GM Restoration parts

[Marc R.]

I'm looking at a rear view mirror from Paragon that's a GM Restoration part. It's touted as an excellent piece with the proper stampings, etc. Does the fact that it's a resto part mean it's as close to original as possible? Comments?

[Chuck S.]

Re: GM Restoration parts

I'm looking at a rear view mirror from Paragon that's a GM Restoration part. It's touted as an excellent piece with the proper stampings, etc. Does the fact that it's a resto part mean it's as close to original as possible? Comments?

Paragon can generally be trusted to get a repro part pretty close, but the fact that it's a GMRestorationPart only means that Paragon has to pay GM a license fee for the use of all GM trademarks, and the Corvette name.

GM supports their licensees by occasionally advertising the GMRestorationParts brand in restoration periodicals, but that does not necessarily mean that any such part is of the same configuration and specification as the original parts sold by GM. In some cases they are close, and in others, not so close...it's more dependent on the licensee than GM's standards.

[Marc R.]

Re: GM Restoration parts

Thanks Charles. As an aside, I tried to search 'GM Restoration Parts' in the archives, but it told me GM didn't have enough letters to work. I guess we'll have to type out General Motors, eh?

[Bill C.]

Re: GM Restoration parts

I bought the mirror - PERFECT!

Had my car judged in Kissimee 2008 - no issues with the interior judges at all.

Bill

[Marc R.]

Re: GM Restoration parts

Good to hear. Thanks Bill.

[Pat M.]

Re: GM Restoration parts

I've also had no deductions with Paragon's mirror for my 70.

[Noel K.]

Re: GM Restoration parts

Some have heard the whole story which I won't repeat about my hubcaps getting full deduct at chapter meet. My point is that the spinners were "genuine restoration parts" and the judge gave them a full point deduction as he said they weren't even close to original specs. I would suggesst you try to ensure you will have full return privileges on buying a part if it turns out be to less than perfect reproduction.

[Dick W.]

Re: GM Restoration parts

Thanks Charles. As an aside, I tried to search 'GM Restoration Parts' in the archives, but it told me GM didn't have enough letters to work. I guess we'll have to type out General Motors, eh?

Marc a little quirk of the search requires four letters or numerals. Just add an asterik * or two at the end of the search word to make it four.

[Joel F.]

Re: GM Restoration parts

Some have heard the whole story which I won't repeat about my hubcaps getting full deduct at chapter meet

Not to hijack the thread, but a full deduct seems a little heavy to me for a repro part.

[Terry M.]

Re: GM Restoration parts

Joel,
In general the deduction for a reproduction part can range from no deduction to a full deduct -- depending on the similarity of the part to the original. The fact that the part is a reproduction, even an authorized Gm reproduction has no bearing on the judgment. Everything depends on the parts resemblance to the original.
I am making no comment about Noel's experience, as I have no technical knowledge in that area. I am simply outlining the general rules.

[Joel F.]

Re: GM Restoration parts

Thanks Terry, I know the deduction can range from zero to full. I do not know much about 65 spinners, but having seen the repro part, to me it looks enough like an original (i.e. 3 bar with Corvette log) that it should have received something. Unless he showed up with something that had 2 bars and a Ford emblem, I'd have given him at least the 10%.

[Eric J.]

Shouldn't GM Restoration parts accepted?

Perhaps "officially licensed" GM Restoration Parts should be treated like current serivce replacements. A Delco replacement battery looks nothing like an old Tar TOP but you do get some points. A service replacement tire gets points as well Why wouldn't a GMRP Spinner get some points unless it had "FOMOCO" on it? (then again it wouldn't have been licensed). WHat is the Vetting process for GMRP? Is it simply a license fee? or do they approve the part?

[Chuck S.]

Re: Shouldn't GM Restoration parts accepted?

...Is it simply a license fee? or do they approve the part?...

Pretty much; the licensing is used as protection for GM's intellectual property. I expect lawyers "approve" the part...does that tell you anything?

[Eric J.]

Re: GM Restoration parts

Charles, THanks. I once paid GM to use the 1981 Crossed flag logo on a website I hosted years ago. They had to approve the logo and it cost me a grand. (2 $500 onetime payments). But wouldn't that level of GM approval warant some respect in judging?

[Chuck S.]

Re: GM Restoration parts

Read Terry's post above again...it doesn't matter whether GM licenses a part or not (Like that is ever going to happen these days!): If a part is different from the original in ANY MINUTE DETAIL, and a judge can detect that difference, it's going to get a deduct.

Now, what you're probably asking is a FULL deduction appropriate in the cited case...Well, I admit, 100% deduct is a little harsh for a part that is there and bears some resemblance, but I didn't see the part or its deficiencies. Such calls is one area where judges have some latitiude...the judging sheets go a long way to making judging an objective process, but they can not infuse experience or compassion into a judge. Simply being able to recognize a part as a reproduction, regardless of it's accuracy, should not be grounds for 100% deduction. An experienced judge should be able to take that repro part and tell you, if necessary, HOW that repro part is different from the original IN EVERY RESPECT. If he takes 100% JUST because he knows it's a reproduction, he's either an unsympathetic purist too far removed from exigencies of today's restorations, or he's really ignorant of the differences himself and is taking the convenient way out. JMHO.

WHENEVER an owner disagrees strongly with a judges call, he should appeal the deduction to the next level, whether Chapter Judging Chairman or Team Leader, and then, if you are still convinced you are right, then to the National Judging Chairman. You may not be happy with the final call, but whichever way it goes, someone is going to get an education about that detail. It's better than complaining later.