General Date Code Question - NCRS Discussion Boards

General Date Code Question

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Terry M.
    Beyond Control Poster
    • September 30, 1980
    • 15573

    #16
    Re: General Date Code Question

    Originally posted by Mike Ernst (211)
    ....(an oldest child, of course).
    Really?? Is that what does it? Next Advanced Judging School I will have to ask everyone about their lineage.

    On a more serious note: My opinion is that the six month rule serves us all very well. Yes it is a generalization, but on the other hand the worst thing a judge can tell an owner is: "I made a deduction because your car is not like all the others I have seen." Or worse yet: " .....because this part is not like the part that is on my car."

    Please note those statements are very different from: "This item is not Typical Factory Production because it differs in xxxxx way." Both statements may wind up with the same score sheet deduction, but the explanation is night and day different. And I submit the effect on the car owner will be night and day different as well.
    Terry

    Comment

    • Michael J.
      Extremely Frequent Poster
      • January 27, 2009
      • 7073

      #17
      Re: General Date Code Question

      I agree Terry, and that was my point in mentioning the 6 month rule and people's opinions on date code ranges. I know judges are encouraged to use their own personal knowledge in judging, but when it comes to deductions the reasons need to be crystal clear and documented by things in the TIM&JG and JRM.
      Big Tanks In the High Mountains of New Mexico

      Comment

      • Keith M.
        Very Frequent User
        • January 17, 2021
        • 663

        #18
        Re: General Date Code Question

        Originally posted by Michael Johnson (49879)
        I agree Terry, and that was my point in mentioning the 6 month rule and people's opinions on date code ranges. I know judges are encouraged to use their own personal knowledge in judging, but when it comes to deductions the reasons need to be crystal clear and documented by things in the TIM&JG and JRM.
        This sort of thinking resonates with me...and I have been giving this a lot of thought. Personally...I think ANY deductions around date codes should be few and far between...and when done...very explicitly explained. Production and assembly in 1969 and thereabouts was nowhere near the precision it is today. We are dealing in the realm of probabilities vs. possibilities. I was not there at the time but I would surmise parts were brought to the assembly line involving pallets and forklifts and such. And without EXPLICIT data documenting what went into each vehicle on the line..well...we are left with probabilities and possibilities. What I mean is...there are probably good guidelines along the lines of the six month rule that a vehicle with a late Oct build date has most parts manufactured in the two weeks prior to 4 months prior timeframe...probably. But is it POSSIBLE that a given part could be much older than that...absolutely...for any of a myriad of reasons. So are you gonna deduct the guy who swears he has a survivor late Oct 69 build vehicle with ALL original parts cuz his starter is dated Dec 68? Maybe Joey in St. Louis or wherever had a hot date waiting that Friday night and circumvented the usual streamline of parts assembly. Maybe even a part dated AFTER build date is possible....for example...build date Oct 25 1969 and that vehicle failed QA testing due to faulty starter or whatever and they throw one in hot off the presses from early November. When it comes to judging ...IMO...there should be a fair amount of leniency when it comes to date codes. Alternatively...part numbers are a different matter. Net of it all...I think the 6 month rule makes sense...this an issue of guidelines and reasonableness....and someone should not face deductions because Judge of the day never seen one like that before. Otherwise we risk turning off restoration enthusiasts who are just trying to get it "right" as best they can....a slippery slope I know....but nonetheless..."right" can at times be subjective...without hard empirical as built data....which future collectors of cars produced today may have the benefit of...as I imagine every auto manufacturing is capturing EVERY piece of information about EVERY car coming off the line.
        ***************
        late Oct 1969 L46 350/350, M21 4spd, 3.70 posi convertible --As with life, restoration is a journey, not a destination. Though restored cars provide both journeys AND destinations!

        Comment

        • Terry M.
          Beyond Control Poster
          • September 30, 1980
          • 15573

          #19
          Re: General Date Code Question

          Originally posted by Mike Ernst (211)
          Your best bet is to do a lot of research on real cars with similar options built in your date range. Many components were batch built, and reproducers/restampers don't do adequate research. That takes time and energy to do, but ultimately, you have a much better feel for what you need, and much greater confidence if you submit to the judging process. Master judges didn't just fall off the turnip truck--they have years of experience, not only in judging cars, but in looking at them here, there, and everywhere.
          Not to beat this idea to death, but I must mention that there are several places in chrome bumper C3s where the dates on the item are typically as much as two years before the build date of the car. Both items that I can think of at the moment are called out in the TIM&JG, and a seasoned Early C3 judge will make a deduction for a date falling closer to the build of the car. If a car with these features is shown at a chapter meet an interesting learning experience can take place. It is always a good idea for a judge to keep an open mind because judging Corvettes is never a black and white situation.

          For one to find a car built close to a car one is working on is a beautiful experience. It is a joy to behold; right Mike? Mike found a car built 20 away from his 1971 and observed that everything in the engine compartment was dated the same as his. ABSOLUTELY everything except the cylinder case casting date. The transmission assembly date and the differential assembly date are different, but the diff is a different ratio so one might expect that one.

          I once showed my 1970 at an event with another 1970 built within several hundred cars of mine. By happenstance we were parked next to each other. With the hoods open one would have thought there was a mirror between the cars. While neither of us needed validation of our cars, a number of people walking by noticed and commented on the unique display. It was not planned that way. It just happened.

          Those of us who pursue this kind of activity find the expression "You have to kiss a lot of frogs to find a prince." an apt description of our searches. Almost any car can reveal some useful data, so don't discard a chance to look at a car before examining the details. And realize you will have to look at a lot of cars to find the information you need.
          Terry

          Comment

          Working...

          Debug Information

          Searching...Please wait.
          An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because you have logged in since the previous page was loaded.

          Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
          An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because the token has expired.

          Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
          An internal error has occurred and the module cannot be displayed.
          There are no results that meet this criteria.
          Search Result for "|||"