Author Topic: MCA concours car description  (Read 1897 times)

Offline ruppstang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2075
MCA concours car description
« on: October 28, 2016, 09:51:59 AM »
I the last judges meeting we discussed a statement of what the MCA expectation of division 1 and 2 concours are. I do not have the exact verbiage but this is what I remember.

A MCA division 1 and 2 concours cars must maintain the appearance and function as when delivered to the owner. Reproduction parts are acceptable in these divisions provided they maintain the original appearance and function. Metal finishes that are painted must appear as the original finish.

There was some discussion about added optional equipment. It was decided that since Marti reports are not available for the early cars that RPO options added as done in production would be allowed. Dealer installed equipment is acceptable provided proper presale documentation is provided. Discussion on whether engine dress up kits would be allowed as they currently are. One opinion was as by the statement above they should not be allowed. Another opinion was dress up kits have been allowed in MCA rules and would anger many members in making this change.

I know many of you judges could not attend this meeting and I would value your opinions on this.     

« Last Edit: October 28, 2016, 03:24:51 PM by carlite65 »

Offline ChrisV289

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1192
Re: MCA concours car discrption
« Reply #1 on: October 28, 2016, 12:55:24 PM »
Define, "presale documentation."  I have a NOS parking brake warning light installed on my car. I need to provide proof the dealer installed it?
Chris
1965 Honey Gold Fastback

Offline caspian65

  • Charles Turner
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5542
Re: MCA concours car discrption
« Reply #2 on: October 28, 2016, 03:15:22 PM »
Personally, I prefer that current owners are not given a free-for-all when it comes to adding options to their cars that it didn't come with originally.  While I understand that there were some Ford advertising efforts to 'personalize' your car, I don't believe that it was done back then to the extent it is now.

What I would like to see is a limit put on over-the-counter accessories, like we used to do.  Limit it to no more than 2-3 per section on the judging sheets.  This still gives quite a bit more leeway then I like, but it's at least something to keep things in check.

Judged a car once, a '66 coupe C code, that the owner had every single K code component installed on the car.  Tried to say it was dealer-ordered that way.  The irony of it was that for this car to be modified to that extent, it would have cost the original owner more than $1k over just buying a K code to start with.  In today's dollars, that's like a $10k increase in price.  Some things just aren't realistic and it's downright abusing the judging rules. 

There aren't a whole lot of concours cars, so I really don't think it's asking too much to restore a car back to how it came.
Charles Turner - MCA/SAAC Judge
Concours Mustang Forum Admin

Offline jwc66k

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3193
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #3 on: October 28, 2016, 04:30:54 PM »
One of the topics in MCA judging seminars I attended several years ago (over 20, I just looked) was vehicle options. The conclusions voiced by the three Gold Card Judges (Jeff was one of them) on options was simple. A "plain Jane" 6 cylinder hardtop has a better chance to be awarded a "Gold" than a fully loaded 428 Cobra Jet Mach I for a simple reason. Judging is based on what is installed. The more "options" you have, the more "judging" you receive, the more possibilities you have for losing points. This was before Marti Reports were available so the addition of options on 1967 and on, could not be verified. Just something to consider when you add something.
Jim
I promise to be politically correct in all my posts to keep the BBBB from vociferating.

Offline J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13427
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #4 on: October 28, 2016, 06:46:29 PM »
A MCA division 1 and 2 concours cars must maintain the appearance and function as when delivered to the owner. Reproduction parts are acceptable in these divisions provided they maintain the original appearance and function. Metal finishes that are painted must appear as the original finish.


Sound pretty much what we came up with last year

There was some discussion about added optional equipment. It was decided that since Marti reports are not available for the early cars that RPO options added as done in production would be allowed.

Sorry couldn't stay for the meeting but believe this was a mistake believe, though it is a change from past practices, that the Marti information is available it should be taken advantage of. Doesn't make it fair or unfair IMHO to any group since they don't compete against one another and doubt that many owners considering to do a restoration would use this as a major part in their criteria when choosing a car for restoring. Kind of like saying that we here in the US should not use some of the advanced medical procedures we have available since not everyone around the world or even in our country doesn't have the access.



Dealer installed equipment is acceptable provided proper presale documentation is provided. Discussion on whether engine dress up kits would be allowed as they currently are. One opinion was as by the statement above they should not be allowed. Another opinion was dress up kits have been allowed in MCA rules and would anger many members in making this change.

If we used or required Marti reports like many other national organizations do (other similar reports in other brand of car clubs) the issue was reduced to only a handful of cars and years.

Don't think we should always be guided by what we think owners might think about subjects but what instead follows our mission statement :). Do believe we should figure out a transition plan for currently built cars with a sunset date but we have been hamstrung for 30 plus years into often not making the right choice for the hobby long term because we focus more on the current crop of cars than on the future restorations and new members. Because of this often the cars take on a halogenated, middle of the road final look. 

If your going to let owners add options IMHO then you must be consistent and allow any possible option or accessory. Its been my experience that many judges pass judgement on what is OK and what isn't based on their own criteria without being even handed. All too often, it seems, that they are OK with adding a console, styled steel wheels but performance based options are deducted for. I've gotten dozens of call through the years for issues when this happens.

I don and have seen those cars were the car seems to be an after thought or becomes just a base for hanging all the owners collection of options and accessories to the point where it is very distracting. In those classes where MCA allows these things its a slippery slop so we either need printed, clear and consisce rules outlining a consistant message.

Guess I need to stop there. Sure the conversation will continue.  For me I would vote to use the Marti reports (require owners to present one or send in a copy with their application) on all cars first shown in 2017 and all cars currently in the MCA show records get a pass until 2021. And on the 65-66 cars a clear definition of what is allowed is published and followed. Just a place to start
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline outlawincorporated

  • Kangaroo Herder
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 349
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #5 on: October 28, 2016, 09:36:04 PM »
agree with the idea of using Marti reports for all 67 and above cars.  I think it is essential....

shame for 65 66 owners (like me) but thems the breaks.

regards.

PHILL BERESFORD.
MELBOURNE.
AUSTRALIA.
ITS ONLY EVER ORIGINAL ONCE!!!!!

MCA GOLD CARD JUDGE 1ST GENERATION.  MCA #68589

Offline ruppstang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2075
Re: MCA concours car discrption
« Reply #6 on: November 01, 2016, 09:35:38 AM »
Define, "presale documentation."  I have a NOS parking brake warning light installed on my car. I need to provide proof the dealer installed it?
Dealer installed equipment should be noted on the bill of sale. Any dealer options after the sale are not expectable.

 I judged a 67 that has red line tires that were not a option in 67. I asked the owner about them and he said that they were install as part of the sale and he had the bill of sale showing the tires. I am ok with that.

Offline ruppstang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2075
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #7 on: November 01, 2016, 10:04:09 AM »
I would like to thank all that posted on this thread. No surprise to the slant here on CMF.

" For me I would vote to use the Marti reports (require owners to present one or send in a copy with their application) on all cars first shown in 2017 and all cars currently in the MCA show records get a pass until 2021."

Jeff thanks for your thoughts, helpful as always, while I agree on the thought above it is problematic tracking specific cars and judging them differently not to mention mistakes in tallying them correctly.

Things move slowly but we have to keep improving.
Marty

Online 67gtasanjose

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2738
  • "Take the MUSTANG PLEDGE"
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #8 on: November 01, 2016, 03:06:50 PM »
I the last judges meeting we discussed a statement of what the MCA expectation of division 1 and 2 concours are. I do not have the exact verbiage but this is what I remember.

A MCA division 1 and 2 concours cars must maintain the appearance and function as when delivered to the owner. Reproduction parts are acceptable in these divisions provided they maintain the original appearance and function. Metal finishes that are painted must appear as the original finish.

There was some discussion about added optional equipment. It was decided that since Marti reports are not available for the early cars that RPO options added as done in production would be allowed. Dealer installed equipment is acceptable provided proper presale documentation is provided. Discussion on whether engine dress up kits would be allowed as they currently are. One opinion was as by the statement above they should not be allowed. Another opinion was dress up kits have been allowed in MCA rules and would anger many members in making this change.

I know many of you judges could not attend this meeting and I would value your opinions on this.     

While I can understand the desire to use Marti Reports on Thoroughbreds, I wonder why the need on lower-level classes. A "bonus point system" would serve the same purpose without potentially running off members. Maybe membership is strong enough?
Richard Urch

1967 (11/2/66, S.J.) Luxury Coupe, 289-4V w/Thermactor Emissions, C-4, Well Optioned
2005 (04/05) GT Premium Convertible, Windveil Blue, Parchment Top w/Med. Parchment interior,  Roush Body Appointments

Offline ruppstang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2075
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #9 on: November 02, 2016, 09:24:24 AM »
While I can understand the desire to use Marti Reports on Thoroughbreds, I wonder why the need on lower-level classes. A "bonus point system" would serve the same purpose without potentially running off members. Maybe membership is strong enough?

The primary definition of the concours classes is authenticity not personalization. Marti reports would be helpful in insuring that the cars receiving the highest awards are authentic.
I have a duel exhaust system on a C code car and I most likely will not remove it because I like it, and I am prepared to take the deduction for it. If I were to build the car today with more stringent MCA rules I most likely would not add it. That is the goal, having cars that represent what Ford was producing.( the vast majority of them were low optioned cars) 

IMO it is unlikely the MCA will start requiring Marti reports at least in the near future. I would however hope to see the rules tighten to limit the use of dealer install options and RPO options that were not available from the factory, with out presale documentation.

Offline mac1971

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #10 on: November 02, 2016, 05:35:07 PM »
and if the Marti report is not correct?...
1971 J Code 429CJ Convertible
2013 Boss 302 Laguna Seca #106

Offline DKutz

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 261
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #11 on: November 02, 2016, 05:55:09 PM »
I, like everyone else, wish there were Marti Reports for the 64-66 mustangs.  But we all know they don't exist..  In doing my car I had to rely on detective work to figure out what was, or would have been on the car.  Even then I don't know if it had standard hub caps or wire wheel covers.  (No Matter I put on Magnum 500's)  I would love to know the full history of my car, unfortunately I never will.  I am not sure how I feel about judging the accessories, but I suppose they should be kept to a minimum.

.
1965 Mustang Fastback 'A' Code, silver Blue Met, Med blue int. Auto, San Jose, 10/8/64 #1449**

Gone but not forgotten - 1996 Mustang GT

Offline J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13427
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #12 on: November 02, 2016, 05:56:41 PM »
While I can understand the desire to use Marti Reports on Thoroughbreds, I wonder why the need on lower-level classes. A "bonus point system" would serve the same purpose without potentially running off members. Maybe membership is strong enough?

But do we lower or keep standards at an artificially low level rather than progressing as others have just to keep numbers higher?  What message does that send to those that want the club and judging to evolve. They are just as likely to leave and find another sandbox or create another show or organization to complete.

From what I've seen over the years is that big changes will affect turn out for a couple of years then  most of the time it rebounds and even gets stronger. Case in point - when SAAC informed owners the year before that they were going to use factory records and confirm the original color of each car the turn out shrunk by about 50%. Within two years the numbers were up and beyond what they were before and today owners can even imagine a time when we would not want the car back to how the car was originally built.  And we see allot less red cars at the shows  ::)
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13427
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #13 on: November 02, 2016, 06:00:32 PM »
and if the Marti report is not correct?...

I've not seen/been told of more than a couple and those were resolved quickly. Or are you referring to Ford being wrong since its their information and if so what are we using to prove those records are wrong and what we have is correct.  Thing like everything we judge those unusual cases and oddities can and will be dealt with on an individual basis but to change or hold back 99.9% of all the other cars doesn't seem to make sense but instead in some cases an excuse for still wanting the car the way the owner wants it but without any deduction for those individual choices they have made for themselves. 

IMHO not fair for all the other owners that want to restore their cars.
Just an opinion as always
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline ChrisV289

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1192
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #14 on: November 02, 2016, 09:33:45 PM »
How would 65-66 cars be judged? Or is this only going to apply for 67+?
Chris
1965 Honey Gold Fastback