Author Topic: MCA concours car description  (Read 3804 times)

Offline carlite65

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1363
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #15 on: November 02, 2016, 09:35:34 PM »
imo i don't forsee a marti report being used anywhere in the near future.
5F09C331248

Offline J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14531
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #16 on: November 02, 2016, 10:11:47 PM »
How would 65-66 cars be judged? Or is this only going to apply for 67+?

We're just discussing the merits and issues in this thread. Nothing has been brought up nor voted on. For some that have been around for a while a similar issue has been promoted but fell short a couple of times when some members and judges wanted a deduction for reproduction door tag since without and before the Marti reports this allows you to change the interior color, style, transmission type and exterior color - even emission equipment in 66-67 and 70 at least

imo i don't forsee a marti report being used anywhere in the near future.

Sure your mentioning this in relationship to MCA since that is the threads focus. Ship has already set sail in other organizations much to the agreement with participants and owners
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline Bob Gaines

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4322
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #17 on: November 02, 2016, 11:56:45 PM »
We're just discussing the merits and issues in this thread. Nothing has been brought up nor voted on. For some that have been around for a while a similar issue has been promoted but fell short a couple of times when some members and judges wanted a deduction for reproduction door tag since without and before the Marti reports this allows you to change the interior color, style, transmission type and exterior color - even emission equipment in 66-67 and 70 at least

Sure your mentioning this in relationship to MCA since that is the threads focus. Ship has already set sail in other organizations much to the agreement with participants and owners
+1 ,SAAC and Mid America Shelby Nationals venues have for some time used the Marti reports on 67-70 Boss and Shelby cars .
Bob Gaines,Shelby enthusiast, Shelby collector , Shelby concours judge SAAC,MCA,Mid America Shelby

Offline ruppstang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2221
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #18 on: November 03, 2016, 12:54:24 AM »
Some in the club thought the sky would fall when we went to all preregistration and all members only on judged cars at national shows. The numbers just keep climbing.

Offline somethingspecial

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 85
  • 1968 GT/CS Registrar mikej@bigbytes.com
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #19 on: November 03, 2016, 10:20:07 AM »
I can see the need to have a car verified by the Marti Report, such as a GT/CS.  A properly done Tribute/clone GT/CS can sometimes be hard to determine "is it real, or not".  We use the Marti Report as a "End all" document to verify authenticity. Marty Rupp and I also keep track of known clone GT/CS-HCS cars.   Back to the thread topic, if an original owner purchased a car and Monday, and on Friday came back to the dealership to have a center console added, does that make it "Non Original", or subject to deduction in judging points because it wasn't on the original sales contract, and to add to that, most folks today do not have original paperwork from the original sale and the console would not be on the Marti Report.  I know we can "What if?" this to death. 

Kevin Marti is a business man and offers the best documentation in my opinion on the authenticity of our cars, but to insist on someone to purchase his document to prove their car seems out of line. To recommend to someone they should purchase one seems more appropriate, but to penalize someone in judging because they don't have one is wrong.  JMHO.  Mike
Your friendly neighborhood 1968 GT/CS Registrar

Offline Bob Gaines

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4322
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #20 on: November 03, 2016, 12:09:38 PM »
I can see the need to have a car verified by the Marti Report, such as a GT/CS.  A properly done Tribute/clone GT/CS can sometimes be hard to determine "is it real, or not".  We use the Marti Report as a "End all" document to verify authenticity. Marty Rupp and I also keep track of known clone GT/CS-HCS cars.   Back to the thread topic, if an original owner purchased a car and Monday, and on Friday came back to the dealership to have a center console added, does that make it "Non Original", or subject to deduction in judging points because it wasn't on the original sales contract, and to add to that, most folks today do not have original paperwork from the original sale and the console would not be on the Marti Report.  I know we can "What if?" this to death. 

Kevin Marti is a business man and offers the best documentation in my opinion on the authenticity of our cars, but to insist on someone to purchase his document to prove their car seems out of line. To recommend to someone they should purchase one seems more appropriate, but to penalize someone in judging because they don't have one is wrong.  JMHO.  Mike
Typically the accepted line in the sand is the way the car was delivered to the first customer when it was new. That leaves room for legitimate dealer additions. Not a week later, month later or year later. I had a owner in concours that provided dealer paperwork to prove a engine change (428 to 427 side oiler) was a legitimate dealer add on because it was done at the dealer. The problem was that the car was sold in 1967 and the engine dealer installation was done in 1976.  Closing the loophole for allowing anything that was possible will certainly not sit well with those that feel like they have to "gild the lily" . The reality is rarely were options like consoles ,foglights etc added if they were not part of the option package when the car was new . It was too much added money. It is more common for past owners to add the upgrades to personalize their car. nothing wrong with that except if trying to show the cars in concours. That personalization contradicts the point of concours where you are trying to make the car original as delivered to the customer.  Doesn't Ford still have the program to give you some of the same info the Marti report does. The Ford report was/is free.  I have never used it because of the time it takes to get it. Marti is more convenient. The Marti report has become the de facto standard in the auction /classic car selling industry. Just some of my thoughts on the subject.
Bob Gaines,Shelby enthusiast, Shelby collector , Shelby concours judge SAAC,MCA,Mid America Shelby

Offline krelboyne

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 678
    • West Coast Classic Cougars
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #21 on: November 03, 2016, 04:13:35 PM »
I like the concept of having the Marti Report for authenticity purposes. It is a document with factory Ford information. Basically a Ford birth certificate.

Scott Behncke - Carcheaologist
West Coast Classic Cougars
503-463-1130
1968 GT/CS 302-4V San Jose 05B
1968 Cougar XR7 Dearborn 09A

Offline J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14531
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #22 on: November 03, 2016, 04:27:31 PM »
Kevin Marti is a business man and offers the best documentation in my opinion on the authenticity of our cars, but to insist on someone to purchase his document to prove their car seems out of line. To recommend to someone they should purchase one seems more appropriate, but to penalize someone in judging because they don't have one is wrong.  JMHO.  Mike

So if MCA had a class for California Specials you would be ok with a fake taking a gold? Which in turn, of course, increases it value and also allows the owner to promote the car with that award standard/certification. 

Just asking since that appears to be what your ok with and how it currently stands. Not what if but when it did happen and when it may again ;)

To show your car (as you well know) your required to purchase allot of things that you otherwise might not purchase and have more to do with the originality of the vehicle than a fire extinguisher - another requirement

How would you feel if it wasn't the owner that had to provide the info but the organization had access and applied the information? Of course the owner would not get a copy of the information - just for judging purposes.


Just continuing the discussion and exploring possibilities ;)
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline jwc66k

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3651
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #23 on: November 03, 2016, 04:33:01 PM »
I like the concept of having the Marti Report for authenticity purposes.
I agree. However, for 64-66 Mustangs, I see no all-encompassing method available. There are buck tags and window stickers, but those are few and far between. The question remains, are Marti reports "fair" for all Mustangs? Should what applies to one group of Mustangs, apply to all?
"Consistency" in judging appears to be compromised.
On the other hand, a Marti Report is a tool.
Jim
I promise to be politically correct in all my posts to keep the BBBB from vociferating.

Offline J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14531
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #24 on: November 03, 2016, 04:52:43 PM »
I agree. However, for 64-66 Mustangs, I see no all-encompassing method available. There are buck tags and window stickers, but those are few and far between. The question remains, are Marti reports "fair" for all Mustangs? Should what applies to one group of Mustangs, apply to all?
"Consistency" in judging appears to be compromised.
On the other hand, a Marti Report is a tool.
Jim

Consistency within a class is the biggest issue through the years. We, at times, have chosen to change rules slightly since the cars are different as they progress through the years. After the classics spare tires are not checked in all class due to access. Catalytic converters, computers and many other parts are on later cars but not on early cars. Which group of cars is it unfair to in those cases? Also isn't unfair to many owners not to use them when they choose to restore their cars as they were built rather than change what transmission, color, interior ..... they want to?

Actually had a MCA President judging a class one day where he instructed the owner that if he didn't want to loss all the points (he had changed his 69 sportroof to a Mach I and painted the car candy apple red) he should get a new door tag so that the judges couldn't tell.  ::)

As mentioned - its just another tool and to ignore its benefit for the vast majority of classes and cars is holding the judging back to the standard of the 80's or even before that  and locks the club from never using this beneficial tool for the vast majority of members and cars.
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline somethingspecial

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 85
  • 1968 GT/CS Registrar mikej@bigbytes.com
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #25 on: November 03, 2016, 05:54:02 PM »
So if MCA had a class for California Specials you would be ok with a fake taking a gold? Which in turn, of course, increases it value and also allows the owner to promote the car with that award standard/certification. 

Just asking since that appears to be what your ok with and how it currently stands. Not what if but when it did happen and when it may again ;)

To show your car (as you well know) your required to purchase allot of things that you otherwise might not purchase and have more to do with the originality of the vehicle than a fire extinguisher - another requirement

How would you feel if it wasn't the owner that had to provide the info but the organization had access and applied the information? Of course the owner would not get a copy of the information - just for judging purposes.


Just continuing the discussion and exploring possibilities ;)

Jeff, No I am not OK with a clone taking a Gold in Concours class. Maybe my thoughts were not received as I intended.  I was trying to say I don't like the idea of "you must have this......".  It's like saying "you must have brand X tires and you must get them from my brother in law's tire shop".  Don't get me wrong, I highly recommend folks purchase a Marti Report, but to say they "must" in order to show is wrong in my opinion.  If someone has one, then show it to prove what you have.  There is nothing wrong with the judges asking "Do you have a Marti Report or other supporting documents, and if so, may we see them"? If they do not have any supporting paperwork, should they be DQed, or receive a penalty? I don't think so, if they do, can they get an extra point, such as with an MCA decal?  again, JMHO.
Your friendly neighborhood 1968 GT/CS Registrar

Offline carlite65

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1363
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #26 on: November 03, 2016, 06:41:32 PM »
mca decals no longer gain you a bonus point. they are not even mentioned on the judging sheets now.
5F09C331248

Offline Hawkeye

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 166
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #27 on: November 03, 2016, 07:50:39 PM »
As I'm reading this, it seems to me that only those in Concours and Tbred classes would need Marti reports, because those are the only classes originality pertains to, I believe.  My occasional driver wouldn't need it (wish I could but darn those 64.5s) because modification is acceptable there.  Making it a requirement for those 2 classes should be easy enough, and I honestly can't see why people would resist it since the goals are authenticity and that gets one step closer.  And if cost was to be tossed out as a problem, I think I'd explode, cuz the money put into some parts is way more than the report.
I would think the unrestored class would also benefit from a report as well.
Just my nickel.

mac1971

  • Guest
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #28 on: November 03, 2016, 08:08:18 PM »
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

Just throwing it out there initially for conversation... I have two examples (one with my own car) where there may be an issue with what is contained on the Marti report and what came from the factory. In both cases, they are '71 429cj cars, my convertible and a coupe. Both cars show as options, "bumper guards" and both cars show no evidence of these having ever been installed. My factory invoice (Lois E. report) does not show this "bumper guard" option... The coupe was one of K. Fryer's recent '71's he sold at the Indy mecum auction and was supposedly an all original car, again, no bumper guards evident, but the Marti report indicated them as having been optioned to the car.

I will contact him at some point in time to see if he will reissue the report for my car, but it made me wonder when I came across this thread, if there is other reports out there with possible questions.

When I first got my report, I went out and purchased NOS guards and then had major doubts when the factory invoice arrived a while later. I don't believe these were ever installed on my car and if the Fryer car was a as advertised in his documentation, they were not installed on that car either. 

I like the idea of providing documentation to validate a car during judging, just hope that it is accurate initially to avoid upsetting people.

Offline midlife

  • Wiring Guru---let me check your shorts!
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1360
    • Midlife Harness Restorations
Re: MCA concours car description
« Reply #29 on: November 03, 2016, 09:29:11 PM »
Here's what I would recommend to MCA (only for 67 on up):
Any car entered into Concours and higher classes must have a Marti Report for the standard entrance fee, or for $15 more, the car can be entered and MCA would query the Marti database on the show days for pertinent information and provided to the judges.  Now then, MCA would have to arrange with Kevin Marti for access to his database that would be restricted to MCA Show Officials and shared with the owner at the start of judging.  That report would not be provided to the owner to keep or to copy. 

Would Kevin do this?  Perhaps, if the fee was reasonable to both parties.  The extra entrance cost would help offset the cost to MCA. 

What do y'all think?