Judging

[Noel K.]

If the block casting number, casting date, and engine pad VIN and motor numbers are correct but the broach marks arent' detectable, is this a full 350 point deduction re: flight judging - and if so, why. My interpretation is that the casting number is judged first, then the cast date, then the deck pad and lastly the pad condition which translates to broach marks present or a 38 point deduction if they are not.

Thanks in advance

[Brian M.]

Re: Judging

Casting # & case config 350 pts
Cast Date 175 pts
Assy. stamping 25 pts
VIN Derivative 25 Pts.
Stamp pad surface 38 Pts.
#1 & 2 are what they are
3, 4 & 5 could have variations.

[Mike M.]

Re: Judging

it would appear you'll loose but 38 points. mike

[Patrick H.]

Re: Judging

Not all broach marks are obvious with the naked eye as you view the pad from above the engine compartment.

Use a magnifier or high power digital camera to view the pad. (Magnify on your computer to see the picture better) You may be surprised what you see. The broach marks will vary depending on how new the blades were when the engine block went through the broaching machine.

Patrick

[Michael W.]

Re: Judging

As long as the broaching marks were not removed by some post-factory effort, or are not an obvious incorrect attempt to reproduce them, I would be very reluctant to make a deduction for 'no broach marks'.

Someone would have to explain to me how they could simply 'disappear' without leaving a clue as to how they were removed. I'd be inclined to believe instead that they were never there (in a detectable manner on the judging field) in the first place.

Just my 2 cents.

[Gerard F.]

Re: Judging

I have a 67 original and I'll be darned if I can see any broach marks. But others have seen them when I posted a close-up on this forum. Never got a deduct for no broach marks at judging. Try posting your stamp pad and you will get an opinion, one way or another.

Jerry Fuccillo
#42179

[Noel K.]

Re: Judging

Thanks for the comments. The result of the judging was that i lost 350 points which was dissapointing. Certainly understand that the judges were volunteering their time, and on a very inclement weather day with lots of rain. I appreciated all the comments that were offered to help me understand what items need to be corrected to bring my car closer to NCRS standards.

My goal will be to initially begin work on the items that i can correct easily or inexpensively i.e. bolts, screws, overspray. Will save the more costly deficiencies as my budget allows. Just wanted to know how to best discuss the issue the next time i have the car judged.

Again, thanks all for replys.

[Noel K.]

Re: Judging

Sorry to be such a computer nerd, but i can'f figure out how to attach or include the photo - either from my digital cameral or from the computer file. Any suggestions.

thanks,

Noel

[Harmon C.]

Re: Judging

This section of judging has 350 points total. If you check the judging sheets a 350 point deduction on the first line stops the judging in this section. You can not lose the total of all the points in this section added together.
Lyle

[William C.]

Re: Judging

This is really a question that should have been raised with the chief judge at the chapter (I assume this was a chapter event) for either a full explanation or a correction. That is one of the reasons an owners signoff is required during each of the judging process, to answer/correct issues such as you raise. Without actually seeing the engine judges ther is not way to make an informed comment as to why the deduction was made. Generally a full deduct as described would require the signoff of the team leader overseeing the judging, another lever of oversight to avoid issues such as this one after the close of judging, when little can actually be done. As such it is a good lesson for anyone having a car judged for the first time, Ask Questions when reviewing the scoresheets prior to signing. A full explaination of the deduct should have been given at that time.

[Stephen L.]

Re: Judging

To post a photo you need to place the photo in a "public domain" such as Villagephotos.com. This is a free site.
Then you need to obtain the photo "URL address" and place that into the space provided when you post a question or reply on this site. Make sure that when you get the address and place it on this site that you haven't "doubled up" on the "http:/" in the title block....
It might take a couple of attempts the first time to get things correct, but it will be a great tool once you get the hang of it...... Post a photo with the title "test" so others know you are trying. Once you solve it then go back and delete your "error posts" so as not to clutter this site.
Good luck.

[Gerard F.]

Re: Judging

Resize the photo to 640X480 before you send it to the image site. I use imageshack.com. Then post the direct link in your message and at the bottom (OPTIONAL IMAGE URL) per Steve's advice. For additional photos in the same message, just paste the direct links in the message text.

Jerry Fuccillo
#42179

[Jerry S.]

Re: engine

Was a 350 engine standard in all C2 cars?

[William C.]

Re: engine

No! The '63-67 did not use a 350 ci engine at all, although there was a 350hp 327 from 1965-67. The '68 version C-3 also did not use a 350 CI engine but ahd a 350hp version of the 327. First year for 350 CI was 1969.

[Michael W.]

Re: engine

No C2 came with a 350 cu.in. engine.