A arms done - what do you think?

[Patrick H.]

Re: A arms done - what do you think?

Thanks for the good word on the finish. It is powdercoated medium gloss black. (not sure of the exact shade) The ball joints are original GM rivet style, and were painted with cast blast. I'm not sure how the rivets were put in, that part was farmed out.

Chris,

Nice job.

As a guy who usually judges chassis...

I picked up that they were powder coated, but it's a nice job.
The cast blast on the ball joint tops is, in my opinion, painfully obvious. If you see the other pics of original ball joints you'll see what I mean. Original joints show heat discoloration at the welds, the rivets are a different color, and the zerk fitting should also be zinc/clear. If I were judging it, the ball joints would lose points on the finish.

Only trying to point this out, not criticize. A clear coat of some type would have likely fooled judges much faster than the cast blast.

Patrick

[Chris E.]

Re: A arms done - what do you think?

Yeah, I know I'm going to get dinged for countless finish issues on the car. That's just the way it is. For example, I'm not going to leave the diff raw cast iron. I live in MN, and that cast iron would stay beautiful for about 11 minutes. Then it would be rusty, and I'd have a rusty diff for the next 30 years. So, I chose to powdercoat it grey, close to the color of raw cast iron.

[Gary B.]

A-arm issues

Patrick,

I missed the cast blast entirely. Rather obvious for the various reasons you mention, now that you point it out.

Regarding the powder coat, I doubt I'd feel comfortable deducting for that as it's not always a clear call if it is or isn't.

Gary

[Patrick H.]

Re: A arms done - what do you think?

Yeah, I know I'm going to get dinged for countless finish issues on the car. That's just the way it is. For example, I'm not going to leave the diff raw cast iron. I live in MN, and that cast iron would stay beautiful for about 11 minutes. Then it would be rusty, and I'd have a rusty diff for the next 30 years. So, I chose to powdercoat it grey, close to the color of raw cast iron.

Michigan's not any better. I think we beat you in road salt usage.

My point also is that there are "other" less detectable ways to protect the natural finishes which will likely get you more judging points without using cast blast.

Patrick

[Jimmy B.]

Re: A arms done - what do you think?

In the 80's I bought new upper A-arms from Burt Chevrolet Denver, CO for the 63 swc I was restoring. I remember distincly that the paint only went to about 1/2 of the ball joint hole - meaning that the outer end of the a-arm was in a natural state. The A-arms had been dipped obviously before the ball joint was rivited to them but like I said not totally submerged in the paint only to about 1/2 the ball joint hole. Anyone ever seen this before?

Regards,

Jim Blakely

[Terry M.]

Re: A arms done - what do you think?

KI have seen lots of over-the-counter control arms that way. It is almost a trademark of service control arms. Originals were entirely coated BEFORE the ball stud was installed.
This is just another example of one of the ways in which NOS parts differ from ORIGINAL parts. I always have to chuckle when someone says: "I restored it with ALL NOS parts." I never could figure out why someone would admit to doing that.

[Chris E.]

Re: A arms done - what do you think?

I always have to chuckle when someone says: "I restored it with ALL NOS parts." I never could figure out why someone would admit to doing that.

I suspect they are trying to point out that no reproduction parts were used, which I think we all agree are less correct than NOS parts. Obviously, original parts are the most correct of the three though.

[Terry M.]

Re: A arms done - what do you think?

I guess that is another way to look at it Chris.

[Ridge K.]

Re: A arms done - what do you think?

I suspect they are trying to point out that no reproduction parts were used, which I think we all agree are less correct than NOS parts. Obviously, original parts are the most correct of the three though.

Chris, You've actually made a very, very good point. I've found that it's very difficult to argue the point convincingly, that current reproduction parts (some of which have their manufacturing base outsourced to China), are ALWAYS closer to original than NOS service replacement parts.
And obviously, we all are not blessed in still owning a vintage Corvette that we bought back in the 1950s, 1960s, or slightly later. And, for many members, there is only one vintage Corvette we own, so, if one wants to drive that car portentially daily, the owner must weight the probable consequences on driving that car on original, 40+ year old assembly line installed parts. Of course, for the Corvette that's backed off a trailer two or three times a year, that's not an important issue. I recently read a thread where a member asked a question about his restored Corvette not starting, and he stated it had only been started to drive into, and out of the car hauler for many, many years.
From reading your previous posts, I can tell you share with me a belief that these cars were built to drive. I love that fact that those survivior
trailer queens" exist, as I love viewing them as much as anyone. If I had four, five, or six Corvettes in a personal collection, where I had one to drive to the office, another for rainy days, and a new Z06 as the highway cruiser, I would likely own one of these gorgeous time-capsules myself.
The single thing I like the most about the NCRS as an club in the twenty first century, is it's inclusivness. That inclusivness, as well as excellent leadership on the board, in the team leaders, national judging chairman, way too many great volunteers to mention here, as well as a small army of volunteer judges representing all levels of experience. That's why I joined in this century, and not back in the late 1970s, as well known Corvette enthusiast Bill Mock had encouraged me to do. I love a club that accepts different views while maintaining the integrity of the judging system, as opposed to a "cliche" where only a handful of experts have cars that are the standard for others to aspire to. Some collector car clubs are still like that. Fortunately for us, close to 16,000 families are now very welcome to share with others their love of this hobby.
One last thing I'll mention, and then get off my soapbox (promise) for the next few days. Many varying opinions still exist about the use of NOS service rplacement parts. Nothing wrong with that. As humans, we all have differnet degrees of life experiences. Some Corvette enthusiasts would rather see an original part restored at all cost. I get that, and have done that for going on 40 years. Many, many times, the restorer can do that. Sometimes however, the original part is pitted, excessively worn, or requires so much "make-up", it differs drasicly from what would have been seen as typical production after normal dealer prep. However, some would argue that NOS service replacement parts ALWAYS differ from original parts. I asked recently this question, which only one sole seemed to want to answer: During the 1967 model year,......and while Corvettes were slowly rolling down the assembly line, and those eassembly line workers were grabbing parts from bins and installing them, did they only pull parts that were built for one of the 22,940 assembly line cars? In other words, did GM and it's suppliers build exactly enough parts for 22,940 cars, and then order in 'X" amount of service replacement parts that were somehow different? What happened if you needed and bought a part at your Chey dealership in say....January of 1967? Were you handed a part that was manufactured in a different plant that the assembly line parts? Did GM tell those "different" parts manufacturers to somehow make them different, or cheaper, or with less quality control? Or, did that other famous rumor kick in.......did GM hire teams of workers to "cull" the parts that were not quite as exact as the assembly line parts? Was there a large dimly lit warehouse close to St. Louis were parts came in, and ran down a conveyor belt, with culls pushed over to another line where they were put in GM cardboard parts boxes, to be distributed to Chevrolet dealer parts departments? And, does any one have a photograph of that "cull" parts warehouse? Hopefully, one of the experienced judges can explain how this happened, as my close to 40 years of research in parts,...somehow hasn't seen those rumors come true. The key concept here is the ERA the parts were manufactured in. Obviously, the NOS part purchased last year for a 1970 Corvette would be different than the 1970 installed assembly line part.
Thanks in advance Chris for graciously letting me throw a thought into your thread. I Look forward to seeing your completed restoration, and hope we can both drive to the same NCRS event in our '67s.
Ridge.

[Chris E.]

Re: A arms done - what do you think?

Thanks Ridge, lots of good comments there. I too hope to SOMEDAY be able to actually drive this thing down the road......last night, the ignition shielding, plug wires, intake manifold, carb and shift linkage went on.

Progress......kind of. I need to take some more pictures, but it was too late last night.

[John H.]

Re: A arms done - what do you think?

I asked recently this question, which only one sole seemed to want to answer: During the 1967 model year,......and while Corvettes were slowly rolling down the assembly line, and those eassembly line workers were grabbing parts from bins and installing them, did they only pull parts that were built for one of the 22,940 assembly line cars? In other words, did GM and it's suppliers build exactly enough parts for 22,940 cars, and then order in 'X" amount of service replacement parts that were somehow different?

Ridge -

In short, the plant ordered exactly what they needed to build the scheduled orders so the parts were in the plant or confirmed in-transit before the car came down the line; see my article entitled "Alphabet Soup" that explains the process in the May, 2009 issue of "Corvette Enthusiast" magazine. Service parts were ordered separately - not by Chevrolet, but by GMPD (GM Parts Division in those days, later GMSPO - GM Service Parts Operations), based on their needs, inventory protocols, and reorder-point quantity plans.

Chevrolet Engineering determined jointly with GMPD how parts were to be serviced (as individual parts or assemblies, etc.) and assigned specific part numbers for service parts where required, but all procurement of Service parts was handled entirely by GMPD. Chevrolet only procured production parts.

[Ridge K.]

Re: A arms done - what do you think?

Ridge -

In short, the plant ordered exactly what they needed to build the scheduled orders so the parts were in the plant or confirmed in-transit before the car came down the line; see my article entitled "Alphabet Soup" that explains the process in the May, 2009 issue of "Corvette Enthusiast" magazine. Service parts were ordered separately - not by Chevrolet, but by GMPD (GM Parts Division in those days, later GMSPO - GM Service Parts Operations), based on their needs, inventory protocols, and reorder-point quantity plans.

Chevrolet Engineering determined jointly with GMPD how parts were to be serviced (as individual parts or assemblies, etc.) and assigned specific part numbers for service parts where required, but all procurement of Service parts was handled entirely by GMPD. Chevrolet only procured production parts.

John I really do appreciate you taking the time to share your knowledge base on this point. If anyone knows this issue, ...you do.
On the specific comment about "NOS parts differ from original parts",...in the scenario I mentioned of correct era produced parts, what's your take on this opinion. I realize there are many exceptions on individual parts, but speaking as a general rule, is that statement in general, accurate, in your opinion.
Thanks in advance for this additional perspective.
Ridge.

[Harmon C.]

Re: A arms done - what do you think?

Chris
A good chassis judge is going to find problems with the finish on lots of parts if he has seen 50 Bowtie cars and has an idea how the factory finished parts for the model year he is judging. I call it overdone.I usally tell an owner from my own cars being judged that a rusty low milage Bowtie car will score the same as a pretty restored chassis that is not the way the factory built cars. I will say I see a problem in the amount of paint and the surface of the A-Arm has that was rusted at one time,(not smooth like just coming out of the punch press). I judge other years but the cross shaft and the bushings and the bolts and washers all the same paint is questionable to me. The cast blast is easy to see. You have the right idea in your coments to others that you don't want the parts to rust so be ready for the hit you take. I hope this is not too harsh but my deduction on a somewhat rusty original arm would be the same as your restored parts.

[Paul J.]

Re: A arms done - what do you think?

Yeah, I know I'm going to get dinged for countless finish issues on the car. That's just the way it is. For example, I'm not going to leave the diff raw cast iron. I live in MN, and that cast iron would stay beautiful for about 11 minutes. Then it would be rusty, and I'd have a rusty diff for the next 30 years. So, I chose to powdercoat it grey, close to the color of raw cast iron.

Powdercoat is a tremendously durable finish, and although I like it I stay away from it as much as possible for three reasons. First, you can always tell it's powdercoat. Secondly, if there are any adhesion issues it will cause flaking, making a real mess. Third, it's durability make it a real bear to try to refinish a powedercoated piece.

I'm with Patrick, there are other very good choices for protection.

Paul

[Ridge K.]

Re: A arms done - what do you think?

Chris
A good chassis judge is going to find problems with the finish on lots of parts if he has seen 50 Bowtie cars and has an idea how the factory finished parts for the model year he is judging. I call it overdone.I usally tell an owner from my own cars being judged that a rusty low milage Bowtie car will score the same as a pretty restored chassis that is not the way the factory built cars. I will say I see a problem in the amount of paint and the surface of the A-Arm has that was rusted at one time,(not smooth like just coming out of the punch press). I judge other years but the cross shaft and the bushings and the bolts and washers all the same paint is questionable to me. The cast blast is easy to see. You have the right idea in your coments to others that you don't want the parts to rust so be ready for the hit you take. I hope this is not too harsh but my deduction on a somewhat rusty original arm would be the same as your restored parts.

Lyle, I always appreciate reading your comments on these points. Your depth of experience in judging is always a huge help to us new-comers.
Take a quick look at the original A-arms in my virgin '67.
Would the "somewhat rusty" clause apply, or would you rather see (A. NOS parts I've depicted, along with every other front end part replaced with matching "67 era NOS parts, or (B. restoring the original parts with current repo components), or....... (C. leave the surviving parts as-is).
How would the three options score in chassis judging, with this quick snapshot view.
As always, thanks in advance for your input.
Ridge.