Judging a c-2 that originally was a 2 top conv.

[Kenneth B.]

If a Corvette came from the factory with 2 tops why can the car be judged without it? I know the obvious is because they can but all other aspects for as delivered are judged I don't understand why no points are deducted for a missing part of the car. I would like to know why NCRS treats hard tops/soft tops different than other parts of the as delivered Corvette. I always have mine judged with the hard tops as they are original & usually in good shape with the right date coded rear window.

[Harry S.]

Re: Judging a c-2 that originally was a 2 top conv.

I am sure there is a whole list of reasons. The only one that makes sence to me is that you can not tell how the car was actually delivered. Meaning a dealer could order a car with two tops, then sell the car with one top. In this case the hardtop might be for another customer. The rear deck would be all set for a hardtop but never delivered with one. Since documentation is rather rare for C1's, C2's etc. it difficult to prove how the car was actually delivered, thus forcing this at judging is difficult.

[Terry M.]

Re: Judging a c-2 that originally was a 2 top conv.

Part of it is a practical judging matter. The judging sheets are set up for points for judging EITHER a hardtop OR a soft top. The totals for each type of top are the same, and the totals on the score sheets are predicated on judging only one top. To do it differently would require judging BOTH tops -- which obviously can not be done for every car, and in fact can only be done for a minority of the Corvettes we judge. To do otherwise would require a different set of score sheets for two top cars and more than 4500 points for those cars. Do you want a different set of standards for two top cars?

[William L.]

Re: Judging a c-2 that originally was a 2 top conv.

Well you can always try for a PV!! They require both tops

[Mike E.]

Re: Judging a c-2 that originally was a 2 top conv.

It's tough enough to make sure that no one steps on your air cleaner or shielding while you have those removed for judging. Can you see hardtops sitting around while soft tops are being judged, and judges and spectators walking around?

[Harry S.]

Re: Judging a c-2 that originally was a 2 top conv.

I believe Ken's question is a different question. I think his question is, why have we not included two top jusging from the very beginning. Not what we would have to change to add it now.

[Stuart F.]

Re: Judging a c-2 that originally was a 2 top conv.

And the deducts for creases in the stowed convertible top! My 63 Hardtop was dealer installed and I don't know where they got it.

Stu Fox

[Joe R.]

Re: Judging a c-2 that originally was a 2 top conv.

Let's not forget that if the Corvette was delivered from the factory with a Hardtop the holes are in the decklid for mounting. If it does not have a hardtop the deck lid does not have the holes.

JR

[Ray G.]

Re: Judging a c-2 that originally was a 2 top conv.

If a Corvette came from the factory with 2 tops why can the car be judged without it? I know the obvious is because they can but all other aspects for as delivered are judged I don't understand why no points are deducted for a missing part of the car. I would like to know why NCRS treats hard tops/soft tops different than other parts of the as delivered Corvette. I always have mine judged with the hard tops as they are original & usually in good shape with the right date coded rear window.

Hello;
.
"Don't poke the bear"
.
my .02
Ray

[Hank H.]

Re: Judging a c-2 that originally was a 2 top conv.

Can someone elaborate on the post stating that a PV requires both tops? Is this accurate? I have PVd a convertible in the past without the hardtop?? thanks

[Michael G.]

Re: Judging a c-2 that originally was a 2 top conv.

I think Bill might be incorrect on requiring both tops for PV. My 63 convertible just passed PV with its soft top only present, no problem.

[William L.]

Re: Judging a c-2 that originally was a 2 top conv.

I think Bill might be incorrect on requiring both tops for PV. My 63 convertible just passed PV with its soft top only present, no problem.

Mike is your 63 set up for 2 top's??

[Michael G.]

Re: Judging a c-2 that originally was a 2 top conv.

Bill, yes it is an original two-top car. I've never put the hard top on though.

[William L.]

Re: Judging a c-2 that originally was a 2 top conv.

Bill, yes it is an original two-top car. I've never put the hard top on though.

I think you may have gotten lucky. The way I read the PV manual you are supposed to demonstrate the "removal and replacement" of the hardtop!! I have helped several guys prep their car's for PV and I once asked a very experienced PV guy why he was taking the hard top and he said you have to install it and remove it, if you dont it's a failure and your out.
Maybe a PV judge will clarify

[Kenneth B.]

Re: Judging a c-2 that originally was a 2 top conv.

I believe Ken's question is a different question. I think his question is, why have we not included two top jusging from the very beginning. Not what we would have to change to add it now.

HARRY
Yes that was my question. I am not saying that both should be judged but if the car had AC,PS according to the eniine code & was not present for judging there would be a deduct. I just brought it up as a point for discussion not that I want them changed. As I said to me it's easier to show with a hard top that a conv. top. It seems like that when questions like this come up some come up for air & spit & sputter.