I saw a 31 with single bar bumpers that the front and rear bumpers did not match. On one bumper the wrap around on the ends were straight or flat. The other bumper the wrap around was bowed or convex. Are they two different years? One original the other a repo? What can you tell me?

See you down the Back Roads

There are two kinds of single face bar bumpers for 1931-32. One has convex bumper ends with a Chevrolet bow tie on the back of the face bar, and the other has straight bumper ends with no bow tie on the back of the face bar. Somewhere I read that there were different manufacturers of the bumper face bars.

JunkYardDog, Would you agree that there should not be both types on the same vehicle?

For judging.....I would think that both the front and rear bumper face bars should match.

It is asthetically pleasing for the bumpers to match but should not be a point deduction in judging. Since bumpers were available to dealers in front and rear separately and I would suggest that the people in the parts warehouse would fill the order with what ever was at hand mixing them would be likely.

I concur that the bumpers were mixed by the dealer. My all original '32 is a fine example of that. However, I think that whether or not points should be deducted because of miss-matched bumpers is something that maybe the judging committee should discuss, and a permanent ruling should possibly be set. For example, all of the tires should match, so maybe the front and rear bumpers should match as well. But, then again, as I have been told, the year of the engine doesn't have to match the year of the car, only has to be the correct cubic inches, so, if this is correct, then mis-matched bumpers is probably a non-issue.

I guess we would need to know if the bumpers were changed during the year or if there were several makers of bumpers and if all the makers shipped to the same plants...?????

If the bumpers were changed during the model year then which bumpers you should have on the car would depend on the car's built date. Maybe????

Also like we have said in the past any paint color available for '32 is "ok" for the judges, does not have to match the cowl tag...but I guess some would just change the tag if the rule changed...

I would like for the tag and paint color to match, IMHO.

Of course it is hard for 1 person to see the front and rear bumper at the same time...LOL...it is like putting different wheel covers on the pass. side and the driver's side...just to have some fun...LOL

This discussion has turned into the very reason I nolonger have a vehicle judged or do any judging. Everything depends on the judging team and the rules set forth by the chief judge at that meet.I have seen cases that a person will get deducted for a after market part on a vehicle. They go out and spend the big money to purchase the original equipment part only to have the chief judge at the next meet state that there will be no point deduction for this very after market part.

Now I hear any engine is OK if it has the correct cubic inches. Any bumper is OK if the dealer got them mixed up. Where do we stop?

Let's go touring and have some fun.

Can I assume that there are other considerations than just cubic inches? A 1960s 194 CID engine in a 1932 might be a nice driver, but?

its my opinion that the casting # and casting date should be appropriate for the year chevy its installed it.a 29 block in a 31 or a 62 283 in a 57 chevy just not appropriate, IMHO. mikie

The whole judging process would be the simplist if all vehicles were judged strictly adhering to the "Philosophy" as printed on page 3 and 4 of the "Judging Manual". "The function of the judging process is to provide a way for our membership to evaluate the historical correctness, workmanship, authenticity, and condition of our Vintage Chevrolets. It is the owners' understanding that when they decide to have their vehicles judged that we, as club members, are comparing their vehicles to how the manufacturer delivered the vehicles to the dealer and on to the public."

Attempts to provide deviations or considerations for parts that are not longer generally available are noble but result in confusion, distrust and angst. They are well intentioned but actually create more problems than they are supposed to solve. If you want an example of a system that has been corrected to absurdity just look to the Federal Income Tax rules and requlations. Even the IRS does not understand it!

Maybe one day the Judging Committee will understand their futile efforts to attempt to please certain membership factions. I still have hope.

Well said

i have been through all the same problems as george and outher members in the judging process . my wife said i turn into a different person on the judging field and afer i thought about it she was correct . i try to get the vehicle as close as possible in kowledge and materials but nothing is perfect and it is in the eyes of the judge so in my old age i am taking the chippers advice ( unusal) to enjoy the meets and mostly the people and fellow members a few points here or there realy doesnot make much difference . if a vehicle has been restored it probably has something that was not exactly like te orignal and i dont mean running gear or body parts .sometimes it is hard to get the design on a cardboard headliner etc. oldpush

Right on Chip. If we could just get some consistency from meet to meet and year to year it would be great. It might be a good idea to have a Judging Committee meeting at each Anniversary Meet to go over problems and set the standard for the next five years and publish the findings in the G & D.

Another possibility is to have a National Chief Judge be thee Chief Judge at all National Judging Meets. This may result in less National Judging Meets but improve the Judging and National Awards System.

This string is the first time I heard about it doesn't matter what year engine is in a car as long as the C.I.D. is the same as original. I can remember many times in the past looking for casting dates to be sure a car had the correct engine.

See you down the Back Roads

NCRS has a full time national judging chairman who attends not only the national convention, but also the 6 to 8 regionals a year. NCRS, with dues at 30 bucks a year and only 16000 members, can afford to pay the chief judge a fair yearly salary. The various team leaders, who create and update the judging manuals, are volunteers.VCCA should consider hiring an extremely knowledgable member in an attempt to provide consistency from meet to meet. mike

Mike,
Judging is not as important a part of the VCCA as it is in the NCRS. I don't expect to have the Board to authorize any salary or compensation to judging people other than travel, mailing, phone and related expenses.

chip: with all due respect, and you've got mine, if a 29 194ci installed in a 31 chevy doesn't take a deduction, how will the owner of a bone stock 31 react to that judging malfeasance? lets push for vcca to hire a full time national judging chairman. shouldn't cost more than 50K/year, which spread over vcca's larger than- ncrs- membership, should almost certainly be affordable. my 1 cents worth. regards, mike

Excuse me Mike, but I think it would be a mistake to hire anyone in VCCA for a $50K salary. As to the number of members of VCCA (8000)compared to NcRS (16000) if your figures are right that club has twice as many members as VCCA. Judging of vintage Chevrolets is an important facet of VCCA but no longer is it the most important facet, probably never was...Any facet of the club's activity that fosters a huge interest surely has enough knowledgeable dedicated members to acomplish the clubs mission on a volunteer basis.
One point that, I believe, sours members on the VCCA system of judging and the process of advanceing through the "classes" is the fact that there is no ethical responsibility of those entering into the process as far as stateing the status of their cars, in my opinion every entrant should be required to list every item that is in conflict with the judging rules,that the owner is aware of or suspects is a point deductable item, instead they seem to delite in seeing how well they can cover up and cheat on items that should draw deductions.

Judging in the NCRS would be very simple compared to the VCCA.It consists of only one type of car that was produced in the last 50 years.VCCA cars include that car plus 100 years of various models,many years of which there is very little info. available.There would be no one person that could be an athourity on every year,shape size and variety of Chevrolet.

As to correct engine size only.I have never seen a car judged , or have judged a car on this basis.Nor is this mentioned in my 2/13/01 judging manual.This is false.I am sure some cars have slipped thru with incorrect engines due to the fact its not always possible to identify the engine year while judging due to the limited time and material available.

The incorrect engine issue was discussed here on Chevy Chatter, and in the G&D concerning judging changes in the last year or so as I remember. I think that Steve Scott was telling us about the possible changes. At any rate, if this change to the judging rules is actually true (?), it would have come about within the last year or two. Therefore, there would be nothing about it in the 2/13/01 judging manual.

Chipper Dipper or Steve Scott should be able to fill us in on this one, and then we will have the correct skinny.

Mike and others,
I wholeheartedly agree that the person that has made efforts to make every nut and bolt as correct as possible to "as manufactured" deserves the credit (and point difference from those that don't) on the judging field.

I have campaigned for many years to have the judging criteria be strictly "as delivered with approved accessories". It has been the opinion of others that it is impractical with the resources available. They cite time required to check the numbers, knowledge and experience of those judging, past point deduction problems, availablility of parts among others. Others feel that if the criteria is felt to be too difficult by owners that we will be forcing them to "street rod" the vehicles. I have countered with a two page fact sheet on the 1931 Chevys that could be used quickly and easily. It was basically ignored.

I must mention that there have been vast improvement in the judging process in the past few years. Judging schools, judge recognition, revisions in the form, publication of the Judging Manual are significant steps toward a first class judging system. I feel that we need to take the next step and figure out how to impliment the judging philosophy as completely as possible. So far we have expended most of the energy in defending the deviations. If enough members get involved with a unified voice then I think that the proper changes can be made.

Chipper Dipper. Can you clarify or confirm the issue regarding the cubic inches of the engine vs. the correct year of the engine as talked about in the 2003 issue of the G&D? Is it okay or is it not okay to have a 1951 216 engine in a 1948 model year car without any point deductions for the basic block itself since both vehicles used a 216 engine?

Ok -I found it in the May 2003 G&D

Reads as follows-

"When the judging team identifies a vehicle that does not have the correct engine displacement AND MODEL APPLICATION FOR YEAR OF MANUFACTURE a mandatory 100 point deduction will be made.We are going to ask that owners record their vehicle engine ID number from the engine stamp pad and to be sure to include the cubic inch displacement on the judging form. This means that the vehicle must have the correct motor for that year or a 100 point mandatory deduction will be accessed".

No where do I see a 1948 216 engine would be allowed in a 1951 216, etc.

Thank you Gene for clearing that question up. I had never heard otherwise until JunkYardDog brought it up.

Back Roads

I'm sorry I raised the question of bumpers that got all of this started.

At least it stayed on the auto-&-VCCA topic

The rest of the statement reads as follows: "For example, a 1948 passenger car must have a 216 six cylinder with a three-speed manual transmission. If it has a 1956 passenger car with a 235 engine and a powerglide then it is incorrect". It goes on further to state that: "If the vehicle were a 1956 Bel Air V8 with a 327 or a 350, which is incorrect, it must have a 265. If it is a 1919 490 and it has a 6-cylinder engine, that is incorrect. If it is an SS 396 and it has a 283 that is incorrect." The above (somewhat vague) statements can be taken two different ways. One, that the basic block has to have the same cubic inches and the same number of cylinders as the car came with new regardless of the year. Or two, that the car must have the correct cubic inches and the correct number of cylinders and the year of the engine block must be correct for the year of the vehicle as well. For the 1948 example above the key words here are "MUST HAVE A 216 SIX CYLINDER ENGINE". It doesn't say that it must have a "1948" 216 six cylinder engine. And, the fact that the above statement only covers six cylinder engines installed in a 1919 model (which is supposed to have a four cylinder engine), and not other four cylinder engines of the period installed in the 1919 model, kinda sorta leads one to believe the "cubic inch" theory might be correct.

Myself, after reading that initially in the G&D, I assumed that the engine block must be correct for the year of car as well. Makes sense and that's the way it always has been previously. That, is to say that a 1948 must have a 1948 216 engine. However, I was later informed by a couple of very reliable judges that the rules concerning this have changed and that a basic 1951 216 block can be used in a 1948 since the 1948 had a 216 engine originally. Please keep in mind here that I am only passing along what I was told by several knowledgable judges regarding this issue.

It would be great if we can get a clarification from someone on the judging committee or from Steve Scott as to what is actually correct (the engine must be the correct year for the year of the vehicle or just the correct cubic inches for the year of the vehicle) so that we can all be on the same page.

Chipper Dipper, you know the answer. How about helping us with the straight skinny on this issue? :p

I must either be ignorant of 1956 specifications or unable to understand the written word, and before somebody says it for me, maybe both. Weren't any 235s with Powerglide produced that year?

I do realize that the statement probably referred to the 1948, but as JunkYardDog pointed out, it is rather vague.

It meant the if the 1948 has a 1956 engine its incorrect,

Steve may have written this late at night and it was not his actual thoughts.....but when judges misinterpret it your in trouble.

Would like to see Steves explanation as he wrote the article.

I know what I have been told at the Judges Meeting at National meets. I also know of the communications within the Judging Committee. But I will not comment here and leave it to Steve or one of his assistants to comment. They all are participants and contributors on this site. I might be a good idea to move or copy the essence of this topic to the Judging forum.

Just in case some of you have missed it. I absolutely do not agree with the official Judging Committee position.

i'd like to see that 48 chev with a 48 casting # and casting date for full credit. the way it could be interpreted up till now, i could take the 4.8L(283ci) out of my 2003 chevy pickup and drop it in my 57 vette and not loose points. that would be bordering on the rediculous but yet they're both small block 283 v-8's. mike

The casting number many times is used for more than one year.Also for more the one cubic inch engine.Its also difficult or impossible to view on the judging field.The engine number is in plain site -on later years designates what transmission, carburetor etc. the engine should have.The only problem with the engine number is that it can be erased and re-stamped

The easiest way to explain this is that the engine has to be correct displacement (CID and HP)for the year of manufacture, plain and simple. (no Mike not the new 283' and 327's). There were many reasons for this but none of them were "efforts to attempt to please certain membership factions." as Chip feels.
The main concern was consitancy of the value of our awards, we can not have some judging class's subjected to examination of numbers and others not, but yet both will recieve the same award in the end. The Blue oval should mean the same on all vehicles, and they should all meet equal standards. It is much easier to identify casting numbers on the six cylinder era cars, but becomes increasingly more difficult in the eight cylinder era, many of these problems Gene has already pointed out. Most members try to make thier cars as correct as they can. What about the engine that needed to be decked? What about cars and trucks where the casting number is not visable? What about a car that had a service block installed? We were not able to come up with suitable answers to those questions that would serve the membership fairly and that is why this decision was made. This was not done to loosen things up, but rather to tighten things up.
We inherited a system that really had no uniform standards at all, and the rules changed from Area to Area, dependending on the Chief Judge. We found that in some instances in the past (pre committee)if the six was grey, it was considered correct, regardless of 216 or 235, and others are checking numbers, we have come a long way from that. We all need to realize that if we tighten things up to much then we also are encourageing members to restamp, which is more of falsification than restoration and preservation.
I hope this helps,
John Mahoney
Assitant Chair VCCA Judging Committee

To start off I would like you to look into your '32 accessories manual, if you have one. Looking on page 8 of your manual you will note that bumpers are an accessory and not standard equipment on the '32 model as well with '31 models. Also you will note "These bumpers come in sets of one front bumper and one set of fenderguards or one front bumper and one rear full bar bumper." These sets were $20 per set installed. This is also documented in the '32 sales data book. So from reading this I would make the call that a '31 or '32 should not lose points for not having bumpers as well as mixed bumpers. You could get mixed bumpers for many reasons.

Now on to the engine issue. As Chip said "The whole judging process would be the simplest if all vehicles were judged strictly adhering to the "Philosophy" as printed on page 3 and 4 of the "Judging Manual". "The function of the judging process is to provide a way for our membership to evaluate the historical correctness, workmanship, authenticity, and condition of our Vintage Chevrolets."

With that said, if you go to your judging manual which was revised May 2004 and open to page 44 you will find the same words that Skipper has already posted. "For example, a 1948 passenger car must have a 216 six cylinder with a three-speed manual transmission. If it has a 1956 passenger car with a 235 engine and a powerglide then it is incorrect' and the manual goes on.

Now, I attended a Judging school in 2003 at the NW meet which Steve Scott ran. We covered this subject very closely about the engines and I talked with Steve for some time after the class was over. From my understanding of what Steve Scott said, as long as a 29 has a 194 CI engine and the engine is visibly correct to the judge then it is correct. So from this I took that I could have a '29 with a '32 engine in it, which from the way that I judge is not correct. I also understood from the judging school that it was too hard to document and tell what the difference is between the various engines which Chevrolet made. But as any person that knows a '31 and '32 you can tell the difference in these engines in many ways. The problem from what I have been told comes when you get to the newer cars. Now my Dad has a 53 convertible and I can tell a '53/'54 engine 20 feet away. Every year of Chevrolet engine has a very distinct look and that is what we should be judging to.

So in the long run you're giving points to the guy that is just trying to make the car look right and taking points away from the guy that finds an engine within 2 days of his original casting date to make his car authentic as possible.

I have talked with many members about this and that is why many people are not participating in judging any longer after years of supporting judging in the VCCA. I for one also do not agree with the official Judging Committees position. I would like to see a Judging manual for every year made by a team of 5 people including the technical advisor and 4 other people that really know that year. Then everyone can restore their car based on that manual which would be updated every year and every member could contribute to by submitting changes and proof. Also this would be the manual that all judging teams would use to judge the car by. If I remember correctly the Model "A" does something like this, why is the VCCA not?

Also some questions, how do you tell the horsepower of an engine with out taking it apart? Would it not be easier to look at the casting numbers then to measure horsepower? Also what about the guy that does it right, should he not get more points? Are we not promoting people to put the wrong engine in his ’29 since a ’32 has a better engine? Also I just got off the phone with a senior judge in the model “A” club and they say there is no other way to judge then by casting numbers and engine serial numbers.

"The main concern was constancy of the value of our awards, we can not have some judging class's subjected to examination of numbers and others not!"

Well so you just made it easier for some groups instead of tightening up on the group that needed tightening up on?

John and Steve, I would really like to talk with you about this subject at the natinal board in March when you are in Portland. Looking forward to it.

First let me say that John is working on the monumental task of improving the judging standards for the vehicles. I have sent him some documented corrections for the 31 and he has graciously accepted them. He is working on the project. Please dend documentation. No opinions.

32 Confederate mentioned the Model A Club. I have been a member of VCCA since 1961 and for a period of about ten years I also had a 1930 original Model A Town Sedan and was a member of MARC in the 80s and 90s. I will mention just a few of the differences.

They do have a Judging Manual that can be purchased. This can be used for a restoration guide. The Judging Committee meets two times per year to review new documentation found and make changes. These changes are published in their magazine.

MARC has a National Meet every year. When we had one in Dayton, Ohio we had over 800 vehicles registered. These are hosted by local regions who bid on hosting the meet.

Out of the 800 registrations there were less than 100 vehicles in the "fine point judging." There was about another 100 that were judged in the driving class judging. These are for the most part vehicles that have been through the fine point judging and are now being driven. A participant in the driving class judging must also judge vehicles. There is an extra fee to have your vehicle judge over and above the registration fee.

In both classes of judging your vehicle must have 14 particular items correct or your vehicle will not be judged. Wheel & tire size, engine, body just to name some of them.

One point I like very much is that there is a mandatory tour the day after judging. If you don't take the tour you will receive no award. I have seen VCCA vehicles that are only out of their trailer long enough to be judged.

For those not interested in judging they furnish instructions for self guided tours in the area. In Dayton we had five tours of between 50 and 100 miles.

Just some food for thought.

Back Roads

John: no doubt the casting # and casting dates on 6 bangers much easier to evaluate than those of the v-8's, however, the most difficult v-8's we evaluate in ncrs is the 56 up vettes with Powerglides and the 65-67 Mark 4's.the former's powerglide kickdown bellcrank covers the casting #, the later's casting date being on the side of the block just in front of the starter motor. With lights and mirrors and experience, these hard to evaluate casting data are judged routinely by ncrs judges. can't see why vcca couldn't train their judges to do the same.regards, mike

I would love to talk, I am arriving on Thursday afternoon, and will be attending the tours on Friday. I am not of sure of Steve's plans yet.
Before this goes into some long drawn out debate I would like for everyone to take a step back and ask themselves do they search for the correct part to satisfy a judge? or did you do it for our own satisfaction? Did you do it for a trophy, or for yourself? My membership in the VCCA had nothing to do with how I restored my car, I did it for me as I am sure that most members did also. Let me pose this question; Do we treat the member with the incorrect year 194 the same as a member who places a 350 in their 32? As far as every year engine being distinct for each year that is not exactly true for all the years our club represents. You can't tell the difference between a 58 and a 66 283 block, and there are several casting numbers that overlap years. The entire assembly may have differences from year to year, such as the head(s) valve cover(s) and so on but there are areas on the form so one can make those deductions if needed. If we were like the Model A Club and only had to concentrate on four years, or the NCRS and dealt with a specific model that was built in one plant then the task would be much easier. We would also have a pool of judges that were knowledgeable of that specific area. We are working on that aspect and is reflective of the consistant results that VCCA cars have been getting on the cars that we are tracking. We can present all of the technical information in the world and if it is not read it is useless. So as far as the manual on each year it seems like a great idea at first, but there can be some major problems with that we are still trying to work out. In the three geographic areas I have been attending meets at I have not seen any cars getting awards that did not deserve them, and have been truly reflective of our clubs mission.

Guys, I would love to sit here all weekend and kick this around, but this is the first day it has been above freezing in weeks,(let alone the teens) and also I don't have to go I to work today.
So remember do it for yourself, and have fun!

Regards,
John Mahoney
Assistant National Judging Chair

...back to the issue of ethics, is that something that is not to be a part of this hobby? Why not? If everyone would correctly describe their vehicle on the entry form as to "modifications" would not that level the playing field? i wouldn't expect my car a 51 with a 53 engine to get as high a score as a 51 with the original engine that had been renewed with a $2000 price tag under the 2001 judging handbook. Our club judging rules need to be clarified, I have no problem with a 31 car having a 30 block or a 53 having a 54 block. But the modification should be stated and some points deducted, maybe 100 points is too severe. Maybe it will encourage more members to enter judging if they are able to stay within wider rules, say as long as it has a engine of the same displacement. Just pick your events where there won't be another car in your class!...I am sure no one does that! LOL

John's right, I should be outside enjoying the weather but I'm waiting to leave for a funeral in a little while. (ugh)
After reading the two pages here, it appears that we all are a little confused. John's suggestion to do it your own way is OK with me. (it's your car) However, the award winning cars must follow the "standard" that the VCCA advocates. "As delivered" with all matching numbers has allways been my guide to a stock restored car. Some guys may have to replace an engine, but it should be an engine from the same year. Later year V8's are tougher to identify so that needs to be looked into. Maybe that's where a glaring problem arrises, and judging adjustments should be made. With the earlier years, If someone has to replace the engine with another one of the same cubic inch but from another year, then he knows it and should except the point deduction. Our Tech Advisers should be responsible for setting the standards. I know they are volunteers and over worked, but they are the most qualified to staighten things out.

I see no reason for the National Judging Committee to except any less of a standard than that all numbers should match.

As said before here the person will the power to 'cut and edit' posting should cut and edit for content all of the posting about the judging issue and repost it under the judging category.

I would hate to lose this conversation later, who is going to look under a bumper question in the 29-32 category for a discussion on VCCA judging?

IMHO

Hi all, I want to thank John for coming in and helping out. I wanted to step in after I have had some time to think about things. I find it a real problem with technology when you have the opportunity to spout off instantly and then maybe regret a few things after they have been sent. I know some of you have been there too!

Not all of us on the judging committee agree with everything all of the time. Chip has been a big help to the club by reminding us of what the basic philosophy should be. Skip also has, what we all know, the right policy, it should be the engine for that car and that year. In fact, it should be the engine the car came with. We all know that.

There is a difference between idealistic philosophy and realistic implementation. This has been the most difficult part of tightening up standards. Non of us can argue that the best way to make sure it's correct is to check everything from front to back and there would be point deductions for anything that is incorrect.

The fact of the matter is there are too many variables involved which, in some parts, are impossible or not practical for us to control.

I will try to make this short:

Our club honors a very wide range of vehicles. There are a proponderance of early 6 and 4 cylinder owners with a lot of knowledge of what is correct for those era vehicles. I won't begin to argue with Chip or Skipper when it comes to these. John has made a practical point about the fact that some casting numbers will be gone and not visible. As the years go up it will be even more difficult for a team member to be able to find the correct number.

Do we really want to ask our volunteer judges to spend more time than we already do looking up numbers? Do we have the resource material readily available at the meet tent? Do we have the knowledge and where all to add tech checks to the list of duties that host regions must coordinate? Are we going to ask for more volunteers when we struggle to get enough at meets now?

I'll take the blame but I have been asked to chair the committee. I have tried to travel around the country to get a pulse of what our membership wants our of the judging system. It is not the NCRS or CLassic Chevy or Notalgic Nova. I have been to all three of these clubs meets. They are very accurate and are the leaders for their era of vehicle. But we have a much more challenging job of judging 1912-1982. No one else has that range except the few large clubs. I will take the heat for it but we have decided on a engine philosophy and other policies with the fact that most of our members drive their cars and have restored their cars the best that they can with the money they have, to the best of their abilities and the closest they can get to original. That means sometimes pulling a 327 out of their hot rodded '56 Bel Air and finding a 265. But if the 265 was a May month and the car was built in Sept. of 55 that's incorrect too. I don't think we want to go there.

We have to work within our means. So if it's a 283 it will loose points, if it's a 265 and it has been made to be visibly correct we need to accept that and move on for now. Things come in small steps. Chip, I think sometimes you want us to leap.

I know there are a bunch of "what ifs" and we will try to answer them on a need basis. This is why our chief judges have to be with the program. We can not have a chief judge saying, "This is my meet and we will do things my way." That is what we have tried to get rid of. If we made the standards too high to reach then the members would become even more discouraged. What is the "spirit" of the VCCA? I don't think concours standards is what we are trying to achieve. Practical, fair, and consistency. I think we have done pretty well along those lines.

Finally, to answer Back Road's first question, I agree with Skip, the car should have the same bumpers. Would the factory put two different bumpers on? But would any of you deduct if they were different? If they were GM and available for 1932? Lets not go there.

Thanks for listening.

Does the VCCA have different levels of judging in each category?

In other words is there a driver class, show class, concours class? The same judges would take more time with each level, depending on what the owner has chosen....just an idea, don't shoot...brainstorming....I think this is sort of what we do with the HPOCF class, isn't it?

This way an owner could sort of choose how close his car is judged and he could be more comforable with the process.

Well said Steve. There are very few that will put in the time and effort you do.

Back Roads

One fact needs to be stated. It is possible to restamp a serial number on a part and that is even with the broach marks consistant with the original. It is also possible to change the casting number or date. In fact it is much easier to change the casting numbers and dates than the stamped ones. A die grinder, some epoxy with coarse sand added will mold a new letter or digit that when painted is impossible to tell from original. (I will not tell you how I know that!). ID plates are reproduced and restamped. You can order a custom made set of metal stamps. So any of the identification numbers can be fudged. Just thought you guys might like to know this.

Anybody dishonest enough to do all that work just to get a trophy earned it-but not honestly. I'll be willing to send him some of mine also.

Some 'live' for the trophy (& will in my opinion cheat) instead of using the whole process to learn about their car and how to make it more original.

Does anything happen to anyone "caught" cheating or lying on the forms? Maybe if clubs banned people who cheat it would help....but now we would have to define 'cheating' when it is almost imposible for us to agree on stuff that is less subjective...


With tongue in cheek- we could award bonus points for items that aren't correct that the owner of the car declares on the form before judging...award a special trophy to the most honest...

agree completly with steve's post.vcca judging isn't perfect(no clubs ever will be) but there's no reason why we shouldn't try to make the system better than it is, no matter what auto hobby club we're talking about.bottom line, per vcca judging philosophy, is that the car should be presented to the judging field as it left the factory, with dealer installed trinkets allowed. probably been enough discussion on vcca's judging methodology for the time being. let the vcca leaders mull over what has been posted to date. we can come back on this subject at a later date.

Wonder how many of the decision makers in the VCCA read Chatter (especially questions about '31 bumpers)?

It would be a good way for them to keep track of current thinking by the membership...

Well said Steve!

When it comes to a national or major judging event,the cars entered should be of the highest quality. Consistancy is very important, but when it comes to a local level, we need to have the cars come out to the events. Maybe thats why adjustments have been made, it's a good policy.
But, if you have a bogus '70 LS6 and enter it in a national event in the hopes of driving up it's worth then shame on you!
Perhaps we need some sort of honesty declaration added to the VCCA application form, with dissmisal as a result if found that you falsely misrepresented the vehicle in a major event.

(I own and regularly show a champion dog. The AKC will never let me enter the dog again if I violate thier very strick rules. That's how they maintain the standards).

A couple of final comments on judging based on experience at meets. Many owners do not have a clue on the actual originality of their old Chevy. When they bought the car (some relatively recently) they were told that it was original. They do not have the expertise or motivation to check it by the numbers.

We have evaluated HPOCF vehicles that had repaints, exchanged engines and other parts that were thought to be or claimed to be original to the vehicle. So asking the owners is not a foolproof solution.

And some owners have their vehicles judged to find out what is correct and what is not. Some of those even get irritated when you tell them what is not correct. Then there are those that take the process as a personal attack on their integrety. Finally there are people like me that see how close the judges get to the point value that a vehicle really deserves. Typically they get from 10-50% of the deductions on my vehicles.

honesty declarations will only be filled out honestly by honest people. as an example, there's a vet dealer in the southeast whose cars have been ncrs-judged about 50 times i know of. he fills out the ncrs declaration stating his 435hp black/red roadster is totally original including the 427ci block.all this in spite of the car having previously belonged to a friend, at which time it sported a 327/300 hp small block.not sure a club can rely on ALL owners being honest.mike

In the two seasons since the mandatory engine deduction has been in place, we have had two owners that have been effected. We have had two owners deducted for air conditioning. I have been able to review every judging form from every National Meet. I can honestly say that the quality of evaluations have improved greatly since 1999. We are starting to get consistency in all areas of the country and I am very impressed with the knowledge of our membership. We are catching the items that we have been discussing. We have done a better job of communicating with Chief Judges and the team selections and team captains have been carefully organized. It is getting better. More and more members are understanding the process.

I know I sound like a politician but these are my observations from overseeing the program. The most important thing to me is good communication between us as members. If a member is in doubt, ask someone. Don't pretend to be an expert when you are not. It's OK not to know everything. Don't be afraid, or too proud to say, "I am not sure about this." We have a system designed to find out the answer before we deduct. It's when the deduction is done incorrectly when it should have been correct that really hurts the credibility.

Let's take Jim's bumper question. Between us in this thread, let's come up with a decision. We are all on the field. BackRoads, you are chief judge, Skipper, you are team captain and a team member comes to you with this question. First of all, I am very glad to see the team member that has spotted the discrepancy. That's because BackRoads discussed this at the judge's and owner's meeting. Chip is the deputy. Confederate is the owner of the vehicle. He has shown Skip the documentation of the two different bumpers. Based on GM documentation and our judging manual let's come up with a decision.

Steve

Wouldn`t it be great if we all able to own 100% original, unrestored and unmolested Chevrolets?? Even in my local VCCA club we have members that claim to own 100% unmolested cars, but they have things like heater switches and running board step plates that were not correct for the year of mfg! In my opinion the VCCA Judging is very important and necessary to uphold our integrity. I have yet to have my car judged yet(31 Ind AE) after over 2 1/2 years of trying real hard to get it right I`m relatively certain it would not be a 100 point car. That category should be reserved for only the best! I congratulate those fine people in our VCCA who volunteer to be involved in the judging process, I look forward to have my 31 judged and will not take it as a personal assault if point deductions are made, I will only consider it a learning process. Thanks for all you do Chipper, and all other judges for "trying" to preserve this organization`s credibility!!!

I would take a minor deduction based on my belief that a dealer would not install two different style bumpers on the same vehicle. We know bumpers were dealer installed because they are not factory equipment. It has been pointed out that both styles were available therefore only a minor deduction.

Back Roads

Not to be too picky but Skipper should be the first to comment or request an opinion in this scenario. His judge came to him with a question. He would either answer it or request backup information. Since the owner, Confederate, provided him with the documentation he has specific information at hand. Is he justified making the decision on his own or asking for assistance?

Being Deputy I will add my opinion when the form is given to me to review.

i may have missed something how does the owner come up with documentation of a dealer installed miss matched bumpers a lot of dealer installed parts for instance heaters if a person wanted a hot water heater on a 36 the parts person went to the shelf got a heater it may be a 36 it could be a 34 or 35 it fit and on the car it went so no way to say what the dealer put on we know it was not a 36 heater not right for the year but dealer installed . point deduction acc parts do not add but take away if they are not correct for the year or came from chevrolet such as delux cars that can be documented . and the list goes on . it should be judged as it came from chevrolet with correct to the year parts . and that opens up other subjecs in chevrolet making only components cab and chassie on and on oldpush

It's a major deduct because they are a missed match set.
I don't think a dealer would have installed them unless he had a matched set. If the owner insisted on having them not matching then the car was wrong to begin with.

I'm really enjoying this thread, but I must now weigh in. A dealer, then as now, would install anything on the car that he thought he could get away with. Besides, it was a mechanic who installed them and it would be surprising if he noticed the difference, much less cared. The dealer would gleefully authorize the installation of whatever was on hand and never give it a thought. It would be up to the owner to notice and complain. If that happened the dealer would downplay the whole deal, play dumb, and hope the customer would fall for it. Most dealers, throughout the history of the occupation, are not and were not "Car Guys". They would be selling bulldozers or windmills if the opportunity to make $ was the same.
Mike

You got that right 35mike, or they were probably good at "kiteing" the installment agreement papers makeing the $129.99 monthly payments for 36 months instead of 30 months! or turning back speedometers! They stayed awake at night thinking up a good reason to not fix Mrs. McGillicutie's new car so it didn't Shake, Rattle and Roll!

The point about the dealer putting anything on the car the owner wanted has been correct from the sources I have talked to over the years. The items put on the car must be those that were from General Motors and documented in the GM books. Local dealers many times would utilize local vendors to put on aftermarket accessories. I have a '99 Tahoe and I went to my Chevy dealer to order a hood screen to deflect rocks and insects. When I picked it up it was a $65.00 piece from LUND INC. I am not sure if Lund was contracted by GM to provide the screens to all GM trucks but if they were and it was in the GM Tahoe literature, then it should be correct. They were a contracted vendor from GM. However, I had to drill holes under the lip of the hood to screw it on. If it is not GM then it would be a deduction in my book. We have always said GM and what was offered in the GM literature. That is a good foundation to stick with.

I don't think the dealer or the factory would put a mis-matched set of bumpers on the vehicle. After thinking about this I would probably deduct for the fact that they were not matched. I would not deduct much and I would comment on the judging form the very same thing I just said. I would have been the team member. Skip, based on what has been discussed, it is your turn. Would you decide right on the field based on your knowledge about the bumper or would you discuss this with your deputy and chief and assistant judge before you decide? Your chief judge, Backroads says deduction, your team member in charge of exterior says minor deduction, what does the team captain and deputy say in this pow wow that we are having on the field, away from the owner, I might add!

35Mike is absolutely correct! The dealer didn't care and mis-matched bumpers were known to be installed on 1932 Chevrolets by the dealership. However, there is more to this scenario than just bumpers with convex ends and straight ends. We also have the issue of the solid rear bumper vs. the bumperettes. For example, there were two types of rear bumper assemblies, the solid rear bumper and the bumperettes. Technically speaking, the solid rear bumper was intended to be used when either the accessory extension luggage carrier or the accessory folding trunk racks were installed. The bumperettes were intended to be used when there was a rear mounted spare. So, besides the bumper ends not matching front and rear, now you have another scenario to throw into the pot.

Bottom line, the customer could have whatever he wanted....even though the bumpers were sold in sets. Chevrolet literature of the period, i.e. Service News, filmstrips and etc. do show cars with a trunk rack that have bumperettes installed. This is documented proof. Here again, if the customer didn't care one way or the other, and if the dealer only had one bumper set in stock that included bumperettes, then those could be installed.

Okay, to answer this last scenario first, should points be deducted for bumperettes that are installed on a car that has a trunk rack or luggage carrier? No, because there is documentation to back up that bumperettes were indeed installed on vehicles that did not have a rear spare.

On the former scenario with the mis-matched bumper ends. Myself, I believe that all items should match, which includes tires, the correct engine (hey, the car didn't come from the factory with the wrong year engine installed), the paint on the car should match the paint code number on the cowl tag (the same is true for the interior trim and the trim number), the Job Number should match the body that is on the chassis, and the bumpers front and rear should match as well. However, with that said, if the owner of the car steps forward with documented proof that the front and rear bumper ends didn't match, then no points should be deducted. And, to go one step further, if a '32 shows up on the judging field with no bumpers installed at all, then points should not be deducted for that either since in 1932 bumpers were an accessory at extra cost, and not a factory installed item.

By the way, there were two types of bumperettes also.....those with the convex ends and those with the straight ends.

Would also be correct if it had just front bumpers and no rears???

Were the front and rear installation kits available seperately??

It would be easy to see if fronts and rears didn't match due to the fact that the sets could have been ordered at different times and could have had one style from an earlier shippment and one from a later shippment.The dealer had to sell them all.

If both style bumpers carried the same part number and year application they would be correct as a dealer installed item , even if they are mixed-no??

Or possible that one bumper was replaced a year later due to collision.

My head is starting to hurt...

The committee that deals with judging and trying to make everyone happy should be given a lifetime supply of aspirin by the VCCA...

Yeah Gator...
3 pages of good hearted squabling is getting to me too...
Maybe I'll bolt on my old front bumper, Ya know the one with the CONVEX in the center of it! I still got the police report and tree bark to prove it's authentic!

We haven't gotten started yet. There are eight pages on tow vehicles.

In the Aug. 1931 "Master Price Parts List" page 100 is the following:

BUMPERS AND FENDER GUARDS - SINGLE FACE BAR

Ind, C Two Front Bumpers with Attaching Parts . . . . . . . Installed 20.00 363368

Ind, C One Front Bumper and Two Rear Fender Guard with Attaching Parts . . . . . Installed 20.00 363370

Ind, C One Front Bumper and One Rear Bumper with Attaching Parts . . . . . . Installed 20.00 363372

Feb. '32 has the same listing on page 128

Page 62 of the December 15, 1931 Parts Price List Confederate Model

contains the same listing under BUMPERS AND FENDER GUARDS

Then there are listings for the separate bumper face bars, attaching bars also.

Now let's get back to the scenario. Given that the information above was laid on the front seat by Confederate. It was available to the Judging Team including the Team Captain. Since the deduction or lack their of by the Team Member is unknown we must assume that there was a deduction as the lack of a deduction would not be reviewed by anyone other than the Team Captain. The Team Captain, Skipper, affirmed the deduction as appropriate both the judge and Team Captain, added a comment ("A-bump mismatch") [for you non-judges A = Authenticity and the comment indicates why the deduction was made.] initialed the form then gave it to the runner.

I as Deputy received the form with deduction on bumpers from the runner. In reviewing the form I noted the point deduction for mismatched bumpers. I now have three options, agree with the Judging Team and Captain and initial the form, disagree on the deduction and remove the deduction or reduce the points (adding my initials at the cross-out or reduced number) or the one that I would actually take. Having a question on why the deduction was made because of my opinion: 1. that there were at least two suppliers of single bar bumpers, 2. that the workers in the parts warehouse did not care which parts were used to fill the order as long as they had the proper part number, 3. that the mechanics at the dealership did not care either as they only got paid for putting on bumpers not assuring that the front and rears matched exactly. I would go back to the Team Captain to ask about the rationale for the deduction. If they were adamant I would initial and send to the Chief Judge – Back Roads. If they changed their minds, I would cross-out the deduction, initial the change with the Team Captain and/or Judges initials and then send to Back Roads.

I am really looking forward to having my car judged the first time, does that make me a masochist?

No Gator I wouldn't say it makes you a maosetungist or whatever you said, just plain Chevrolet crazy.

Go fer it!

According to the April 1934 Master Parts Price List the price dropped to only $15.00 installed.

MMMM...Chipper, I would say your #3 is more accurate.

Since the VCCA requires that all of the tires on a vehicle match wouldn't it be consistent for the VCCA to require that both bumpers match. IMHO

What other items come in pairs (or multi-) on the car that were supplied by different vendors that maybe looked different? Which could cause a problem; Lenses, inside sun visors, horns, etc...

Maybe a general statement by the VCCA regarding this issue of matching parts for all vehicles/years would solve future problems. IMHO