending on how much you can write down that is not correct. I thing judges should remember that if you can't write down what is wrong a deduction is not in order. In the end the team leader should decide the deduction for etched lettering and the deduction should be the same on all cars in his group no matter which system he uses. Maybe the standard deduction system should be updated so as etched glass lettering is included as this is seen in lots of years cars. Lyle

[Lyle Chamberlain]

Re: Standard Deduction

I would not use the standard deduction in this case.It is for the old school long before the John Woods 5 points of originalty. Using the 5 point system you have etched lettering 20% but that would include if the shape and spacing of the letters is correct. I could see a deduction of one to three depending on how much you can write down that is not correct. I thing judges should remember that if you can't write down what is wrong a deduction is not in order. In the end the team leader should decide the deduction for etched lettering and the deduction should be the same on all cars in his group no matter which system he uses. Maybe the standard deduction system should be updated so as etched glass lettering is included as this is seen in lots of years cars. Lyle

[Mike Cobine]

This sounds like I'm better off

with the '66 windshield that is an original '66 windshield in my '63 than to get a reproduction windshield.

Even though the reproduction would look right to most, it could actually be judged to less than the one that is wrong to everyone.

Ouch.

[Mike Cobine]

This sounds like I'm better off

with the '66 windshield that is an original '66 windshield in my '63 than to get a reproduction windshield.

Even though the reproduction would look right to most, it could actually be judged to less than the one that is wrong to everyone.

Ouch.

[Patrick H.]

I doubt it.

You'd have to weigh the point loss for wrong date with the point loss for a slight difference in configuration.

As Lyle points out, it's likely a very small deduction for a reproduction windshield. I'd think 1-2 points, to be honest, based on the 5 axes principle. The 50% deduction is way off, and even 25% is heavy.

Patrick

[Patrick H.]

I doubt it.

You'd have to weigh the point loss for wrong date with the point loss for a slight difference in configuration.

As Lyle points out, it's likely a very small deduction for a reproduction windshield. I'd think 1-2 points, to be honest, based on the 5 axes principle. The 50% deduction is way off, and even 25% is heavy.

Patrick

[Lyle Chamberlain]

Re: I doubt it.

Patrick I need you around when I get on my Soap Box. Lyle

[Lyle Chamberlain]

Re: I doubt it.

Patrick I need you around when I get on my Soap Box. Lyle

[Patrick H.]

Re: I doubt it.

Is that the same one you need to be as tall as me?

See you in a week....

Patrick