I showed my 67 GT500 in the Thoroughbred class at the recent St. Augustine National show. I waited over a week after receiving my results and score sheets to cool down enough to put my thoughts in writing without cursing.
Judging was supposed to start at noon on Saturday. My plan was to spend the morning giving the car a final detail. However, as soon as I parked the car at 8:30 AM all 4 judges immediately came to the car and wanted to get started. I explained I had not had time to give the car a final detail and was assured they would look past this in regards to dust, etc. I should have known better….
I purchased my Acapulco Blue 67 GT500 with a/c and 4 speed from Bob Gaines. It came out of Bob’s personal collection. It was originally restored by Jeff Yergovich as a SAAC Division II/MCA Concours Trailered show car. Bob purchased the car and completely disassembled it restoring it as a SAAC Division I/MCA Thoroughbred Car.
After purchasing the car I took it to SAAC 39 in Elkhart Lake, WI where it earned SAAC Division I gold. I took it to Jeff the following week and we corrected everything noted. It then went to the MCA event in Springfield the following week earning MCA Concours Trailered gold. It then went back to Jeff where he attacked every item on the score sheets noted. He also pulled the engine totally refreshing the engine, engine bay, as well as the underside (summer 2015). It was shown at the Muscle Car Nationals in 2015. Every item highlighted at MCACN was taken care of by Peter Geisler at Orlando Mustang. I also had Ed Myer closely look over the car from front to back including the complete under side. Peter attacked every item high lighted by Ed as well. Prior to the show Peter show detailed the car throughout including the underside and delivered the car back to me on Thursday prior to the show.
MCA judging is hard to get used to since there is zero communication from the judges on anything they find. This is especially a problem when the writing on the score sheets is not totally legible. Looking at how they scored items later I can sure understand why they would not want to explain their deductions face to face. The scoring reminded me of a Mequiars Shine Concours where the total focus was on obsessive anal shine.
I thought the standard was how the car would have looked the day the customer picked it up from the dealer. Do you really think that the dealers detail guy would have been proficient in anal toothbrush and q tip cleaning and there would not be an insignificant water spot somewhere?
What was especially galling was the lack of professional scoring on workmanship and originality where a judging category or assembly comprised 4-5 or more items. Numerous times I lost 50% or more of total available points for the entire assembly or more for a microscopic piece of dirt or minor imperfection on one of the parts of the assembly. The weighting of the deductions made no sense whatsoever.
A. Door Area , scuff plates, Label, Door hardware., and painted surfaces of door area for both doors. I lost 20% of workmanship points for this entire area for a scratch in the scuff plate, hint of rust at bottom of phillips head screw requiring a magnifying glass for to me to see it, plus 3-4 very minor scratches in stainless. Looking at all of the components of this assembly a 20% loss for the items noted seems about 5 times more than it should have been.
B. Kick panels – One kick panel has a very minute scratch. I lost 50% of the total workmanship, condition, and cleanliness points for both kick panels for one minnute scratch in one kick panel. Deduction was at least 5 times what it should have been. What about the overall condition of the kick panels, installation, fasteners, etc?
C. Roll bar, Package Tray, and Quarter Panels. Lots of items in this assembly – Lost 33% of workmanship points for the entire assembly for a small tear in the roll bar pad and (finish on rear deck chrome trim – Have no idea) Again very disappointing weighting of the two deductions compared to the entire assembly being judged.
D. Headlights, Driving Lights, Parking, Tail, Back-up, and tag lights – Question about the finish of a fog light bezel finish on one fog light cost me 20 % of the total workmanship condition points. At least 5 times more that it should have been deducted.
E. Engine Compartment – All items to be natural. Lost 1/3 of the workmanship condition points for this assembly for note saying accelerator linkage SS with a question mark. Wonder why a magnet sticks to the linkage?
F. Carburetor including manifold. Lost 50% of workmanship points for finches on halwaue (no clue)) and a jam nut not tight. Again at least 5 times too much of a deduction.
G. Horns – Lost 100% of workmanship points for the horns for microscopic dirt I have yet to be able to find. Ridiculous. What happened to the points for fit, finish, and installation?
H. Underside of hood – Lost 50% of available workmanship points for not enough texture on a small spot on the left hand side of the hood. If you compare the questioned area to the total area of the hood the deduction is at least 10 times excessive.
I. Belts – Got hit for 2 points under originality because they could not see the embossing on the fan belt. Wish they had said something to me as I would have been happy to turn the engine so they could see the embossing. It would have meant they would have to talk with me though…..
J. Brake System – Comprises lots of components. Lost 18% of workmanship points for the entire brake system due to dust boot missing from emergency brake cable. Hugely excessive deduction.
K. Wheels, Center Caps, & Lug nuts – They called the black finish light on the inside of the wheels, questioned the perfect lug nut finish, and called a date perfect 50 year old Speedway tire recapped – ridiculous call. This cost me 40% of the total workmanship points for all of the items in this assembly. At least 5 times excessive.
L. Exhaust system: Lost 25% of the available workmanship points for the 50 year old exhaust saying it needed to be cleaned. Exhaust system is 50 years old.
M. Exhaust System: The car was judged on the ground. I lost 37.5% of originality points for the exhaust for intermediate resonator should be triple hump, Alignment tab on on H pipe d____? Engine intermediate pipes (no clue) Funny, Jeff Yergovich, Bob Gaines, and Ed Myer all looked closely at the exhaust system prior to the meet while the car was on a lift and found nothing amiss.
I realize all judging is volunteer and I very much appreciate their efforts. While we would like to think it is objective it is obviously quite subjective in MCA. After all of the effort, time, and expense preparing a car for this level of judging it is very disappointing to leave the meet with inconsistent judging results.
I had very much enjoyed showing cars at MCA previously and was looking forward to becoming active with MCA again. St Augustine cured that……