One persons opinion:

[Terry M.]

[Dennis B.]

Re: One persons opinion:

Many experienced Corvette guys can pick out a repro piece simply from being in the hobby for decades- but have no clue what sort of deduction to apply.

So in one comment, all it was, was a restorers skill
Now you respond that deductions are given to repros (likely inconsistently) , indicating that skill is not the end of it. Some judges will deduct for repros, others don't? Sounds like a judging rule book issue within NCRS?

[Gene M.]

Re: One persons opinion:

One has to be careful when using NOS parts. Just because they are NOS does not insure they are the same as the original assembly line parts. Many cases show this to be true. And under these cases there have been repro parts that far exceed the originality appearance of those NOS pieces.

Remember judging is just a detective task of being able to decipher the art of illusion. As is restoration is the art of illusion.

[Dick W.]

Re: One persons opinion:

Let's just agree, we both be long in the tooth.

[Michael W.]

Re: One persons opinion:

So in one comment, all it was, was a restorers skill
Now you respond that deductions are given to repros (likely inconsistently) , indicating that skill is not the end of it. Some judges will deduct for repros, others don't? Sounds like a judging rule book issue within NCRS?

Dennis-

You took another member to task for quoting out of context. I believe you've done the same yourself, or are confusing me with another poster.

In any case- I don't believe this particular post is the best time or place to learn the fundamentals of how the judging system works. As suggested above, best go out and do it in person. Your local chapter is the best place to start.

[Norris W.]

Re: One persons opinion:

One has to be careful when using NOS parts. Just because they are NOS does not insure they are the same as the original assembly line parts. Many cases show this to be true. And under these cases there have been repro parts that far exceed the originality appearance of those NOS pieces.

Unfortunately NOS has become almost as much a maligned term as matching numbers. Example: someone has recently been selling SMC surround panels for mid years on E Bay as NOS. They are technically new old stock and are in fact GM pieces but would probably be better described as GM replacement rather than NOS. The same is true for mid year front fender tips and quarters as well as other GM fiberglass parts for cars that were never originally built in SMC. I think we've come to consider the description NOS as correct and original, and that's not always the case.

[Ridge K.]

Re: One persons opinion:

Very interesting thread with diverse opinions.

Plus, I really enjoyed Vinnie's post. Written obviously in jest by the original author, but actually sums up the inner thinking of a small few .....very well.

Pat's comment of: ......"

The judges allow anything the owner wants to do. However, there may be a point deduction in their evaluation. The owner has to decide for themselves the risk/reward calculation. It is, after all, a free country." was also very well said.

As well as Norris W's comment about: ......"

Like it or not, I think our passion for the absolute sometimes exagerated originality has in many cases outlived it's practicality. I don't forsee the young guys that are entering the hobby wanting to dirty up a fresh high quality resto with flaws that they have to explain to the non expert as being intentional mistakes to replicate factory production. Digging up blatantly inferior, currently available lead free laquer paint in place of far superior current materials is a prime example of impractical conformity. It's always seemed silly to me to replicate factory sloppiness in the form of drips and runs that may or may not even be present on a many cars and are inconsistent at best. The utter foolishness of the growing overspray fungus all over everything has long ago evaporated from my cars. I've seen '67 big blocks with orange paint all the way to the carb bases on the intake and fully expect to see it sooner or later on the wiper blades, over the top of the windshield and on the dash pad with some guy's proud declaration that it came that way. For some unknown reason it seems we've gotten to the point that exagerated factory sloppiness is preferred over abbreviated. The same can be said for preference of an original part that is inferior to a currently available repro. I've come to the conclusion that all of my Corvettes were specially prepared by GM for the ultimate owner who they considered very important (ME) and were therefore factory detailed as they would have been for a corporate executive or annual factory auto show, being completely void of overspray, drips, runs and orange peel in the paint."

And Joe R's: ...... "

Replacement parts from GM are not rejects. They are made from dies that were worn out in the 60's and used in the 70's so Corvette owners would have replacements. My hats off to GM!"

Although Norris is also correct in pointing out that the internet auction sites are ripe with phony claims of "NOS parts", ......that's to be expected when some amount of greed creeps into a person's psyche.
It takes being self-educated on how to protect one's self from phony advertising. Some precautions are only buying parts still contained within original GM packaging (although not a 100% protection, as boxes do occasionally get recycled) , and learning about the correct era of clues such as GM parts packaging, and/or GM labels.
Bing one of "those" interested in the nuances of GM service replacement parts boxes, etc., I've had the benefit of studying these details for 35+ years. Younger member's obviously haven't have the experience base, but do have the advantage of expertise on internet research.
In short, it takes being careful to not get burned int he world of NOS parts trading. I'm fairly good with the available research data and I've been burned a dozen times. Some of these instances of being burned has caused me to ask sellers
(A) is the packaging included, and
(B) will they include a photo of the parts number on the box ir label. I pass on supposedly NOS parts without packaging or correct labeling.

Be careful, and keep the faith.....

[Rick A.]

Re: One persons opinion:

Norris,

More to the point, parts such as you describe should be classified as NORS (New Old Replacement Stock) rather than NOS.

Bottom-line folks, throughout the entire discussion ORIGINAL keeps being bandied about - parts are original ONCE! - when someone media blasts, repaints, etc. that part, it is NO LONGER original, but rather a restored part!!!!!

And, agree with PapaSmurf and others, it is up to each individual judge and owner to be responsible for following / understanding CCIDF which is what NCRS is all about.

As an owner, make an effort to educate yourself by purchasing the requisite books, etc. Ask questions about the NCRS judging process here on the TDB, that is what it is for - helping others. Don't go to those other "weebsites" as Mike stated and ask questions - do it here

[Tracy C.]

Re: One persons opinion:

So in one comment, all it was, was a restorers skill
Now you respond that deductions are given to repros (likely inconsistently) , indicating that skill is not the end of it. Some judges will deduct for repros, others don't? Sounds like a judging rule book issue within NCRS?

Dennis,

If you don't have the 8th edition of the NCRS Judging referenence manual, you need to buy one and study up on the judging process. It is extremely well written and will clarify any confusion on how any given component should be scored.

The only variable will be the experience level of the judge looking at your car. As mentioned, the judges have the responcibility to fully understand the process before they deduct for anything.

tc

[Michael F.]

Re: One persons opinion:

What will happen, we will be judging cars with all reproduction parts in years to come.

If things get too restrictive? You will run out of cars to judge. The few with all original or NOS parts, will be locked away in investors collections.

I would focus on ways to keep younger buyers and owners interested in what NCRS is doing. Take a look at what's happening to the VFWs around the country. Younger "Vets" (no pun intended) have no interest. The mind set of the organization plays a big part.

If someone goes to the trouble of living up to the NCRS credo and displays a gorgeous job. Holding a few repro parts against him seems counter productive.

Just one mans opinion.

[Norris W.]

Re: One persons opinion:

If things get too restrictive? You will run out of cars to judge. The few with all original or NOS parts, will be locked away in investors collections.

I would focus on ways to keep younger buyers and owners interested in what NCRS is doing.

Very good points.

[Tracy C.]

Re: One persons opinion:

If things get too restrictive? You will run out of cars to judge. The few with all original or NOS parts, will be locked away in investors collections.

I would focus on ways to keep younger buyers and owners interested in what NCRS is doing. Take a look at what's happening to the VFWs around the country. Younger "Vets" (no pun intended) have no interest. The mind set of the organization plays a big part.

If someone goes to the trouble of living up to the NCRS credo and displays a gorgeous job. Holding a few repro parts against him seems counter productive.

Just one mans opinion.

Michael,

I'd bet that at least 50% of the Corvettes awarded top flight in the last 5 years have more than just "a few repro parts" installed. As mentioned in previous posts a good repo part can pass with no deduct at all. (the Dewitt restoration radiator is a good example and there are many others)

If you have some good suggestions regarding catching the younger generations interest, we would love to hear them.

tc

[Joel T.]

Re: One persons opinion:

This is only my opinion, I think the Corvette reproduction industory is destroying the way we as judges, judge cars. The NCRS standard of judging a car is as it left the factory, St. Louis or Bowling Green. What good is it when a person restoring a car purchases a reproduction part to install on there car for judging, because they are to lazy or just don't want to spend the time and money to try to locate the original piece. The words have been said many times, well it's ONLY one point deduction, so why should I spend hundreds of dollars on a original. Yes there are people like myself who will spend the time and money to put a original part on there car. Let's stop taking the lazy way out!!!!! NCRS judging chairman, team leaders,should take a long look at these short cuts. What will happen, we will be judging cars with all reproduction parts in years to come. Again this is only one persons opinion.

I usually keep quiet about stuff like this.. however... It is this kind of "perspective" which drives folks away from this hobby. I like most other folks I buy original and/or NOS IF I can find them and IF I can afford them.. Listening to some of the guys who have judged my car talk among themselves, one would think I committed a crime by installing a reproduction part... My 1965 was basically resurrected from the dead at a very significant cost bring together the best of what I could find to make it as good as I could possibly make it, and I continue to refine it when opportunities are presented, including a number of reproduction parts... Maybe I should have dropped in a crate motor and turned it into a resto-rod.. I could have saved myself a lot of money and prospective judging subjectivity and we could have deleted another one of the 2157 BB '65's from existence.

[Dennis B.]

Re: One persons opinion:

Dennis-

You took another member to task for quoting out of context. I believe you've done the same yourself, or are confusing me with another poster.
.

I agree, my apologies, heat of the moment, or maybe just a seniors moment, I thought I was hot on the track of a killer and the track went cold

[Mark D.]

Re: One persons opinion:

Wait til Dennis hits the 30 day mark on his membership. He'll really be able to totally restructure NCRS.