Judging CE engines revisited

[Edward M.]

I have obviously touched a nerve with this issue. I want to try and clarify some of my thoughts, and get suggestions for improvements.

I am suggesting that an engine replaced under warranty be given "some" credit as a service replacement part, not a full deduction.

As an example, a 1969 350/350hp car with a build date of August 1969 has a CE engine in it dated September of 1969. The warranty period for this model year was 12 months, so this engine falls within that 12 month period. This car should be examined closer for evidence of 1) a horsepower change or 2) a cubic inch change (we do this now anyway). If no evidence is found, "some" credit should be given as a service replacement engine. The engine would also need to be checked to insure that it is consistant with service replacements of that time frame.

Current rules allow an engine with the "correct" casting number and date, and a blank pad, to get a 175 point deduction (out of 350 points). Perhaps a 200 point deduction for a service replacement engine is not out of line.

One obvious problem with this idea is that an owner could now just locate a CE engine that falls within the warranty period for his/her car and install it instead of restamping a "correct" engine. If the engine installation was done correctly, I don't really have a problem with this.

One other thought, I would recommend against making the owner prove that his/her engine was replaced by the dealer under warranty. The truth is, most of this documentation is long gone.

I am once again reminded of a piece of advice that I received from Bert Lukens (spelling?) on my first day as an NCRS judge (too many years ago to count). He told me that "Our job as judges is to help the owners. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, give the owner the benefit of the doubt." That is the motto by which I personally judge cars.

I am going to try an formalize this idea in writing to submit to Roy Sinor for consideration. Any and all thoughts / comments / suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

[Jeff Polidoro]

Re: Judging CE engines revisited & other mods

Sounds great.

I think you should also recognize straight axles with 6 tailights (an option in CA cars, anyway, right?) if they were installed during the warranty period but only after the original owner was involved in a minor, non-chargeable rear end collision, not involving alcohol, and the dealer agreed to install the extra lights for cost.

Also Camaro tailights in any 63-7 provided they are from a 67 Z28 with, of course, at least one or the other vehicle still under warranty at the time of grafting.

JP

[Gary Schisler]

Re: Judging CE engines revisited & other mods

Jeff, it sounds like your sarcasm is showing through just a bit. Can we save that for some of the other bulletin boards. The gentleman made a valid suggestion and, as always, this will be discussed and cussed. If we never changed we wouldn't even have half of the categories for judging that we do today.

[Richard S.]

Re: Judging CE engines revisited

Ed, your suggestion may be worth some consideration by the NCRS. I'm losing interest in the NCRS at this point in time so even though I have a CE car, when the restoration is complete I won't bring the car to any NCRS events. The car has been restored to NCRS standards to the best of our ability. . We have some previous owner history and I'm sure one day I'll have it all.

We are positive the motor was replaced under warranty and one day I'll find out why, where and by who. The CE motor is part of the story this car has to tell and to me this is just as important as restoring the car to as close to factory original as I can.

Earlier this year I considered buying a correct block and removing the CE motor just to enter the car in NCRS judging. After talking to some of my NCRS chapter friends I decided not to spend the big bucks for a correct motor JUST to obtain NCRS scoring points. I don't really want to change anything about this car that I believe to be an original part of it's history.

The car has been altered already with the CE engine, but the alteration was part of it's true history. Perhaps there is a place for the encouragement of the preservation of the original history of a car without overpenalizing during judging.

[Jack H.]

Re: Judging CE engines revisited

Personally I agree with your mature position but NOT your conclusion. Why burn out on NCRS because one rule you don't agree with exists? If you restored the car to enjoy and use vs. make into a museum piece, remember NCRS encourages members to use their cars through our milage drive credit.

So what if you take a 350 point deduct for a CE motor? You've already said you will keep the CE power plant under the hood because that's part of the car's history (hooray!). Now, get in, fire the engine and go drive 'er 778 miles (go run the numbers) to a meet while others tug along at 55 with their enclosed trailers. The milage driven credit will COMPLETELY compensate for the full deduct on your CE block and you stand as tall as anyone else on the judging field (maybe a little taller since you got to enjoy/use your car). There's no such thing as a bad Corvette....

Remember: (1) the 'they' in NCRS is really 'us' and (2) it's the cars that bring us together, but in the end it's the people that matter. Don't write off a whole organization because one rule (today) is not in your favor. You worked hard to get where you are. Go forth and reap your reward and recognition!

It's the judge's job to HELP you EARN your award -- not plot and scheme on how to cheat you from it. I'm one of those pesky judges, a fellow member, and I AM trying to help you in the spirit of NCRS....