Just had my 54 judged at the SCC meet in Calabasas, CA. I found it to be very educational. I thought I knew a lot about this car, having owned her for 17 years, but the judges pointed out several things that I will work on.
One deduction that puzzles me though. I was dinged for not having original tires. I have the Coker 6.70 x 15 Firestones. The judge informed me that the "DOT" markings on the tires caused the deduction. Although I understand that the DOT did not exist in 1954, how can it be possible that anyone could be expected to have the originals after so many years?
One side note: the manufacturer (Coker) informed me that the gov't requires the DOT rating to be marked on the tires, and they cannot supply them without.
Even though I drive this car, I am striving for an even higher standard of originality that she currently has been judged as having. Does anyone have any further thoughts on this?
Joe #24865
One deduction that puzzles me though. I was dinged for not having original tires. I have the Coker 6.70 x 15 Firestones. The judge informed me that the "DOT" markings on the tires caused the deduction. Although I understand that the DOT did not exist in 1954, how can it be possible that anyone could be expected to have the originals after so many years?
One side note: the manufacturer (Coker) informed me that the gov't requires the DOT rating to be marked on the tires, and they cannot supply them without.
Even though I drive this car, I am striving for an even higher standard of originality that she currently has been judged as having. Does anyone have any further thoughts on this?
Joe #24865
Comment