I was away from the board for a day or two, but I found the thread about this quite interesting. Having been through the Bowtie judging process, I have a thought or two. Dale, you mentioned original is not always "correct". I know what you mean, but if we use the term correct to mean that we (NCRS) think we know something, but then we encounter something different on what turns out to become a Bowtie car, then I guess we were INCORRECT, or at the very least INCOMPLETE (in our knowledge). To me, ORIGINAL is Absolutely, Always, CORRECT by default, even if it is something we have not encountered. If the experts agree at the time that something new is probably original, and if we get consensus, and if we DOCUMENT it, and if we learn from it, then we have done our jobs. Original is Correct Always. The hard part is determining if something newly encountered is original, but if we do that, we must add the new learning to our database and our Judging Guides - in a timely manner. As far as Bowtie judging goes, I like the fact that some of you mentioned cases of "leniency" where what looks like an original part has been removed. If the Judge on the spot "feels" the part is original, and can come up with a reason for it having been removed, empower him with the ability to make the call that it is OK.
-
-
Re: Typical Factory Production (TFP) *TL*
I have been toying with posting to this thread and thought I would leave it alone, but alas you all sucked me in.
For Flight Judging abandon the terminology "original and correct" and stick with TFP. That allows you to state that certain items (the generator Dale cited or the excess gaskets) are not typical, but may have been done on one or a few cars for reasons that the judge need not explain.
Our task as judges is to determine originality (the heading of the judging section - NOT the originality of the part) on the 5 dimensions: finish date completeness configuration installation
If any of these is not TYPICAL we then have to assess whether a deduction is merited. We as judges already have that power - we don't need to ask for it.
Could the part be originally installed by the UAW, not be typical, and merit a deduction? You bet. If I were flight judging the examples Dale gave, with no more information than he provided, I would make a deduction as he cited "too many gaskets" or "inappropriate generator number." If I knew that these deviations were typical and the judging manual failed to mention that, then I would not make the deduction.
For Bow Tie judging we have another question. Is this THE part installed by the UAW in Flint or St. Louis (soon to add Bowling Green). That is the question and the answer is YES or NO. End of story.
If the Bow Tie judges think the answer is MAYBE they have the option of consulting with the team leader through the voting process. It sounds like what took place in Dale's example.
Can the inappropriate generator number be installed by UAW - Dale said it was. Judges can pass it and no need to consult team leader, unless judges are unsure. The same way with excess gaskets. If the judges opt to consult the team leader they had best be prepared to live with his answer. "Don't ask the question you don't want the answer to."
Terry
Terry -
Re: Correct/Original/Bowtie
Everett, I agree with your post. I have a car that I put through Bowtie judging as well. It would be nice if a judge could exercise some ability to consider an original part that might have been removed, repaired and replaced. However, I don't think we are to that point yet. It was explained to me that there is no way to prove beyond all doubt that a removed part is original to a car. So much for that idea.
On another issue I have to wonder what happens when a 100,000 plus mile car shows up for judging and makes four stars???? Is this really possible? If you drive em they wear out, break, get out of alignment etc etc. Any repair involving the removal of a part will cause that part to fail (period). The age factor not withstanding I have to wonder about that. Our 66 (40K miles) has the original carb on it and it failed because on the way to the nationals in Sun Valley the pin for the primary float fell out. We had to remove the carb to repair it. It was a simple issue of repair it or don't make it to the meet. (We repaired it - it failed). By the way....ANY WARRANTY WORK done by the dealer in the first year of ownership (under 12k Miles) would also cause the parts involved to FAIL!!!!!! How do you detect that on a 25 year old car????
My point is this....I'm all for some lattitude in the Bowtie Judging process. I just don't know how, or where we are going to draw the line.
Regards
Bill #8620Comment
-
Re: Correct/Original/Bowtie *TL*
Bill,
Tehre is a 100K mile Bow Tie 1980. I think it got the 5th star as well.
Terry
TerryComment
-
Re: 100K Bowtie
Terry, I think that's great. However, my point is this. Say if I have a 100,000 mile 65 coupe ....... And...let's say that somewhere around 20k miles (about 1971 by timeline arithmetic) the water pump goes out and I replace it...what happens??? It weathers in over a period of years. Technically it should fail the judging process but it's not detectable and it passes. This can go on and on. If driven regularly, parts will weather in pretty fast. Maybe the car makes it (four stars) and maybe not. My point is there is still no way to know if a part is original (what we are really saying is....has it been removed??...can we detect that beyond all dout???...I don't think so...)
Don't get me wrong here...I'm a big supporter of the Bowtie program....I just think that we need to think about refining the process over time. The judging process works to a point. Can we do any better?? I think so. I just don't know exactly how to address it. I'd still buy my 66 again (original unrestored car) and I still gravitate toward the original cars over the restored ones (just a matter of taste).
regards
Bill #8620Comment
-
100K Bowtie
I recall reading about that car, and if memory serves it seems original parts had been removed early on and the subsequent owner had them AND PUT THEM BACK ON FOR BOWTIE JUDGING...
Also, once long ago I suggested an additional points add (in addition to the age add) for mileage - to differentiate between the cars that are driven (as NCRS preaches should be done) and the cars that were bought and stored away. Mileage points could get back some points that driving can cause to be deducted. A well-designed system of points/miles for specific wear items would need to be worked out, based on those items that typically/statistically fail AT HIGHER MILEAGE LEVELS. This would seem to be a plausible suggestion, however my idea must have been too controversial, or maybe it did not get the attention of anyone that cares. Am I treading on Sacred Ground here? I will volunteer to be part of a team that designs points/parts/miles.Comment
-
Don't get me wrong Guys...
I LOVE Bowtie cars and the Bowtie system. No other organization has anything even close. I just think that maybe even our system can evolve slowly over time, with careful consideration. As a relatively newer member here (only several years), I want to get more involved, and I AM by becoming my Chapter's Judging Co-Chair (that means I want to help out a senior Chair while learning), and I would love to be a member of a team that looks into these types of Bowtie issues; making the calls on parts that appear to be original, but have been removed, mileage adds, etc. I think the current system is the best there is, and maybe it can continue to evolve. Nothing but Constructive Criticism here...Comment
-
Good point
Everett, good point, I couldn't agree more....This is not going to be easy but I think we can improve it over time.
regards
Bill #8620Comment
-
Re: Effecting change *TL*
Bill,
Regardless of whether it is Bow Tie judging or Flight Judging - If the judges don't detect it - that is it. There is no fall back on that one. We can only detect what our skills allow us.
Everett,
I suggest you put your Bow Tie milage proposal in writing and send it to Roy. If you did that before - do it again.
Just to play devil's advocate a la Bill: How are we to know that the mileage shown is accurate? Would this mileage bonus not reward owners who falsely add miles to the odometer?
The NCRS judging process (all facets of it) is a continually evolving system. Rules can and do change, get tweaked and so on. This is generally, but not always, done in Team Leader's meetings. Best way to change the system is address the Team Leader if your situation is unique to a specific class and address Roy if it is systemic. Best to send written, rational letter with as few 4-letter words as possible. This organization is for and by the members and if you remain silent you will NOT get a change.
Terry
TerryComment
-
Yeah, but...
What about all the guys who have odos that have read 60K miles for the last twenty five years because the gear stripped. How do they get the extra points for the extra 100k miles that have gone undocumented. BTW, I don't know any words that have more than four letters.
DukeComment
-
Re: Effecting change
Terry - Everett, I don't think the mileage thing will work. We don't do it now for Duntov/McClellan. If we did we'd have guys driving in from 10,000 miles off and getting 97 points on an 80 point car. That would be lunacy on our part.
I also agree with Terry, if the judge does not catch an item its gone....However, it does bring up our overall problem.......and that is just this....WE ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO BUILD DUNTOV CARS....however, we have to do all we can to insure that we DISCOURAGE that same practice on the Bowtie field. Like I said,,,,I'd like to see a change but I'm having a problem seeing what it might be. For now I'll stand behind the Bowtie program and put alot of thought into it.....and talk to Roy...he always listens.....
regards
Bill #8620Comment
-
Re: one point re: Bow Tie miles *TL*
Everett,
One point I forgot:
Up to Sun Valley Roy said that most Bow Tie cars fail a section not because of the percentage of line items failed, but by the vote of the judges and team leader.
Thus you may be addressing a problem that doesn't exist.
I don't know how that stacks up including the Bow Tie cars judged at Sun Valley, but I would be surprised if it changes a lot.
Terry
TerryComment
-
Re: Correct/Original/Bowtie
REAL good post Everett! The word "correct" is to be purged from our vocabulary! Lets use "appears to be typical of factory production" instead! There are NO ABSOLUTES in Corvette production! We have only to draw on "what I'm accoustomed to seeing" and "how could this have happened?" When I judge Bowtie, which I love to do, I always ask myself, "how can you explain this?" before deciding on a pass or flunk. I don't deal in absolutes, although trained as an engineer at MIT! I was trained in LIFE at a Ford assembly plant in Torrence Illinois. I know first hand what goes on on an automotive assembly line. Man, the LAST thing you want to have happen is falling behind and seeing the line foreman helping you catch up! That's the kiss of death!
The wonderful, caring and skillful artesians at St Louis who assembled our cars were concerned with a smoothly operating assembly line above all else! Anything that could assure that this accomplishment be realized was effected! From time to time you're gonna see some wierd stuff!
The Rev.Comment
-
Re: Correct/Original/Bowtie
I gotta 1962 4 star bowtie candidate! What a sweet old lady she is! 97,000 miles and never a wrench put on her! (Ahem!) This Corvette has answered more questions over the years than any team leader could ever attempt to answer! She's got rotten carpets and seat belts BUT they are the ones she had when born!
The Rev.Comment
-
SNIFF IT OUT
Man, maybe I'm hallucinating or something, BUT as I sit here reading this thread and reflecting on my experiences I've come to the conclusion that you can really screw yourself up by thinking too much about what you see when you look at a Corvette. Am I nuts or something? I can "smell" a real Corvette from 50 yards away. No Joke! I NEVER think about what I'm thinking about. I just relate to how I feel! I'm either feeling, "C- Central" or I'm feeling "Real Car". QED! That's It!
The Rev.Comment
Comment