ConcoursMustang Forums

Showing & Judging => General Showing and Judging Discussions => Topic started by: Bob Gaines on December 08, 2017, 08:47:51 PM

Title: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: Bob Gaines on December 08, 2017, 08:47:51 PM
I am interested in what my peers think about what is expected in regards to Concours Trailered at MCA , SAAC DIV II or even Heritage class at Mid America Shelby. I am under the impression that all three have the same expectations in this regard that I want to pose a question about. The question is one in general as it relates to all Mustang's and Shelby's.  I am wondering the consensus of how relevant a engineering number is for this class on a part given the shape and finish are consistent with assemblyline look?  Are there parts that should be treated differently in this regard and if so why?
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: caspian65 on December 08, 2017, 10:23:10 PM
A lot of parts, by default, should have period correct engineering numbers, otherwise there would be obvious design differences.

An example might be an aluminum water pump for a '65.  The later alternator V8 cars usually had the C5AE-C engineering number, although Ford serviced a nearly identical pump with a -D.  There is a very subtle design difference in the casing(usually).  I'd have a hard time deducting for a -D marked pump in a concours trailer/Div 2 class.  It would definitely be something worth mentioning as an improvement item though.  It would have to be at least some kind of deduction for T-bred/Div.  Especially considering that any -D pump would most likely not have a period correct date code anyway.

There aren't a whole lot of other items that come to mind with engineering numbers... radiators, exhaust manifolds, transmissions, motor mount insulators, exhaust pipes/muffler, some suspension parts like rubber boots, shocks...
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: Bob Gaines on December 08, 2017, 10:49:48 PM
A lot of parts, by default, should have period correct engineering numbers, otherwise there would be obvious design differences.

An example might be an aluminum water pump for a '65.  The later alternator V8 cars usually had the C5AE-C engineering number, although Ford serviced a nearly identical pump with a -D.  There is a very subtle design difference in the casing(usually).  I'd have a hard time deducting for a -D marked pump in a concours trailer/Div 2 class.  It would definitely be something worth mentioning as an improvement item though.  It would have to be at least some kind of deduction for T-bred/Div.  Especially considering that any -D pump would most likely not have a period correct date code anyway.

There aren't a whole lot of other items that come to mind with engineering numbers... radiators, exhaust manifolds, transmissions, motor mount insulators, exhaust pipes/muffler, some suspension parts like rubber boots, shocks...
Those are quite a few. C4 and C7 control arm boots appear the same but of course different number . Would a C7 boot that looks the same as a C4 boot be worthy of a deduction in trailered concours and if so why?
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: caspian65 on December 08, 2017, 11:06:42 PM
Those are quite a few. C4 and C7 control arm boots appear the same but of course different number . Would a C7 boot that looks the same as a C4 boot be worthy of a deduction in trailered concours and if so why?

My opinion is for concours trailer class/Div 2, that would not be worth a point deduction and should be at most an improvement item comment on the judging sheet.  On a T-bred/Div 1 car, I would expect the correct engineering number.

There has to be concessions for trailer concours, otherwise the class is the same as t-bred.

Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: Bob Gaines on December 08, 2017, 11:16:49 PM
My opinion is for concours trailer class/Div 2, that would not be worth a point deduction and should be at most an improvement item comment on the judging sheet.  On a T-bred/Div 1 car, I would expect the correct engineering number.

There has to be concessions for trailer concours, otherwise the class is the same as t-bred.
would the same thing apply In your mind for shocks given that some OEM shocks appear the same shape and detail as assemblyline when painted properly?
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: caspian65 on December 08, 2017, 11:59:52 PM
would the same thing apply In your mind for shocks given that some OEM shocks appear the same shape and detail as assemblyline when painted properly?

For shocks that are otherwise identical in design and appearance, I could overlook whether or not they were the correct engineering number.  Again, a perfect opportunity to give a comment for improvement on the judging sheets.
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: J_Speegle on December 09, 2017, 12:04:23 AM
Depends. engineering number are often used to determine things on the first sheets such as is the engine, transmission correct for the car since no one wants to give a top trophy to a car with the wrong engine or trans in the car even though the appear similar to most bystanders.

As for general parts that make up the car and are covered in the judging sections of the sheets if depends on the parts up to this point. On some we've always instructed owners and judges that if you don't see the engineering numbers then they get a pass (example shocks) but if they have incorrect markings then you can deduct since they are visible different from the originals and that is the focus and goal of the classes. I don't think we've been faced with many examples of cast items or others being marked differently than what was original but I've always seen judges deduct for C7 (for example) parts on a 65 for example or for example the incorrect

If the wrong engineering number is ok then is a Motorcraft marked part different than an Autolite marked one?  Lets say on the distributor or the alternator. Since the engineering number is no less visible than the makers (in this example) marks.

If I have a starter with the engineering number stamped into the housing or with an Autolite ink stamp on it is that as correct or original as one marked with the correct FoMoCo. And if so how are we rewarding the owner/builder that got it correct, maybe not once but twenty times on his car compared to the other car with the differences. What good does it do for the people who spend their time and effort to reproduce and make available the correct parts or spend the time searching out the right ones?

Now if your limiting the discussion to minor details such as the exact same part but one is a -C and the other is a -D then we have a slightly different discussion and of course on a graduated scale and point deduction system were then talking about percentages that are much smaller than in other wore incorrect details.

You asked  :)
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: Bob Gaines on December 09, 2017, 12:27:59 AM
So what about fuel pumps flange number wise ? hipo vs no hipo number ? Cobra jet vs multi BB application number? Would there be a deduction for incorrect flange number where every other aspect is correct? As per the thread Trailered Concours not Thoroughbred criteria .   
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: J_Speegle on December 09, 2017, 12:47:17 AM
So what about fuel pumps flange number wise ? hipo vs no hipo number ? Cobra jet vs multi BB application number? Would there be a deduction for incorrect flange number where every other aspect is correct? As per the thread Trailered Concours not Thoroughbred criteria .

In the case of the flange engineering numbers our past practices would depend on what organization since there are limitations placed on us because of the structure and rules. but in either case if checked on all the cars within the class then there may or may not be a deduction. Normally a note would be made and since the "value" of that detail does not reach the 51% of a point on some sheets or 25% in that section on another set of sheets. If not it's left to be considered with other minor details that did not meet the threshold in the last section of the main section, that way consideration and benefit is given to the owner/builder/car that didn't have these less than correct parts.

We all know every car that wins the top award has shortcomings but any of them rarely, on their own, will cost a car the award. More often it is a collection of incorrect parts, processes, and choices that produce a lesser outcome. Its often an unrelated larger thing or a large group of minor things that in total cost cars an award level.

Think paying attention to details, notating them and deducting for them (though very lightly in most cases) when appropriate is the only way to be fair without ignoring a defect,  creating a slippery slop that lowers the standards and expections while still rewarding effort as well as focus on originality and celebrating the accomplishments of those that get it right.  And lastly its just fair.



Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: caspian65 on December 09, 2017, 12:58:28 AM
It's definitely a gray area and we could all benefit from more concise guidelines/expectations for each judging class.

Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: caspian65 on December 09, 2017, 01:05:13 AM
Think paying attention to details, notating them and deducting for them (though very lightly in most cases) when appropriate is the only way to be fair without ignoring a defect,  creating a slippery slop that lowers the standards and expections while still rewarding effort as well as focus on originality and celebrating the accomplishments of those that get it right.  And lastly its just fair.

The key here is to know precisely what the boundaries are for each judging class, only then can we more effectively reward effort where it's due.

For instance, a '65 hipo with a fuel pump that's exact in every detail except it's not a 3939S.  If we say that for concours trailer/Div 2 class that the stamped number is not factored into the judging, then the car with a 3939S or one with a 3911S get the same credit/points.  We can't factor in 'reward' for the owner with the 3939S if it's not applicable to the guidelines set forth.
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: Bob Gaines on December 09, 2017, 01:32:00 AM
The key here is to know precisely what the boundaries are for each judging class, only then can we more effectively reward effort where it's due.

For instance, a '65 hipo with a fuel pump that's exact in every detail except it's not a 3939S.  If we say that for concours trailer/Div 2 class that the stamped number is not factored into the judging, then the car with a 3939S or one with a 3911S get the same credit/points.  We can't factor in 'reward' for the owner with the 3939S if it's not applicable to the guidelines set forth.
The same thing can be said for the entrant of a car in trailered concours that choose to show it with original tires instead of the more common re issue tires. Although nice I don't think it is up to venue to reward someone who goes above and beyond the established guidelines for a given class. That is what the next class up is for. Maybe encourage them to enter into the next class up.
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: Bob Gaines on December 09, 2017, 01:36:45 AM
It's definitely a gray area and we could all benefit from more concise guidelines/expectations for each judging class.
I believe we are giving mixed signals unless we are all on the same page. And speaking of the same page the details need to be spelled out so entrants know what to expect. 
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: J_Speegle on December 09, 2017, 02:04:25 AM
The key here is to know precisely what the boundaries are for each judging class, only then can we more effectively reward effort where it's due.

For instance, a '65 hipo with a fuel pump that's exact in every detail except it's not a 3939S.  If we say that for concours trailer/Div 2 class that the stamped number is not factored into the judging, then the car with a 3939S or one with a 3911S get the same credit/points.  We can't factor in 'reward' for the owner with the 3939S if it's not applicable to the guidelines set forth.

Agreed not suggesting extra points and rewards for owners/builders choosing to do extra things like we do in other classes.


Playing devils advocate with the engineering number part of the discussion. Where are the guidelines related to engineering numbers stated?  Don't recall a reference to engineering numbers but instead dates.

And I would guess that, trying to be consistent, as it is been posed judges would ignore a

- large C9OE-xxxxx engineering number on the top of an intake installed on a 65 if all other details (painted engine color, provisions for senders, brackets and so on being the same) on a 66
- an air cleaner service sticker calling out a different filter 
- a D2 starter solenoid in place of a C7 version
- a non Carlite window  or windshield
- a Midas stamped muffler if it matched the size, shape and material as a Fuller or original   

Would each be ok and overlooked? Since I can recall where we've deducted for most of these when we've judged together. :) Other than the intake example. Sure there are more.

I believe we are giving mixed signals unless we are all on the same page. And speaking of the same page the details need to be spelled out so entrants know what to expect.

Trying to think of an example or time when this came up or was in play when we have judged - example you wanting to ignore a C8ZZ fuel sender on a 65 for example. 

Not sure of what mixed signals your referring to?  If we go back to your original question I think we're pretty close - either they get over looked (not noticed) or they are a very very small detail when weighed against all the other details. Might be as close as you can get and us all still being humans

Almost all or all of the questions we respond to in helping out entrants normally seem to focus on what is correct for the cars not what "I" can get by with. When referring to what to expect in judging (other than the areas where there is a range of acceptable details as there were originally) its always been best IMHO to focus on how the cars were originally built, if the part is not available or is in poor condition prepare the owner/builder that if seen, there might be a deduction. This has been supported and improved (from the point of the entrant) by the teaching of the weighted point deduction practice over the older "light switch" practice when an imbalance of points were deducted or ignored. 
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: Bob Gaines on December 09, 2017, 02:36:46 AM
In the case of the flange engineering numbers our past practices would depend on what organization since there are limitations placed on us because of the structure and rules. but in either case if checked on all the cars within the class then there may or may not be a deduction. Normally a note would be made and since the "value" of that detail does not reach the 51% of a point on some sheets or 25% in that section on another set of sheets. If not it's left to be considered with other minor details that did not meet the threshold in the last section of the main section, that way consideration and benefit is given to the owner/builder/car that didn't have these less than correct parts.

We all know every car that wins the top award has shortcomings but any of them rarely, on their own, will cost a car the award. More often it is a collection of incorrect parts, processes, and choices that produce a lesser outcome. Its often an unrelated larger thing or a large group of minor things that in total cost cars an award level.

Think paying attention to details, notating them and deducting for them (though very lightly in most cases) when appropriate is the only way to be fair without ignoring a defect,  creating a slippery slop that lowers the standards and expections while still rewarding effort as well as focus on originality and celebrating the accomplishments of those that get it right.  And lastly its just fair.
In the case of the flange engineering numbers our past practices would depend on what organization since there are limitations placed on us because of the structure and rules. I am not aware of what limitations are placed on us can you elaborate? I cant remember the last time I checked a flange number in a Trailered class or given any direction to do so by the concours head. If you are talking about deduction value of something like a incorrect flange number the only limitation is to give any deduction for this particular infraction at all given there is nothing written that says it is appropriate .  We all know every car that wins the top award has shortcomings but any of them rarely, on their own, will cost a car the award. More often it is a collection of incorrect parts, processes, and choices that produce a lesser outcome. Its often an unrelated larger thing or a large group of minor things that in total cost cars an award level.  The question is how the shortcomings are perceived. As long as the shape and finish are achieved isn't expecting a correct engineering number and deducting for if not present being heavy handed given there is nothing in the guidelines/rules that designates there to be ?  If engineering numbers are expected along with the other criteria there is not much separating trailered from thoroughbred it seems. I know we are all going in basically the same direction but from these comments I can see we are on slightly different paths to get to the end . I for one choose not judge wrong engineering numbers as long as all of the other criteria for the part is met. In the case of the control arm as long as the boot looks the way it is supposed to the engineering number is not considered . Same goes for other suspension parts like leaf springs as long as correct shape and finish I don't see any reason to consider the engineering number. Idler arm has distinct assemblyline look and as long as that look is achieved I don't consider the FOMOCO stamp or engineering number. Same goes for tie rods. Many times the bottom tie rod cover will have a aftermarket stamped marking which as long as the tie rod and boot look correct I overlook the mfg marking or if it has a 'B" or not as in the later 67 up models . Radiators I am more concerned that it is the correct capacity width ,finish ,side straps and if DEP or WMO radiator. The stamping or tag is secondary although something needs to be there given different marking determine plant usage IMO.  In the case of the starter if it is a late 67 (changeover is foggy) on up it should have a metal stamp instead of a Autolite or Fomoco ink stamp but I don't consider the engineering number on ether. They just have to be correct type for period. Same goes for the alternator as long as the case ,condition of case and wiring is correct and as long as it has the correct color of stamp (except metal stamped 69 alts)  I don't judge the engineering number. These are just some examples of my point of view on particular items there are many more but you get the idea. I think the engineering number and deducting if it isn't there or is incorrect is heavy handed given all other part criteria is achieved. Expecting the correct engineering numbers is a slippery slop toward less reproduction allowed and  too much like thoroughbred expectations which will discourage participation and not encourage it IMO. These are also just my opinions and I respect others opinion too even if I don't always agree.   The shape and the finish is most important to preserve historic look IMO and the engineering number is secondary IN THIS CLASS ONLY.       
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: Bob Gaines on December 09, 2017, 03:04:14 AM
Agreed not suggesting extra points and rewards for owners/builders choosing to do extra things like we do in other classes.


Playing devils advocate with the engineering number part of the discussion. Where are the guidelines related to engineering numbers stated?  Don't recall a reference to engineering numbers but instead dates.

And I would guess that, trying to be consistent, as it is been posed judges would ignore a

- large C9OE-xxxxx engineering number on the top of an intake installed on a 65 if all other details (painted engine color, provisions for senders, brackets and so on being the same) on a 66
- an air cleaner service sticker calling out a different filter 
- a D2 starter solenoid in place of a C7 version
- a non Carlite window  or windshield
- a Midas stamped muffler if it matched the size, shape and material as a Fuller or original   

Would each be ok and overlooked? Since I can recall where we've deducted for most of these when we've judged together. :) Other than the intake example. Sure there are more.

Trying to think of an example or time when this came up or was in play when we have judged - example you wanting to ignore a C8ZZ fuel sender on a 65 for example. 

Not sure of what mixed signals your referring to?  If we go back to your original question I think we're pretty close - either they get over looked (not noticed) or they are a very very small detail when weighed against all the other details. Might be as close as you can get and us all still being humans

Almost all or all of the questions we respond to in helping out entrants normally seem to focus on what is correct for the cars not what "I" can get by with. When referring to what to expect in judging (other than the areas where there is a range of acceptable details as there were originally) its always been best IMHO to focus on how the cars were originally built, if the part is not available or is in poor condition prepare the owner/builder that if seen, there might be a deduction. This has been supported and improved (from the point of the entrant) by the teaching of the weighted point deduction practice over the older "light switch" practice when an imbalance of points were deducted or ignored.
large C9OE-xxxxx engineering number on the top of an intake installed on a 65 if all other details (painted engine color, provisions for senders, brackets and so on being the same) on a 66 -for consistency I would probably bend and except this
- an air cleaner service sticker calling out a different filter - that's easy I wouldn't accept it because it is a incorrect sticker and not a engineering number
- a D2 starter solenoid in place of a C7 version - as long as finish /stud and thread size /nut was consistent I would be compelled to accept that on a 67 on up car that used the same style. The exception would be some 69/70 Dearborn cars.
- a non Carlite window  or windshield -another easy one. I would not accept it because it is in the current rules as mandatory.
- a Midas stamped muffler if it matched the size, shape and material as a Fuller or original  - disregarding stamping if another muffler was a exact match in shape, finish and attachment as original it would be the same as Fullers and therefore acceptable (i don't see that happening anytime soon)
Trying to think of an example or time when this came up or was in play when we have judged - example you wanting to ignore a C8ZZ fuel sender on a 65 for example.  Jeff you must have me mixed up with another because the 3/8 C8 sender on a 65 that is supposed to be 5/16 doesn't meet my point of view criteria or maybe I was in the sun too long.                                                                                                                                                       Jeff, I agree with your advising philosophy . I judge a certain way because it is only fair in my mind given the judging guidelines entrants are given to abide by. If the judging rules are change to reflect a more precise direction I will change the way I judge for that venue. Until then i see it as a obligation to do what I think is fair within the parameters of the guidelines. When I advise people building on the other hand I tell them the way it is done on the assemblyline. I don't volunteer what they can get by with but would tell them if they asked directly but I don't seemed to get asked the short cut questions ether.           
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: ruppstang on December 09, 2017, 10:03:21 AM
I have less experience judging than those that have posted here but here is my experance. I do not go looking for engineering numbers when judging but when there is one that is in your face like a incorrect intake prefix number I would deduct for it. As for the fuel pump I often need to use magnifying glasses to find number when it is in my hand. Given the number of division 2 cars to judge typically there is not time to go looking for engineering numbers, a division 1 car can take a team of judges a half of a day to judge.

A solenoid was mentioned above, here are the 67-68 rules.

  C. Starter Solenoid: Black Autolite. Correct with part number (C6AF- or C7AF-) on passenger side inner fender panel near the battery and before the shock tower .............................................. 2
Workmanship, condition and cleanliness ......................................................................................... 1

I do not see how to ignore this.

Here are the shock rules.

M. Shock Absorbers: Black Autolite with phosphate washer and tooth nuts .............................. 4
Driven Exception:
Black Motorcraft ...no deduction
Black Non-Ford ...................................................................................... mandatory 2 pt deduction
Workmanship, condition and cleanliness ......................................................................................... 2

I look for the Autolite stamp not correct engineering numbers. If I happened to see a C9 on a 68 car I would deduct for it. ( a smart restored would be sure that I would not see the C9)  ;)

IMHO Concours Trailered or division 2 cars are nearly the same as Tbreds except reproduced parts are excepted given that they have the same fit, finish and operation as originals. Also Engineering and date codes are not searched for and verified. That is a very big difference.
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: mikeljgt500kr on December 09, 2017, 10:35:01 AM
I have to say that as a master judge with another organization, I find this discussion fascinating.
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: ChrisV289 on December 09, 2017, 12:08:35 PM
This reminds me of what I've dealt with GTOAA judges on a GTO Judge I helped restore for the past 2 years. They currently don't have an equivalent of a T-bred class in their organization, but they do a concours and in there they do look for engineering numbers, date codes, fit, and finish.  They have a team of 4-5 judges and each judge has a different section of the car they specialize in.  One has the engine bay where he will crawl underneath and look at the block codes.  He will also look at the intake manifold, exhaust manifolds, water pump, starter, alternator, and carburetor and make sure the numbers are correct and the date code.  Then he will focus on the firewall, and inner fenders.  One guy will be underneath the car the whole time looking at the undercarriage, one will be inside the car, and one looks at the exterior.  They probably spend an hour on the car if not more. They do deduct for reproduction parts regardless.  For instance, we got deducted for the rear bumper because the original after being beat to crap from previous owners did not fit.  The reproduction fit fine, only difference; no date code stamped behind the license plate frame.  They do not like reproduction parts even though AMES Performance is their biggest sponsor.

I've only judged at three shows so far and I wouldn't mind looking for engineering numbers and date codes.  When judging with Mike M on a car I don't remember if we deducted or made mention that a Dearborn car had a San Jose radiator. 
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: Bob Gaines on December 09, 2017, 03:18:50 PM
I have less experience judging than those that have posted here but here is my experance. I do not go looking for engineering numbers when judging but when there is one that is in your face like a incorrect intake prefix number I would deduct for it. As for the fuel pump I often need to use magnifying glasses to find number when it is in my hand. Given the number of division 2 cars to judge typically there is not time to go looking for engineering numbers, a division 1 car can take a team of judges a half of a day to judge.

A solenoid was mentioned above, here are the 67-68 rules.

  C. Starter Solenoid: Black Autolite. Correct with part number (C6AF- or C7AF-) on passenger side inner fender panel near the battery and before the shock tower .............................................. 2
Workmanship, condition and cleanliness ......................................................................................... 1

I do not see how to ignore this.

Here are the shock rules.

M. Shock Absorbers: Black Autolite with phosphate washer and tooth nuts .............................. 4
Driven Exception:
Black Motorcraft ...no deduction
Black Non-Ford ...................................................................................... mandatory 2 pt deduction
Workmanship, condition and cleanliness ......................................................................................... 2

I look for the Autolite stamp not correct engineering numbers. If I happened to see a C9 on a 68 car I would deduct for it. ( a smart restored would be sure that I would not see the C9)  ;)

IMHO Concours Trailered or division 2 cars are nearly the same as Tbreds except reproduced parts are excepted given that they have the same fit, finish and operation as originals. Also Engineering and date codes are not searched for and verified. That is a very big difference.
Thanks for pointing those out. That takes the away the uncertainty .
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: J_Speegle on December 09, 2017, 04:06:15 PM
The question is how the shortcomings are perceived. As long as the shape and finish are achieved isn't expecting a correct engineering number and deducting for, if not present being heavy handed given there is nothing in the guidelines/rules that designates there to be? 

No I believe your question was for others and ďI am wondering the consensus of how relevant a engineering number is for this class on a part given the shape and finish are consistent with assemblyline look?Ē

Don't see how considering a very small deduction that by itself will likely never amount to a deduction, one eight of a point in some sections, would be considered heavy handed considering the time and effort owners and builders spend getting the details correct on these cars.

   Expecting the correct engineering numbers is a slippery slop toward less reproduction allowed and  too much like thoroughbred expectations which will discourage participation and not encourage it IMO.

Didn't think our task as judges or as an organization was to ensure that more reproduction parts are sold or used - unless there is a plan I'm not aware of worked out with the sponsors of the club as there was in the past.

Since we have considered them in the past in some cases and they are typically correct   (approximately) 98% of the time this practice has not stifled the participation, the investment nor the enthusiasm to participate as entry numbers show. 

To continue the devils advocate role just once more so that we can explore

   


   - an air cleaner service sticker calling out a different filter -

 that's easy I wouldn't accept it because it is a incorrect sticker and not a engineering number

In this example isn't the decal identical but the engineering number of the replacement filter is different?  And to be more exact, only two numbers.


- a D2 starter solenoid in place of a C7 version -

as long as finish /stud and thread size /nut was consistent I would be compelled to accept that on a 67 on up car that used the same style. The exception would be some 69/70 Dearborn cars. 

This would be a change considering the number of times we've deducted for that in the past. 


Trying to think of an example or time when this came up or was in play when we have judged - example you wanting to ignore a C8ZZ fuel sender on a 65 for example. 

 Jeff you must have me mixed up with another because the 3/8 C8 sender on a 65 that is supposed to be 5/16 doesn't meet my point of view criteria or maybe I was in the sun too long.
                                                                                                                               

I can at least recall one specific car and show sure there are more if we focused on them together. In any case some might consider deducting for a 1/6"th of an inch over an approximate 2" run - heavy handed.

Guess to be consistent currently or in the future you would not deduct for non-HiPo heads at a show on a k code equipped 67 GT350? For others these can be determined by a visible engineering two digit number


Of course we could go though every part int he car and I believe that we would find examples of where we have and had not looked at these details. Often due to not being able to see them with out mirrors, flashlights or touching (things all three organizations did not have in common in the past).

Going back to your original question the honest answer (based on the guidelines and past practice) yes.
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: Bob Gaines on December 09, 2017, 06:16:54 PM
Jeff, Marti beat you to the punch on the solenoid engineering number question . It is in the rules. I have always deducted before as you mentioned but was answering your posed question on if the exact same shape with a different engineering number would there be a deduction given if one engineering number is ignored (all things being equal) all should be or vice versa. Your hipo head comparison does not fall into the lines we are discussing because the two digit number system first is not a engineering number but a means of identification which much like a overall shape or finish gives it the qualifying assemblyline look for a hipo. I purposely am referring to items that can be identified as looking the way they are supposed to regardless of engineering number or not. I am getting a impression that that some would rather see a engineering number disappear rather then to have a incorrect one C8 on a 66 application etc. on all of the things that are not specifically spelled out in the judging guidelines. Since there are things that are spelled out in the rules engineering wise it would seem that other parts that don't have specific engineering numbers spelled out in the rules would logically be given a pass as long as they are the correct shape and finish. I am playing devil advocate also given I am typically on the stricter side of the conversation typically.   
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: J_Speegle on December 09, 2017, 07:04:04 PM
Jeff, Marti beat you to the punch on the solenoid engineering number question .

Yes some of us get up earlier than others or are in earlier time zones.


 
................ Your hipo head comparison does not fall into the lines we are discussing because the two digit number system first is not a engineering number but a means of identification which much like a overall shape or finish gives it the qualifying assemblyline look for a hipo. I purposely am referring to items that can be identified as looking the way they are supposed to regardless of engineering number or not............

Think your drawing a pretty thin line between what your describing as a identification number and an engineering number used to identify a part

Since there are things that are spelled out in the rules engineering wise it would seem that other parts that don't have specific engineering numbers spelled out in the rules would logically be given a pass as long as they are the correct shape and finish.

Not sure if this is a what if or what you believe should be the practice in the future - thought the thread was about how others thought about your questions.

Think that goes against what has been our practice and what we've both stated in earlier posts and discussions since we are limited in space in the judging rules not every part, details and nuance can be included within the space. Sure examples of these can be produced.


................ I am playing devil advocate also given I am typically on the stricter side of the conversation typically.   

We're repeating in public the "what if " back and forth we all do when discussing the possibilities and situations. Often ones we have never seen or faced but might. Considering your intent as stated I think you have received honest and truthful responses to

"...... how relevant a engineering number is for this class on a part given the shape and finish are consistent with assemblyline look?  "
"Are there parts that should be treated differently in this regard and if so why? "

Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: PerkinsRestoration on December 09, 2017, 08:05:53 PM
[quote author=ruppstang link=topic

IMHO Concours Trailered or division 2 cars are nearly the same as Tbreds except reproduced parts are excepted given that they have the same fit, finish and operation as originals. Also Engineering and date codes are not searched for and verified. That is a very big difference.
[/quote]

 Marti, I have to disagree here. There are some  Div. II cars that have areas of Thoroughbred quality craft-manship however it is not the  standard of excellence in Div.II or trailered concours. For example in THB class paint and body is judged tighter than trailered concours. Orange peel, Stamping marks in the metal in door jams and spotwelded  panels are closely inspected. Panel repair or replacement is scrutinized closely. Date codes in sheet metal are checked and must be present. Undercarriage primer must have factory appearing runs and drips. Excessive paint or filler on engine bay sheet metal or engine and attaching parts that remove factory date codes or stamping marks in the metal is evaluated. In short most first generation Mustangs do not have a body good enough to be a candidate for a THB restoration regardless who restores the car.

  The restoration of Natural metal parts is another aspect of restoration that differs drastically between THB and trailered concours. Rust pitted natural parts such as suspension parts , rear springs , drive shafts etc. can be restored using natural type paints in trailered concours, but no paints in THB class. Even painted parts such as rear axle housings if pitted and pits filled you loose the stamping marks in the metal. Not an issue in trailered concours but an issue in THB class.I doubt we will be checking for machined surfaces on the rear end assembly any time soon in trailered concours.. Replacing every pitted part on most Mustangs is not an option for many reasons, cost availability, time restraints etc.

 Fasteners and hardware. Most if not all reproduction fasteners and standard parts are not acceptable in THB class. Most if not all reproduction fasteners and standard parts are considered concours correct in trailered concours classes. Think about it, no AMK hardware?

  Workmanship and attention to detail is 50% of THB judging sheets! The other Fifty percent is parts.
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: markb0729 on December 09, 2017, 09:53:49 PM
Excellent insight into the judging process and why there can be variation among the judges.  My understanding of Concours trailered vs Thoroughbred restorations is pretty much summed up in what Mr. Perkins said.  Judging should be based on the rules set forth for the class being judged.  Tough job if I do say so.  Thanks to all for your thoughts.  Good food for thought and just makes the hobby better hearing from the experts!
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: 1969 Cale II on December 09, 2017, 11:32:14 PM
I find this discussion interesting. As A Cyclone owner who went to great lengths to make my car factory perfect, I don't see me getting any extra points with the way the judges for these cars go. The cars that get high marks makes my car go over 100 percent. I wish these judges had the knowledge you guy have in giving points where points are due.
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: mikeljgt500kr on December 10, 2017, 12:51:22 AM
Quote from: ruppstang link=topic



  Workmanship and attention to detail is 50% of THB judging sheets! The other Fifty percent is parts.
[/quote

I had thought at least 50% was cleanliness......... :)
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: TLea on December 10, 2017, 09:43:37 AM
If engineering numbers are not to be considered then shouldnít the same be true for manufacturers markings? Washer bottle/bags are a great example. A 68 washer bottle without the FoMoCo logo is barely noticeable but leave it  of a bag and it stands out like a sore thumb.
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: TLea on December 10, 2017, 11:33:08 AM
[quote author=ruppstang link=topic

IMHO Concours Trailered or division 2 cars are nearly the same as Tbreds except reproduced parts are excepted given that they have the same fit, finish and operation as originals. Also Engineering and date codes are not searched for and verified. That is a very big difference.



  The restoration of Natural metal parts is another aspect of restoration that differs drastically between THB and trailered concours. Rust pitted natural parts such as suspension parts , rear springs , drive shafts etc. can be restored using natural type paints in trailered concours, but gno paints in THB class. Even painted parts such as rear axle housings if pitted and pits filled you loose the stamping marks in the metal. Not an issue in trailered concours but an issue in THB class.I doubt we will be checking for machined surfaces on the rear end assembly any time soon in trailered concours.. Replacing every pitted part on most Mustangs is not an option for many reasons, cost availability, time restraints etc.
Iím not sure I totally agree on the body and paint but will save that for another discussion. If I understand you correctly what you were saying here is pitted components on a concours trailered car are acceptable  if the pits have been filled? Is that correct
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: PerkinsRestoration on December 10, 2017, 03:46:08 PM
Iím not sure I totally agree on the body and paint but will save that for another discussion. If I understand you correctly what you were saying here is pitted components on a concours trailered car are acceptable  if the pits have been filled? Is that correct


  What I said is in THB class pitted parts or lack of date codes or stamping marks due to filling of pitted metal is not concours correct. In trailered concours class date codes and stamping marks in metal are not scrutinized. Minor pitting of undercarriage components in trailered concours is usually not scrutinized.  If you start with a rusty pitted undercarriage you either have pitted sheet metal or sheet metal filled with filler and primer with no visible date codes or stamping marks. Same applies for axle housings, backing plates, 3rd members, disc brake parts etc.  For these reasons rusty cars are not good candidates for a Thoroughbred restoration.
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: J_Speegle on December 10, 2017, 04:57:56 PM
.....Minor pitting of undercarriage components in trailered concours is usually not scrutinized.  .........

Will have to disagree defects, damage and so on is not the goal for a restored class. But of course we're both looking this from different vantage points  ;)
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: PerkinsRestoration on December 10, 2017, 06:21:31 PM
Will have to disagree defects, damage and so on is not the goal for a restored class. But of course we're both looking this from different vantage points  ;)

 Jeff, I never implied defects and damage is a goal for any restored class. Most Fifty year old cars and parts have minor pitting. I doubt you have ever judged a Div.II or trailered concours car without some pitted parts. I don't know why you think we are looking at this from different vantage points. I think I use common sense and follow club guidelines. I understand I put more emphasis on paint and body than most judges that do not have a paint and body backround,however most major car club venues  put a substantial emphasis on P&B long before you and I had any input.
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: TLea on December 11, 2017, 10:03:48 AM

  What I said is in THB class pitted parts or lack of date codes or stamping marks due to filling of pitted metal is not concours correct. In trailered concours class date codes and stamping marks in metal are not scrutinized. Minor pitting of undercarriage components in trailered concours is usually not scrutinized.  If you start with a rusty pitted undercarriage you either have pitted sheet metal or sheet metal filled with filler and primer with no visible date codes or stamping marks. Same applies for axle housings, backing plates, 3rd members, disc brake parts etc.  For these reasons rusty cars are not good candidates for a Thoroughbred restoration.
Actually this is what you did say,
"Even painted parts such as rear axle housings if pitted and pits filled you loose the stamping marks in the metal. Not an issue in trailered concours but an issue in THB class."
My question was for clarification so we can be consistent with judging. You said in your response to Jeff "consistent with MCA guidelines", where is the guidelines written that states minor (or any) visible pitting is acceptable? Same with excessive fiiler pimer or plastic filler that alters the physical appearance? This goes for in undercarriage and body and paint? Is there written guidelines for when outer body has lost its crispness due to excessive fill? I have read rule book and see nothing stated.
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: caspian65 on December 11, 2017, 10:21:49 AM
What Bob is referring to are the manufacturing marks/details from when the parts or panels were originally manufactured.  These are found on inner fender panels and other areas.  Also, like on the rear axle housing.  Those witness/stretch marks will be scrutinized more when judging a Div1/T-bred vs. concours.

I don't believe it is ever acceptable for noticeable pitting on any part to get a pass in concours class, it ought to at least get a comment, depending on the points allowed for the item.
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: PerkinsRestoration on December 11, 2017, 11:38:15 AM
Actually this is what you did say,
"Even painted parts such as rear axle housings if pitted and pits filled you loose the stamping marks in the metal. Not an issue in trailered concours but an issue in THB class."
 

Tim, I'll tell you one more time in more layman terms, rust pitted parts ,or pitted parts that are filled with  "bondo" or heavy primer surfacers which fill the pits as well as date codes and stamping marks in the metal is not acceptable in Thoroughbred class. In the Trailered concours class date codes and stamping marks are not scrutinized like Thoroughbred class.  You might try moving up to the THB class rather than trying to pic and choose some THB  standards for Div.II classes. I guess you need to restore a real Thoroughbred Authentity award car to fully understand the difference. 
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: TLea on December 11, 2017, 11:46:56 AM
 Bob. Your typical condescending remarks are as expected. If you saw my post it was very clear what I was asking and you have evaded the answer. Charles seems to understand it and chose to  answer it successfully so maybe you should try one more time to listen
 No one needs to move from one class to another to understand or answer a simple question. The question was are pits acceptable  in Concourse trailer? Youíve already answered whether they are acceptable in thorobred. Is that too hard to understand?
Ps.  Iíve done more than my share of what you call thorough bred in SAAC  and are very familiar with the differences
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: PerkinsRestoration on December 11, 2017, 12:12:11 PM
 Tim , You don't have a Thoroughbred unless you have the  MCA document to show you won the Award. It's not cool to imply you have won an award you have not. ;) You need to reread Charles post as he gets it. Charles also has multiple THB authenticity awards. :) 
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: TLea on December 11, 2017, 12:42:45 PM
  It's not cool to imply you have won an award you have not. ;)
I don't believe I did. Anyway the conversation has been deflected off the subject. As I said I was looking for clarification on pitting in trailered and t bred cars for the purpose of consistency. The answer has been avoided
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: priceless on December 11, 2017, 01:21:22 PM
I'm gonna jump in here If I may.

I have been around "Concours Judging" for over 17 years and just 4 years ago I received my Gold card status.  IMHO, I have seen WAY to many Gold cards in the past several years, especially some of the old school gold cards, judging a Concours Trailered/Driven car similar to a thoroughbred. TOTALLY different classes. I have seen judges recently, before I became Gold status, still continually looking for engineering numbers, part numbers, etc., on a Concours judged Mustang. And I have seen it even continue through 2017.

Concours trailered/driven classes are not supposed to be even attempted to be judged like a T-bred class where, for the most part, engineering/parts numbers are, for the most part, the difference.  I do firmly agree with Marty R, for example, if there is an engineering number that is blatantly wrong on a concours Mustang and as a Judge you know that number is wrong, then Yes, It should be counted off. But in concours trailered/driven classes where reproduced parts are excepted given that they have the same fit, finish and operation as originals, that's where I see some of the Gold card Judges not following the guidelines of the concours judged Mustang.
Lol, and I have seen/heard some of these concours Mustangs Judged that way, and not coming back to an MCA show just for that reason.

But, this same argument has been going on for years now.

***ALL COMMENTS HERE ARE MY OPINION AND WHAT I HAVE SEEN THROUGH MY EYES OVER THE YEARS***

Richie

Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: TLea on December 11, 2017, 01:51:29 PM


I don't believe it is ever acceptable for noticeable pitting on any part to get a pass in concours class, it ought to at least get a comment, depending on the points allowed for the item.
Thank you Charles for answering
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: mikeljgt500kr on December 11, 2017, 02:16:27 PM
I'm gonna jump in here If I may.

I have been around "Concours Judging" for over 17 years and just 4 years ago I received my Gold card status.  IMHO, I have seen WAY to many Gold cards in the past several years, especially some of the old school gold cards, judging a Concours Trailered/Driven car similar to a thoroughbred. TOTALLY different classes. I have seen judges recently, before I became Gold status, still continually looking for engineering numbers, part numbers, etc., on a Concours judged Mustang. And I have seen it even continue through 2017.

Concours trailered/driven classes are not supposed to be even attempted to be judged like a T-bred class where, for the most part, engineering/parts numbers are, for the most part, the difference.  I do firmly agree with Marty R, for example, if there is an engineering number that is blatantly wrong on a concours Mustang and as a Judge you know that number is wrong, then Yes, It should be counted off. But in concours trailered/driven classes where reproduced parts are excepted given that they have the same fit, finish and operation as originals, that's where I see some of the Gold card Judges not following the guidelines of the concours judged Mustang.
Lol, and I have seen/heard some of these concours Mustangs Judged that way, and not coming back to an MCA show just for that reason.

But, this same argument has been going on for years now.

***ALL COMMENTS HERE ARE MY OPINION AND WHAT I HAVE SEEN THROUGH MY EYES OVER THE YEARS***

Richie

Well said, thank you!
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: caspian65 on December 11, 2017, 03:49:48 PM
Concours trailered/driven classes are not supposed to be even attempted to be judged like a T-bred class where, for the most part, engineering/parts numbers are, for the most part, the difference.  I do firmly agree with Marty R, for example, if there is an engineering number that is blatantly wrong on a concours Mustang and as a Judge you know that number is wrong, then Yes, It should be counted off. But in concours trailered/driven classes where reproduced parts are excepted given that they have the same fit, finish and operation as originals, that's where I see some of the Gold card Judges not following the guidelines of the concours judged Mustang.
Lol, and I have seen/heard some of these concours Mustangs Judged that way, and not coming back to an MCA show just for that reason.

A lot of folks seem to get upset that their car is getting judged 'like a thoroughbred', but when they get their judging sheets, they realize that a lot of things they thought were getting deducted for are actually comments with no deductions.  The judging process is just as much about helping the owner make their car better as it is an evaluation measured against a judging standard.  Owners that are in it for just the award, miss this totally and are usually the ones that leave and don't come back.

I have seen many concours cars get judged incorrectly, including cars I restored myself.  Most of the time, it wasn't that the judges were judging the car like a t-bred, it was because they were just downright wrong.  I have judging sheets where something was deducted for, yet it was the opposite of what was typed on the judging sheets.  The other extreme is where judges are heavy-handed on the points and not weighing the total points allowed per item.  For instance, taking a full point off on a distributor because the hold down bolt isn't the correct style or finish.  For a 2-3 point category, it makes no sense.

When I was MCA NHJ, a lot of focus was on consistency in judging.  We made the annual Judge's Meeting about training and improving consistency.  Unfortunately, that has gone backwards since I stepped down.  Only with training will judging ever improve.  OTJ training only helps so much and can actually perpetuate incorrect judging habits, there has to be more.

Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: priceless on December 11, 2017, 07:59:48 PM
A lot of folks seem to get upset that their car is getting judged 'like a thoroughbred', but when they get their judging sheets, they realize that a lot of things they thought were getting deducted for are actually comments with no deductions.  The judging process is just as much about helping the owner make their car better as it is an evaluation measured against a judging standard.  Owners that are in it for just the award, miss this totally and are usually the ones that leave and don't come back.

I have seen many concours cars get judged incorrectly, including cars I restored myself.  Most of the time, it wasn't that the judges were judging the car like a t-bred, it was because they were just downright wrong.  I have judging sheets where something was deducted for, yet it was the opposite of what was typed on the judging sheets.  The other extreme is where judges are heavy-handed on the points and not weighing the total points allowed per item.  For instance, taking a full point off on a distributor because the hold down bolt isn't the correct style or finish.  For a 2-3 point category, it makes no sense.

When I was MCA NHJ, a lot of focus was on consistency in judging.  We made the annual Judge's Meeting about training and improving consistency.  Unfortunately, that has gone backwards since I stepped down.  Only with training will judging ever improve.  OTJ training only helps so much and can actually perpetuate incorrect judging habits, there has to be more.
I'm going to just comment on your first sentence, and I won't further comment on this thread. WRONG!!!  I know for a fact that in the 69-70 concours class that a lot of folks were/are getting deductions and NOT just comments on the sheets where a comment would've been sufficient. And ALL the gold cards, and I'm speaking only from my knowledge of the 69-70 concours classes, should know NOT to judge a concours like a thoroughbred looking for engineering and/or part numbers. They should know better. I was taught NOT to judge a concours like a T-bred, and I don't.

That's it!!  No more comments from me!!
Merry Christmas to All
Title: Re: Concours judging concensious question
Post by: caspian65 on December 11, 2017, 08:12:41 PM
Richie, my post wasn't intended to start anything, just stating my personal observations.  I've judged at over 60 MCA national events and judged with all types of judges.  Maybe they were too scared to speak up, but I honestly have not run into what you've described.  I've mainly only heard of owners complaining that 'their concours car was being judged like a thoroughbred'.

If you have real examples with documented proof to share, I am sure the MCA head judges would like to hear from you.