Restoration engine

[Mike E.]

Re: Restoration engine

Still have trouble with "restored engine"
I can understand restoring parts parts on the car. Like restoring the original alternator. You can restore the original water pump. You can restore the original carburetor. You can restore an ORIGINAL engine. But how can you restore a NOM to be "original". To me, if it is a restored NOM, judges are being asked to judge how good a someone can make a fake. Judging the font size, the character shape, the character spacing, proper ganging, stamp depth, location, and orientation is just having a judge verifying how good a counterfeit is being presented.
Each car came with a motor and that should be the only one that can be "restored". Simply stating NOM should be enough. If the car came with a BB and the NOM is a replacement BB so be it. Replicating the original stamping on a NOM should not be allowed, they are just counterfeits.
End of my rant.

My only problem with your thinking why is the engine different than any other part, paint or even tires? When new these cars were driven HARD, they were meant to be driven that way. What should be done with a car that was unfortunate enough to have a blown engine early in life? Turn it into a resto-mod? Uck! The "R" in NCRS stands for Restorers.

Making a car something it's not or never was...Yes I agree 100% that's counterfeit.

Not informing a potential buyer the car has a restoration engine...That I would consider fraud.

Mike

[Ralph E.]

Re: Restoration engine

Thanks Michael,
I understand the logic until the last line. "Stamping a 435-HP block to conform to the date/serial number of the original 435-HP Corvette in which it was installed." Why isn't this consider counterfeiting. It certainly is misrepresentation. It is making the NOM look original.

[Kenneth B.]

Re: Restoration engine

Thanks Michael,
I understand the logic until the last line. "Stamping a 435-HP block to conform to the date/serial number of the original 435-HP Corvette in which it was installed." Why isn't this consider counterfeiting. It certainly is misrepresentation. It is making the NOM look original.

So if you have someone make a counterfeit front windshield or side glass & repo hoses & you install it in your car is that ok? How about correct dated carb ETC.

[Kenneth B.]

Re: Restoration engine

The subject of a restoration engine has been controversial to many NCRS members I know. But, the 8th Edition of the Corvette Judging Reference Manual does a good job, IMO, of sorting out the terms and distinctions. For instance, it states as the definition of,

Counterfeit:

"To make an imitation of something else with the intent to deceive or defraud".

For instance, the following would be examples of counterfeiting:
-Repainting an original blue car red and changing the trim tag to make red appear to be the original color.
-Installing a red interior in a car that left the factory with a blue interior and changing the trim tag to make red appear to be the original color interior.
-Replacing the engine of an original small block Corvette with a big block and stamping numbers on it to make it appear to be an original big block engine.
-Replacing the carburetor on an engine with a fuel injection unit and stamping the numbers and suffix code on the block to make it appear to be original.

Vs. to Restore
Restore:"To renew; to put back into existence or bring back to a former or original state".For instance, the following examples represent restorations and are not considered counterfeiting:

• Repainting an original black Corvette with black lacquer paint.
• Installing accurately reproduced black vinyl seat covers in a car that left the factory with a standard black interior.
• Stamping a 435-HP block to conform to the date/serial number of the original 435-HP Corvette in which it was installed.

AGREE For those that get it no explanation is needed. For those that don't none is possible.

[Michael W.]

Re: Restoration engine

Thanks Michael,
I understand the logic until the last line. "Stamping a 435-HP block to conform to the date/serial number of the original 435-HP Corvette in which it was installed." Why isn't this consider counterfeiting. It certainly is misrepresentation. It is making the NOM look original.

How is repainting a car in it's original colour not counterfeiting then?

[Robert M.]

Re: Restoration engine

If every* other minute detail of a car can be restored without anyone batting an eye, why not the engine stamp pad?

*except trim and VIN tags

Absolutely Correct and reasonable.

[Ralph E.]

Re: Restoration engine

My only problem with your thinking why is the engine different than any other part, paint or even tires? When new these cars were driven HARD, they were meant to be driven that way. What should be done with a car that was unfortunate enough to have a blown engine early in life? Turn it into a resto-mod? Uck! The "R" in NCRS stands for Restorers.

Making a car something it's not or never was...Yes I agree 100% that's counterfeit.

Not informing a potential buyer the car has a restoration engine...That I would consider fraud.

Mike

Since I am on the slow team and don't totally get the explanation, I can understand making a car something it's not is a counterfeit. SB to BB.
To me you restore using original parts. You cannot restore tires, you can restore a carburetor. You can restore an original motor and now per NCRS, you can REPLICATE an original motor with a NOM if you meet NCRS standards. Problem is once judged it gets passed off as original.
To me if you replace the windshield with a new windshield it is a REPLACEMENT windshield not a RESTORED windshield. It is like the Proteam Corvette. That car has a lot of replacement parts yet the car is said to be restored.
I may never fully understand this concept.

[Mike E.]

Re: Restoration engine

Problem is once judged it gets passed off as original.

I would agree that's an issue. I've seen sellers list cars as "NCRS Certified". That alone is enough to turn me off on a seller.

Part of it is the misconception of what Top Flight means and it's a case of "Buyer Beware " and "A fool and his money are soon parted."

It's up to the buyer to do the proper due diligence when spending big bucks on a car.

Mike

[Don H.]

Re: Restoration engine

It depends on what the meaning of the word is is.

[Michael W.]

Re: Restoration engine

Problem is once judged it gets passed off as original

But it isn't. Nothing gets passed off as original in Flight Judging.

[Georges C.]

Re: Restoration engine

Mike, Agree Totally. I Knew Original purchaser of my car who drove the hell out of it and blew the original engine. My high school best friend bought the car from him, then best friend came down with cancer ( agent orange). After his death, his wife asked if I wanted to buy it, OCT 1976. It was sitting on blocks and the engine torn down for three years. I HAVE THE ORIGINAL WARRANTY BOOK WITH PROTECT O PLATE. My wife drove that car for years after I semi restored with 1970 LT1. Two years ago, I decided to take the car back to it's original delivery state.
MY ONLY CHOICE: a NUMERICALLY CORRECT REPLACEMENT 427! I could have purchased a "so called real BB" , but I chose to keep the car I bought from my friends wife and do it justice.
Some people need to get a grip!

[Jim H.]

Re: Restoration engine

From my reading of this BB, restamping an engine pad, even if done within NCRS "restoration v. counterefit" guidelines, seems problematic. The stamping fonts, depth, placement on the pad, weathering, and the all important broach marks have to be replicated fairly precisely to achieve the desired result. Get any of them wrong and you've just dumped a bunch of money into an engine that's going to cost you a bunch of points when judged. Not to mention the possible unfavorable opinions of amatuers and professionals advising potential purchasers which could upset your sale. While I understand the motivations of owners who have absolute certainty as to the original engine, the pitfalls of restamping seem fairly significant. Not to mention the likely potential of a restamp being passed off as original down the ownership chain. It's a gamble and I like greater certainty of results. No criticisms implied, just my opinion.

[Mike E.]

Re: Restoration engine

Mike, Agree Totally. I Knew Original purchaser of my car who drove the hell out of it and blew the original engine. My high school best friend bought the car from him, then best friend came down with cancer ( agent orange). After his death, his wife asked if I wanted to buy it, OCT 1976. It was sitting on blocks and the engine torn down for three years. I HAVE THE ORIGINAL WARRANTY BOOK WITH PROTECT O PLATE. My wife drove that car for years after I semi restored with 1970 LT1. Two years ago, I decided to take the car back to it's original delivery state.
MY ONLY CHOICE: a NUMERICALLY CORRECT REPLACEMENT 427! I could have purchased a "so called real BB" , but I chose to keep the car I bought from my friends wife and do it justice.
Some people need to get a grip!

Which Mike are you agreeing with?


Mike

[Steve B.]

Re: Restoration engine

Interesting thread. Of course everyone has a right to their opinion. My view is that the comparison to stamping an engine to conform to judging vs. stamping a carb or alternator, etc. is an apples to oranges comparison. One determines the HP of the car and with that a huge part of its value while the other simply makes the car more correct. The bottom line is that most engines are restamped for a couple of reasons. First to restore a BB to its former glory which I have no problem with. Second is for the resale value and to deceive a potential buyer, something that I have a huge problem with. Unfortunately I have seen more cases with the second scenario vs. the first one.

[Michael W.]

Re: Restoration engine

Interesting thread. Of course everyone has a right to their opinion. My view is that the comparison to stamping an engine to conform to judging vs. stamping a carb or alternator, etc. is an apples to oranges comparison. One determines the HP of the car and with that a huge part of its value while the other simply makes the car more correct. The bottom line is that most engines are restamped for a couple of reasons. First to restore a BB to its former glory which I have no problem with. Second is for the resale value and to deceive a potential buyer, something that I have a huge problem with. Unfortunately I have seen more cases with the second scenario vs. the first one.

Changing the part number/date of a carb or alternator is just as much counterfeiting as changing the casting number/date on an engine case. Altering the horsepower rating/cubic inches of a car is also counterfeiting. Nobody here supports that.

People joining NCRS and putting a car through the judging process just to boost it's value is another topic.