What was the time span they used these hood's and did they note this on the tank sticker or else where? Also were they painted with the stinger or left plain? Looking at a car that has one on it that the owner said came with it. Thanks larry
-
-
Re: 1967 Corvette big block hood on a small block
have not seen documentation, but supposedly used for a few days in a particulat series of serial numbers. Look for no sign of emblems ever having been installed, and no sign of stinger paintBill Clupper #618 -
Re: 1967 Corvette big block hood on a small block
The alleged event is supposed to have occured in March, involving cars build over a few day period.Comment
-
Re: 1967 Corvette big block hood on a small block
OH MY HERE WE GO AGAIN. You might want to check the archives on this subject. I hope that it will convince you to be a total skeptic when viewing this car. There is ABSOLUTELY NO evidence whatsoever that this actually happened. NONE. No matter what some publications and our judging manual says. You can do us a favor by asking the owner for his documentation and taking some detailed pictures of the hood and the mounting hardware associated with the hood and the hood support mountings. (both sides). Making this available to us will go along way to prove or disprove this tale. The call goes out again as it does every time this thing raises its ugly head. SHOW ME THE BEEF.Comment
-
Re: 1967 Corvette big block hood on a small block
Wayne
Not looking for an argument but were is the evidence just using my 55 vett, talking about three headlight designs, two Dist. designs , Radiator (five) piece not the (four) piece most think is right and so many other changes or add on's.??
Show ME the beef!Comment
-
Re: 1967 Corvette big block hood on a small block
Roy, I don`t contend to know much of anything about your `55 and I dont see the connection between that and the question at hand. I do, however, know that this is a commonly accepted scenario that has no basis in fact. And because our judging manual and other publications have promoted it, everyone thinks it is so. Part of the problem is that there is an inherent wish that it is so, and that there are a bunch of cars out there that have the BB hood. And, as in this case, they further expound the myth. Just look at the original post and you will see the depth of the problem. This gentleman did not question that it was a fact, he was asking what the serial number range was. He assumed that it was a fact. Well again I ask, where`s the beef? Our judging manual says so. So , we should be able to answer the question. What is the serial number range? If anyone has any proof as to what the serial number range is, please come forth. If anyone has any proof that this is real, please come forth. If anyone knows of a real example please come forth.Comment
-
Re: 1967 Corvette big block hood on a small block
What I was trying to point out is that there is no documentation on many things we know DID happen by using my 55 as a example. So then the BB hood could fall in that category??? YES??? NO??? and if no is your answer then show me documentation for three headlight designs for the 55 Corvette.Comment
-
I guess....
I guess we can also say that a '66 big block hoods were used on '66 small block cars during production run? Just kidding.
Gary
#3503Comment
-
Re: I guess....
I understand what Roy is saying, there are observable running changes, supplier variances etc. that may not be totally documentable. But, in this case, a major component of the car is said to have been subsittuted. And the fact is, that so far, no observations or documentation is found supporting the event. But, we continue to promote the thing by including it in our judging manual. I dont know how or where it got put there. It was not in the original manual that I helped work on so many years ago, but sometime since has been added. I have asked the 67 team leaders where it came from and got no response. What I am saying is that unless someone has some proof that it is a fact, it should not be there.Comment
-
Re: I guess....
Theory is, we could say about any thing because so many items were not documented, that is the challenge of NCRS .
That is why so many parts on our Corvette are changed now and then and new judging manuals are rewritten now and then. So don't think it couldn't of happened , I remember when people thought the Mid-year six tail lights were a factory optionComment
-
Re: I guess....
Just for the sake of conversation, I happen to agree with Wayne, I don't know how it got into the manual either, and I've looked at a lot of unmolested cars since '67 without ever seeing one I could verify.Bill Clupper #618Comment
-
Re: I guess....
This reminds me of the discussion about KO wheels on 63's. No documentation, no points. Seems to me there should be ways to tell if a 67 small block car was assembled with a BB hood. What about the hood support location and the reinf/tapping plate for the hood support bolts in the fender skirt?Comment
-
Re: I guess....
If we new ALL the answers having ALL the documentation and now new ALL the design changes on ALL parts , All years, and ALL early and late Corvettes . Then WHO needs this discussion board ? WE would have the perfect judging manuals, no one could question a judge ( but on how pretty our Corvette is) that surly would be nice. BUT ! NO!
We have to remember that to many people were turned off on NCRS from it's beginning ( and do I say , even now) because to many people thought and think they have ALL the answers. Vary few new or older owner are given the benefit that what they have may be correct. Yet owners of past RACE cars are goggled over at meets including me.There have been NCRS members that have taken a seances from owner on parts, that later changed the J.M over the years, which is the reason we have had so many re-issue new judging manuals and rewritings with out any documentation to back it up.
So we have to ask , where and what happened to those people that were told they were wrong and sent home up set. We hold classes saying how few % of Corvette owners are NCRS members .
How about thinking of a flight award which would mention the doubted item as a side note as valid say for a year till the upper heads look in to it.( that may keep all Corvettes from becoming geriatric= the same early or late)
Hay they allow non-original seat belts, fire equipment ,alarming systems etc. with no point deduct.
Or how about a real G.M dealer factory approved accessory or option pertaining to that year Corvette as original as a valid side note still allowing a first flight award with out punishing an owner with a deduct , that surly would be nice.
Am I dreaming /YESComment
-
As a NON-NCRS member
I agree there is a lot of truth in what Roy says. I've seen some of it first hand. I would think if your judging manual is going to have exceptions to the norm, there should be names, dates and documentation as to how it got in the judging manual in the first place. The same goes for ANY revision to your judging guides. Most of you seem pretty big on the CAR documentation. Why not the same on the judging manuals? My opinion but I'm not a paying member.Comment
-
Re: As a NON-NCRS member
Michael, There is one way that I can tell for sure, but, I have never seen one that had all of the attributes that would qualify it for exception. As I have said before, I dont care one way or another. I hope that we can find one someday. I think that it is a good possibility that a single example or maybe a few could have been done. I know that there were some insiders that had enough clout that could have one done any way he wanted it. But, I dont buy the story of the hood shortage. It just doesnt make much sense, and there is no evidence much less documentation to support it.Comment
Comment