Restoration engine

[Steve B.]

Re: Restoration engine

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.

Point taken but changing a part number of a carb or alternator will not dramatically alter its value or change the vehicles identity.

I agree that no one here supports changing the HP of a car but the reality is that it has been going on for decades which is a shame.

[Robert M.]

Re: Restoration engine

So now the PC word for restamp is "restoration?". Guess that OK as long as everyone is on the up and up about being a NOM.

PC is not a correct description. There is aa big difference between a NOM and a restoration motor. The restoration motor has all correct casting and part numbers as well as they are dated parts correct for the car. They are NOS or restored originals. A NOM could be a 350 a 454 and made up of numerous reproduction parts.

[Jim D.]

Re: Restoration engine

There is aa big difference between a NOM and a restoration motor.

NOM = Not the Original Motor. Restoration Motor - Appears correct BUT it's still NOT the ORIGINAL MOTOR. Zero difference when it comes to originality.

[Ralph E.]

Re: Restoration engine

NOM = Not the Original Motor. Restoration Motor - Appears correct BUT it's still NOT the ORIGINAL MOTOR. Zero difference when it comes to originality.

Originality is the issue for me. An original motor can be restored. A NOM can be made to look original and as long as it is described as a restoration motor it will give the impression that the NOM is original to the car. For NCRS judging it appears an original restored motor will not get you more points than a non original "restoration motor". Doesn't make sense to me?
Thought the "R" is NCRS was for restore not replacement.

[Robert M.]

Re: Restoration engine

Originality is the issue for me. An original motor can be restored. A NOM can be made to look original and as long as it is described as a restoration motor it will give the impression that the NOM is original to the car. For NCRS judging it appears an original restored motor will not get you more points than a non original "restoration motor". Doesn't make sense to me?
Thought the "R" is NCRS was for restore not replacement.

Remember yor words when you "restore" the original engine with TRW pistons and rods, Crane Cam, Manley stainless etc. Still the original motor? This discussion can be taken to the absurd. It seems it is all right to replace everything, as long as the block is original. That is what does not make sense to me. As long as one does not male a SB into BB, there is nothing counterfeit or fraudulent about making the car as it came from the factory.

[Michael W.]

Re: Restoration engine

Being that the term 'restoration engine' has no usage or meaning in NCRS judging nor is it officially defined anywhere, isn't the whole discussion a moot point?

[Mark E.]

Re: Restoration engine

Help me with the terminology. Begin with a component without a VIN stamp, like an alternator.

What if I find a seemingly unaltered alternator on ebay with the correct PN and date for my Corvette and install it?
Is it "correct" because it has the same PN and possible date as the alternator that was installed by the factory?
Is it "not original" because my car didn't come from the factory with it?
Is it "counterfeit" if I don't disclose my car didn't come from the factory with it?
Is it a "restoration" alternator if I do disclose my car didn't come from the factory with it?

The definitions of these terms are even more complicated with parts that are altered or have a VIN.

[Leif A.]

Re: Restoration engine

Help me with the terminology. Begin with a component without a VIN stamp, like an alternator.

What if I find a seemingly unaltered alternator on ebay with the correct PN and date for my Corvette and install it?
Is it "correct" because it has the same PN and possible date as the alternator that was installed by the factory?
Is it "not original" because my car didn't come from the factory with it?
Is it "counterfeit" if I don't disclose my car didn't come from the factory with it?
Is it a "restoration" alternator if I do disclose my car didn't come from the factory with it?

The definition of these terms are even more complicated with parts that have a VIN stamped on them.

The expression "it's only original once" comes to mind. Everything else is whatever someone wants to call it...but it's not "original" unless the car was born with it. IMHO

[Joseph S.]

Re: Restoration engine

If I can add my 2 cents here. I was hoping to stay out of this thread but I can't resist. The one word that is missing in this whole discussion is "APPEARANCE"! The NCRS judging standard is to evaluate as to the "appearance" of how it left the factory. Let's leave the "BORN WITH" discussion for BOWTIE cars.

[Mike E.]

Re: Restoration engine

Remember yor words when you "restore" the original engine with TRW pistons and rods, Crane Cam, Manley stainless etc. Still the original motor? This discussion can be taken to the absurd. It seems it is all right to replace everything, as long as the block is original. That is what does not make sense to me. As long as one does not male a SB into BB, there is nothing counterfeit or fraudulent about making the car as it came from the factory.

I would extend that to same horsepower rating. Turning a base small block to a fuelie is a no no also. I think you implied that in your post though.


Mike

[Michael W.]

Re: Restoration engine

This thread is starting to go in the same direction of those which debate the meaning of 'numbers matching'.

[Gene M.]

Re: Restoration engine

There are many personal thoughts on the definition of restoration as well as the NCRS definition of restoration. First off Joe is correct in NCRS judging standard is to evaluate as to the "appearance" of how it left the factory. Judging reference manual states this quite clearly. There is no provision in the NCRS judging standards for instruments, templates, gauges, spectrophotometer, Rockwell, spectrometer, densitometer, optical scan, magnetic quality, gauss, dynameters, etc, or any means of verification of what is visible.

Second point is pertaining to VIN or VIN derivative. The NCRS acceptance of permitted “restoration” of specific stampings are often not an acceptable practice by others and even some NCRS members. Most know my opinion on this matter. But I will say the original stamping put there by GM workers was to identify that the said engine block and only that one engine block was an extension of said one car. No other engine block is an extension of said car. This can not be the same intention of any other part such as alternator, seats, window glass, etc as NONE of these parts have VIN or VIN derivative. And as such do not have definition of said one and only car. The transmission, frame are also VIN derivative and thought of same as engine block. Any effort to duplicate these stampings is to give the illusion of being real the way it left GM and was delivered. Why not just leave it alone?

If you disagree with this thinking, fine. But understand not everybody has the same in the gut feeling of what restoration is and what is right and what is wrong.

[Robert M.]

Re: Restoration engine

I guess all these opinions,, which I respect, means some one can replace or restamp any or all otf the ancillary parts on the motor, and as long as the block is not touched, they can claim their car has the original engine? I think not, but I have seen that done many times.
I think ones word and integrity is everything. I make no doublespeak about my car. It is a 67 documented L71 coupe. The tank sticker has been authenticated by two sourcs. My trans and rear are original. the motor is not as far as I can tell, however there are no reproduction parts, but all NOS and restored originals from the air cleaner lid to the pan. That also includes the internals. All casting numbers, part numbers and yes even the dates are correct for the build date of the car. Nothing was restamped as far as those parts. They were all found and restored. If I did not tell most people they would never be able to know it is not the original block. For all I know it is original and was restamped after being decked and rebuilt My feeling is unless you are the original owner of your 48 year old car it is just an opinion that the motor is original, albeit an expert opinion from the right people. My engine is a totally correct 1967 L71 motor amd that is what I say in addition to it was built from scratch.

[Michael W.]

Re: Restoration engine

My engine is a totally correct 1967 L71 motor amd that is what I say in addition to it was built from scratch.

That presumes the universal understanding and agreement that 'totally correct' overlooks having a restamped pad.

That doesn't fit my definition

[Robert M.]

Re: Restoration engine

That presumes the universal understanding and agreement that 'totally correct' overlooks having a restamped pad.

That doesn't fit my definition

Michael
I certainly respect your opinion, but answer my question if evey item has been replaced except the block, is that the "Original" Motor?