How would this be judged in Blue Ribbon?

[Gary Karr]

I got my NOS early '28 fan shroud down from the attic yesterday to strip and paint it and noticed a run plus a glob of something in the original paint. I have also seen runs in paint on NOS fenders and wheels. How would these be judged in high point blue ribbon judging? I hope to finish the car with no runs in my paint but it made me think about over restored restorations. Any thoughts?

[Jim Mason]

I've only judged undercarriage so take this for what it's worth. If there weren't any other defects (rub thru spots, scratched etc) and it was obvious NOS I wouldn't take off any points for runs. I would take off for the schmutz in the paint, scratches, and rub thru. If it were me, I'd re-finish and be as defect free as possible with going overboard. The shroud was dipped and dried, not buffed and polished. I have NOS fenders that I'm going to hate to strip, but I'm in the same boat...fwiw,jm

[Steve Ciccalone]

Gary, likewise I have two of these shrouds, NOS, as well as fenders, shields, wheels, etc that have the runs made after being dipped and hung. IMHO, I don't think they should be docked but unfortunately they will be. Obviously it doesn't affect original cars in fine point but a restored car would lose in the "workmanship" section of the scoring sheets.

Frankly, if a new Model A could be brought through a time machine and showed today, it probably wouldn't get 500 points in Touring, much less fine point, as there wouldn't be any "patina."

[john charlton]

You got me thinking so I looked at a shroud I have and it too has runs where it had " drip dried" It is surprising how very thin the paint is and no undercoat .It has no wire clips and a channel across the bottom.

John in warm cloudy evening England

[Roger V]

I wouldn't dock any points if it looked like it was at a drip point from being dipped and hung on a conveyor. If it was from spraying too heavy and not at a drip point, than I would deduct.

[Jerry Parr WI]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Although I agree with not deducting for a run in NOS dipped parts you must also consider that it is possible to have one with no run. Since it was not the factory intention to create runs one without them could easily exist and should reasonably score better. Shelf wear will almost always necessitate refinishing so it's probably not a big issue.

[John LaVoy]

It is interesting how the appearance of the parts as the were produced doesn't play into what we want in restoration, but in other judging like 60s cars it does. They duplicate the overspray etc to make it as it came out of the factory. Maybe we should start deducting points for over restoration if the fenders etc are not dipped in paint and hung up to dry!

[Roger V]

This point has been on my mind for some time as I'm doing a 1930 Pickup for fine-point judging. I would like to paint the underside of the bed concentrating on the sheetmetal BUT with overspray going on the treated wood adjacent to the edge of the sheetmetal. Everyone I've seen has the wood masked off as if the wood was installed after painting. Ford would not have done that on an underside and yet some/most judges may/will deduct either out of tradition or lack of knowing.

[Jim Mason]

Originally Posted by John LaVoy

. Maybe we should start deducting points for over restoration if the fenders etc are not dipped in paint and hung up to dry!

I would have no trouble with this suggestion. Currently the standards read in the sheet metal section "Do not judge the paint finish" and "All sheet metal character lines, such as edges, mouldings,draw marks, and creases, shall be evident and identical to the original." In the paint and stripe section reads "The paint surfaces must be smooth, free of runs, ripples, blisters, body filler work, orange peel and other blemishes. Paint finishes should simulate the original color, texture and sheen"
So as it stands now, runs aren't allowed but the spot welds on the fender tails should show through the pain. If this were changed to allow or require the runs on the undersides of the fenders, on the wheels etc. it would be 'more correct' imo...fwiw,jm

[Steve Ciccalone]

I judged undercarriage at French Lick this year. Some vehicles had deductions for over restoration of the body pans, they were as shiny as the body. The latest revision of the Paint Guide states something to the effect that little or no effort was made to paint the underside of the body but it may be done so in the interests of preservation. If for example a base/clear paint is used, the clear on the underside should be mixed so as to reduce the gloss, same as internal body panels that were not rubbed out.

I've actually been thinking about doing an all black car for fine point with enamel fenders and a nitrocellulose body. Obviously, the two blacks would be different but this is the way an original car would have looked. I'm wondering how well that would play.

[Jim Mason]

I do know that the gloss on the undercarriage wasn't judged for several MARC meets. We did deduct for lack of draw marks, etc. IMO there should be at least three levels of sheen (gloss, whatever) on the under carriage and manufacturing process marks should show. I like a more flat finish than most on the frame. I've always felt bad when a well restored undercarriage gets covered up with a body.
Steve, since the undercarriage is judged separate from the body/fenders you should do very good with the paint idea you have.

[Marco Tahtaras]

Originally Posted by Jim Mason

So as it stands now, runs aren't allowed but the spot welds on the fender tails should show through the paint. If this were changed to allow or require the runs on the undersides of the fenders, on the wheels etc. it would be 'more correct' imo...fwiw,jm

Talk about opening a can of worms! With the newer crop of judges added to the roles over the last 15-20 years we have a tough enough time teaching them to be able to identify repro from original in many cases (even simple stuff). Can you imagine trying to educate both judges and restorers alike the difference between a factory type paint run pattern from a random sag? Not a chance!!!

With that said, I think I could include several such details and present it in such a manner that I would receive no deductions 85% of the time.

Originally Posted by Steve Ciccalone

Frankly, if a new Model A could be brought through a time machine and showed today, it probably wouldn't get 500 points in Touring, much less fine point, as there wouldn't be any "patina."

I've heard that many times over the years and totally disagree with the tenor of the statement. True, the judging would need to be highly focused and it may actually fare better in blue ribbon. There would undoubtedly be errors in judging that would likely preclude it from receiving a perfect score. In any case just look at the scores you've received with your unrestored cars. I believe most folks totally underestimate the impact a truly new Model A would make.

[Jim Mason]

"This point has been on my mind for some time as I'm doing a 1930 Pickup for fine-point judging. I would like to paint the underside of the bed concentrating on the sheetmetal BUT with overspray going on the treated wood adjacent to the edge of the sheetmetal. Everyone I've seen has the wood masked off as if the wood was installed after painting. Ford would not have done that on an underside and yet some/most judges may/will deduct either out of tradition or lack of knowing."


Ive always taken the paint/assembly process as dull black preservative finish on the wood. Paint the bed. install the wood. Paint the inside of the bed to make the wood body color. At least how I interpret the paint and finish guide. could be wrong...fwiw,jm

[Jim Mason]

Originally Posted by Marco Tahtaras

Talk about opening a can of worms! With the newer crop of judges added to the roles over the last 15-20 years we have a tough enough time teaching them to be able to identify repro from original in many cases (even simple stuff). Can you imagine trying to educate both judges and restorers alike the difference between a factory type paint run pattern from a random sag? Not a chance!!!

I would certainly agree with that. Pointing out modern v original hardware is a hard enough. "I" wouldn't have a problem with it being in the standards...judging it that would be different. BTW, have you looked at the new 21" goodyears? Is this the late tread pattern? Also am I remembering the the tread pattern changed in late 29?

[J Franklin]

Goodyear had many different tread patterns in the 20's & 30's, just as they do today. The tread seen on the modern Insa-Premier tire, as odd as it is, was an actual tire brand pattern in the 30's.

[BRENT in 10-uh-C]

Originally Posted by Steve Ciccalone

I judged undercarriage at French Lick this year. Some vehicles had deductions for over restoration of the body pans, they were as shiny as the body. The latest revision of the Paint Guide states something to the effect that little or no effort was made to paint the underside of the body but it may be done so in the interests of preservation. If for example a base/clear paint is used, the clear on the underside should be mixed so as to reduce the gloss, same as internal body panels that were not rubbed out.

I've actually been thinking about doing an all black car for fine point with enamel fenders and a nitrocellulose body. Obviously, the two blacks would be different but this is the way an original car would have looked. I'm wondering how well that would play.

WOW, let me muddy up the waters even more!!

Steve, adding to your thoughts, ....this year one of the vehicles I had in fine-point was incorrectly scored as having a powdercoated frame --which it did not (see images below!). Ironically when I quizzed my son (who also judged in that same class) about what the team was looking for, his comment was that the concensus of the team was "ya'll could just tell if it was powdercoat or not." Naturally when the team judged this particular vehicle, Blake had stepped aside & abstained from judging so he could not advise the team at that moment that the call being made was in error. It's not a problem but what this DOES do, is bring up a point regarding actual materials used and this ties in to what Gary & others are asking above.

If we are to rely on what the Standards say, then in the last paragraph of page 14, the frame paint used was a Japan Black with a high percentage of asphalt & mineral spirits which dried in a dense (i.e.: thick, textured) manner. Factory photos seem to confirm this. Then on page 16 under Assembly, it indicates again that varying degrees of paint thickness were used during assembly and these all had a satin to dull appearance depending on whether it was spot painted with pyroxilyn.

So this begs the questions, if a matte or satin enamel paint, --OR matte or satin urethane paint is used in lieu of the original Japan Black, ...why should there be a 50% point deduction for using a matte or satin Powder Paint? According to my son and one other individual, full credit was given to enamel or urethane type paints yet not for powder paints which have a very similar composition as what urethane paint does.

Then after inquiring about that, I asked Blake what else the team was looking for on the frame. He said y'all were looking for stamping draw marks and no pitting. Naturally we all understand why there should be no pitting found, ...but when I asked him about the draw marks, I understand the concensus was that if they were not found in the frame, then a deduction was made for over restoration of that component. Again, if we are to believe what is written in the P&R Manual, it specifies that heavy amounts of the asphaltum-based paint could have been applied to the frames which I think many would deduce would indeed cover most, --if not all stamping draw marks.

Now please understand that I am NOT being critical whatsoever of the Area 4 team but isn't the issue regarding the deduction for using powder paint a "double-standard" if the same deduction is not mandatory for use of synthetic enamels or urethanes? Carrying that one step further, if someone were to show up at San Diego or in Wisconsin with the frame of their fine-point car painted with asphalt & Japan Black paint (and some pyroxilyn spot-sprayed for detail), how should they be scored in Area 4, ...and would they receive more or less points than someone else that has used urethane paint?


.

[BRENT in 10-uh-C]

Originally Posted by Jim Mason

"This point has been on my mind for some time as I'm doing a 1930 Pickup for fine-point judging. I would like to paint the underside of the bed concentrating on the sheetmetal BUT with overspray going on the treated wood adjacent to the edge of the sheetmetal. Everyone I've seen has the wood masked off as if the wood was installed after painting. Ford would not have done that on an underside and yet some/most judges may/will deduct either out of tradition or lack of knowing."


Ive always taken the paint/assembly process as dull black preservative finish on the wood. Paint the bed. install the wood. Paint the inside of the bed to make the wood body color. At least how I interpret the paint and finish guide. could be wrong...fwiw,jm

Jim, I had a '28 pick-up in fine-point this year and the way I interpretted the bed portion was that we first painted the wood with flat-black epoxy as the preservative, then installed it in the bodyworked (--but unpainted) bed, and then painted it allowing overspray to fall onto bottom side of the wood (no taping of the wood when applying the topcoat finish). We received full credit for this method.


.

[Steve Ciccalone]

Marco, I probably didn't make my point well enough. As most judges are used to the top cars being flawless, not over restored but flawless, a new production Model A would exhibit things that would make it appear to be a poor quality restoration. An original car today is easily identifiable and I think are given a break by the judges. I haven't seen the sheets yet but I think most of the deductions on that coupe will be on "condition" just like a think a "new" original would be downgraded on workmanship. I'm not saying the car wouldn't do well, just that it wouldn't receive a top score, even though it would be as originally built.

[d.j. moordigian]

This whole thread has me really PO. Why should I bust my ass to make my car correct
and have some arrogant jerk tell me it's wrong.....or did I misread something? Too
fargen political.

I'm not happy on this Monday, Dudley

[BRENT in 10-uh-C]

Originally Posted by d.j. moordigian

This whole thread has me really PO. Why should I bust my ass to make my car correct
and have some arrogant jerk tell me it's wrong.....or did I misread something? Too
fargen political.

I'm not happy on this Monday, Dudley

WOW ...I hope it wasn't me who is the arrogant one as I sure did not mean to act that way towards anyone!!

If you are referring to "missed calls" during the recent fine-point judging at French Lick, myself nor my customer is really P.O.-ed about it. Just as in the Soccer Finals, --or as in a recent baseball game, there are missed calls that do happen. It is the nature of the beast when humans are making judgment calls based on what they see. I might also add that the JS do not always give all the details, ...some of that is just an "expected to know" type of thing. My advise to you is probably the same that Marco usually tells folks, build your car to suit yourself first.


.

[Roger V]

Jim, I had a '28 pick-up in fine-point this year and the way I interpretted the bed portion was that we first painted the wood with flat-black epoxy as the preservative, then installed it in the bodyworked (--but unpainted) bed, and then painted it allowing overspray to fall onto bottom side of the wood (no taping of the wood when applying the topcoat finish). We received full credit for this method.

This is exactly my take on doing the pickup bed. I don't believe Ford would ever paint the bed install the wood and then come back and paint the wood.

[Jim Mason]

I think I've been convinced. thanks.

[Jim Mason]

Originally Posted by d.j. moordigian

This whole thread has me really PO. Why should I bust my ass to make my car correct
and have some arrogant jerk tell me it's wrong.....or did I misread something? Too
fargen political.

I'm not happy on this Monday, Dudley

sorry if I came off arrogant, not my intention at all. As for judges being arrogant...they may be around, but I've not met them during judging. In my experience, the judges don't tell you it's wrong, they state the team's consensus that it isn't as outlined they interpret the JS. Their interpretation may be different than yours but it is just that, their interpretation. That's why the best advice I've gotten (and given) on fine point judging is 'don't make the judge make a decision'. Read and understand the JS and then do it that way. Make everything possible a yes or no, black or white decision. It's the maybe's and gray areas that force the judge to interpret the standard. As for politics...I've not judged that much (4 times) but at all meets I have judged, politics were removed as much as possible. We were told to be consistent, and give the benefit of the doubt to the owner. If we had worked on a car, or there was any sniff of conflict of interest we were told to not judge that car. In fact, other than 3 cars in 4 years I didn't even know who owned it and didn't care....fwiw,jm

[d.j. moordigian]

OK....Brent, Jim Mason and whom else, I DON'T think you guys are arrogant( but when necessary I'l let you know), this whole thing about the paint an finish is driving me nuts!
I have Marco's car interior sheet metal photo, painted but no upholstery, was the tin that perfect when new? I'm dazzled, I guess that was a question.
Next thing, runs in the paint (not sags), if your dipping parts YOU GOTUM.
Next, scratches, look at that lifting hook thing for dropping the engines in the chassis, if that engine wasn't scratched all quite right now. I would think there should be small
scratches in other areas, if not, then it's over restored!
The humidity in different plants had to mess with the paints, like SFA.

Have at it, Dudley

[Steve Ciccalone]

DJ, I didn't see anybody being arrogant or mean spirited at Fench Lick. I made some mistakes that I've been advised of privately and will try to be better next year. In any case, due to the MARC expanded point system, which some folks don't like, the actual 500 point deductions were quite small, maybe 1-5 points per catagory. I stil contend that if a restorer pays attention to the JS, it is very possible to reach 400 points and earn a MARC/MAFCA resoration award by spending the same amount (or less depending on personal skills) than some of the "driver" junk I see sell on ePay.

[BRENT in 10-uh-C]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Originally Posted by Steve Ciccalone

I stil contend that if a restorer pays attention to the JS, it is very possible to reach 400 points and earn a MARC/MAFCA resoration award by spending the same amount (or less depending on personal skills) than some of the "driver" junk I see sell on ePay.

Steve, I think almost all of us that took on the task of evaluating these cars at French Lick surely made mistakes too!! I also agree that most of those who participate in this genre' of the hobby are very conscience with regard to someone else's vehicle and its craftsmanship.

One thing that I did this year as an experiment was to see just how well a "detailed" vehicle that was purposely restored using mostly reproduction parts could faire against the Judging Sheets. Out of the four vehicles that we restored that were in fine-point, two of them were of this caliber, and these were cars that were restored using the best quality reproduction parts. Many of these items had been camouflaged somewhat to mimic more of how the item would have looked originally, but in most of the instances, the idea was not to try and deceive the judges, but to fool 90% of the spectators about 90% of the time. For example, urethane paint was used however the firewall, jambs, subrails & etc. had paint that was less glossy to mimic un-rubbed finishes, or these cars had reproduction terminal boxes that had been mediablasted to make the texture mimic Bakelite. Items such as the Stipe shocks, Brassworks radiator, wiring harness, horn, coil, interior kit, door handles, headlights, gas/radiator cap, bumpers, clamps, hubcaps, king pins, brake rods, etc. were all store-bought items that were installed straight out of the package. Both cars even had all reproduction sheetmetal including all four fenders, body aprons, and hood. Both of these cars scored in the 380s which was high enough to earn a first place trophy, and be in the 'elite 20' that was showcased inside the atrium of the West Baden hotel.

I might add that while both of these cars were shown in competition, their true purpose for being restored was for their owners to drive them. Both cars have counterweighted crankshafts, Stipe 335 cams, high compression heads, electronic ignition, oversized valves & intake manifold, cast-iron brake drums and 3.54 gear ratios. The undercarriages were completely powder painted, --and likely if a little change in direction would have been made regarding using original sheetmetal, restored lights, original interior britework, and etc., it is very probable that both of these cars could have scored high enough to receive the MARC of Excellence as Steve said. Since this type of car is capable of touring at 60 mph all day long, it's definitely a 'Having your Cake and eating it too!!"

Gary, sorry that we/I have hi-jacked your thread!!

.

[Gary Karr]

I must say that these are all great (and valad) comments. As a restorer of a previous Henry Award Model A, I was always concerned with over restoration when it comes to paint, both on chassis components as well as body and fenders. How do you fill any rust pits without covering up draw marks and casting marks at the same time applying enough material to flow out nicely and seal the metal underneath to protect it from any future deterioration. I found myself actually putting some draw marks back into various parts that I felt were covered up by primer and/or finish coats. I guess this is a real issue on how to restore as accurately as we can without over restoring. I know through my many years of judging that I have seen beautiful restorations that had too much material on both chassis components as well as the body and fenders. Jim Mason is absolutely correct in that original fenders had visable spot welds in various places. I went to great lengths to keep those visible without covering them up with primer. The other issue mentioned above is about the level of gloss on the various parts and body panels. How much is too much and how flat should various parts and panels be to be most like what Model A's were like coming off the assembly line? On the chassis, if they were sprayed with proxylin to seal any scratches from assembly, wouldn't that be a completely uneven finish and not uniform flat throughout? Dudley, I also have to agree with you. Bottom line for me though is that I'm restoring my cars for me. Sure, I'm going to do as best I can plus as closely to the Judging Standards, but there will always be someone down the line to criticize our work whether it is a judge at a national meet or someone in a local club. I guess this is all part of the game.

[Gary Karr]

Brent, no hi-jacking here, just great comments. All are valid and really good comments. This is a great discussion.

[Gary Karr]

I must say that these are all great (and valad) comments. As a restorer of a previous Henry Award Model A, I was always concerned with over restoration when it comes to paint, both on chassis components as well as body and fenders. How do you fill any rust pits without covering up draw marks and casting marks at the same time applying enough material to flow out nicely and seal the metal underneath to protect it from any future deterioration. I found myself actually putting some draw marks back into various parts that I felt were covered up by primer and/or finish coats. I guess this is a real issue on how to restore as accurately as we can without over restoring. I know through my many years of judging that I have seen beautiful restorations that had too much material on both chassis components as well as the body and fenders. Jim Mason is absolutely correct in that original fenders had visable spot welds in various places. I went to great lengths to keep those visible without covering them up with primer. The other issue mentioned above is about the level of gloss on the various parts and body panels. How much is too much and how flat should various parts and panels be to be most like what Model A's were like coming off the assembly line? On the chassis, if they were sprayed with proxylin to seal any scratches from assembly, wouldn't that be a completely uneven finish and not uniform flat throughout? Dudley, I also have to agree with you. Bottom line for me though is that I'm restoring my cars for me. Sure, I'm going to do as best I can plus as closely to the Judging Standards, but there will always be someone down the line to criticize our work whether it is a judge at a national meet or someone in a local club. I guess this is all part of the game.

[Ken Ehrenhofer]

this thread prompted me to look at my NOS 30-31 wheel. What an interesting thing this is!
Hanging from the valve stem hole the wheel was immersed in black paint. as it came out of the tank all runs go south (of course) gravity you know!
Puddles formed in the inside of the center because of the valley in there. about 1 to 2 ounces of paint inside. (no drain hole)
on the bottom of the rim area was also a puddle on the outside and the inside.
and of course coming from several spokes were runs and sags!
Now when I paint a set of wheels it is not uncommon for me to have a couple of runs and sags but now I got to make sure they sag going down from the hanging hole!
That might be tough to do! LOL
When I fill in a frame from 80 years of being in the farm field I usually also fill in the stretch marks because I have no choice. They usually go along with all the pit marks from years of rust.
Sometimes I even try to scratch some of them back in with out going too crazy!!!!
Or is it to late for that??????
You see Ford had brand new steel, no rust pits, so he did not have to worry about that. His stretch marks showed up real well.
When I am judging I take into consideration a lot of things and we must remember no one has a tank of paint. I have worked in Ford plants where the e-coat tank has over a million dollars worth of paint in it. (e-coat is where the body is dipped for coverage all over inside and out.
buying a gallon is high enough in price to kill my check book!!
I would overlook a small run on the bottom of the fender but not on the top.
I guess the fun should be in doing it to the best of your ability and over restoration is usually hard to avoid if not impossible.
IMHO,
Ken

[Mike V. Florida]

Originally Posted by d.j. moordigian

This whole thread has me really PO. Why should I bust my ass to make my car correct
and have some arrogant jerk tell me it's wrong.....or did I misread something? Too
fargen political.

I'm not happy on this Monday, Dudley

What is correct? I have resolved this issue within me by accepting that judging looks for a vehicle the Ford would have wanted it to look like as it rolled off the assembly line NOT as it actually did.

Does one think that Ford wanted to have cars leave with drips or sags, or do you think that is happened every once in a while and no reason to scrap it for it's flaws?

[BRENT in 10-uh-C]

OK, if we are saying that the judging timeframe is "as when" it rolled off the assembly line, then why do we require the spare tire(s) to be installed for fine-point judging?

[Jim Mason]

We have to separate, in our minds, the restoration guidelines from the judging standards .

I think that some people get the mistaken idea that the standards are a book of absolutes. It is a book of best estimates based on research. As a restoration guideline it states this is our best estimate as to how the car rolled off the line. Absolute dates, finish, conditions aren't known for 'fact', but are best estimates based on research. I'm sure the early style part didn't stop being used on a specific date, but we have the date of the drawing, and engineering release, and an estimate of when it started being used. We have the engine number of the first single plate clutch installed, but an unknown number of engines were in float all over the country so an exact date of when the single plate clutch was used in all cars is an estimate.

As for judging....A line has to be drawn somewhere. Line has been drawn at 'no runs', 'no spare tire' 'no over spray on the grease fittings' etc etc. Why? Because it is. It's not that the original car was like that...it just gives us all a line to base judgments off of.

I'm as guilty as the next guy for blurring the two...fwiw,jm www.jmodela.com

[Steve Plucker]

Not to open another can of worms in relation the this great discussion, but I sure hope that when a particular part is painted "BLACK", as it is now stated in the present edition of the standards for various parts, that the upcoming revisions will be more specific on the correct "sheen" of black that a particular part should be instead of just saying that the "part" was painted "BLACK".

So is "Black is Black"? Noooooo. We all know there is Gloss Black, Satin Black, Flat Black and on and on due to different painting schemes such as parts being dipped or sprayed, ect.

Pluck

[Jim Mason]

Originally Posted by Jeff/Illinois

Takes the number one reason out of having an antique car. Fun.

For you. I like the research, the nit picking on finishes. I think there is room for all. It used to be that there were 3rd, 2nd, and 1st place cars in fine point. Since the inception of touring class (judging line drawn in a different place) you don't see many 3rd and 2nd place cars in fine point. Now, before I get jumped for implying that touring cars are second rate, that isn't my meaning. If you take a 500 point touring class car, which btw is a first rate car, it may not score more than 2nd place in fine point because the line is drawn differently, not because the car is second rate. I would bet that one of brents 1st place 380 point cars would score close to 500 points in touring. fwiw, jm www.jmodela.com

[Jim Mason]

In the previous message I forgot to mention that I'm not sure that the majority of people realize that the paragraphs in the RG & JS are meant as notes to the judges...fwiw,jm

[Roger V]

Takes the number one reason out of having an antique car. Fun.

I totally accept that for you. I don't believe that covers everyone else. As with Jim, others like the challenge and accept the situation as it is. That's "fun" for them. It's been said that only 5% are in fine-point. Yet, so many of the rest want to pass judgement for something they are never going to do.......................

[Jim Mason]

Originally Posted by Jim Mason

In the previous message I forgot to mention that I'm not sure that the majority of people realize that the paragraphs in the RG & JS are meant as notes to the judges...fwiw,jm

duh...make that read italicized paragraphs

roger V brings up a point. Back a zillion years ago over on the ahooga board, there were several heated debates over two blade fans as a requirement for blue ribbon judging. I asked, 'if the requirement was changed, how many would enter a car for blue ribbon that wouldn't have?' the silence was deafening. btw, there was a recent change inblue ribbon toallow 'original style metal fans' with a small deduction for non original fans.

[peters180a/170b]

Back in the day's of the OLD FORDBARN [FRAME BLACK ]was a on going question. What is frame black. What is the correct paint formula for chassis Anyone has it This weekend i'll take picture's and post them of a 13,000 mile frame where the rear cross frame was protected for the elements.[White duck and rear seat covered the frame."GLOSS" not satin,not flat black ...Yes the front is part open to the elements[weather] shows above a flat black look but not as glossy as the rear.When i see a guy trying to dull this frame down and another car is as well too dull my car might be[OK is it over restored ] by who's standards The judges based on their cars Their cars were TOO DULL as much as mine was tooo glossy.So you know who makes the call.

[Marco Tahtaras]

Originally Posted by peters180a/170b

This weekend i'll take picture's and post them of a 13,000 mile frame where the rear cross frame was protected for the elements.[White duck and rear seat covered the frame."GLOSS" not satin,not flat black

I would best describe the frame as between satin and semi-gloss. I would expect the cloth covered portion of the rear cross member to be a bit glossier. Typically the top edges of the cross member have the paint "polished" right down to bare steel by the cloth over on applicable Briggs and Murray bodied cars.

[RockHillWill]

I like this quote from Teddy Roosevelt that was given in a speech in April of 1910 regarding 'The Man in the Arena'.

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.

Just a thought!

[RockHillWill]

The above response was a respectfull reply to the observation of Mr. Moordigian

[RockHillWill]

"...the man who really counts in the world is the doer, not the mere critic-the man who actually does the work, even if roughly and imperfectly, not the man who only talks or writes about how it ought to be done.”

"Criticism is necessary and useful; it is often indispensable; but it can never take the place of action, or be even a poor substitute for it. The function of the mere critic is of very subordinate usefulness. It is the doer of deeds who actually counts in the battle for life, and not the man who looks on and says how the fight ought to be fought, without himself sharing the stress and the danger."

Just thoughts!

[henry494]

I'm so pissed. I just spent over half-hour giving a detailed reply to so many of these great comments. When I went to post, I guess my password had timed-out. The post is not here, not can I find what I wrote. If I get the energy, I'll write it again.

[Geo. H]

Some guys get their jollies from creating perfection. For others, judging is only a way to get disappointed. I've been there, now I'd rather drive my cars.

[d.j. moordigian]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

My post was not directed at any ONE person. I use the JS, this forum, any book or
person that will help, to achieve my goal, of a CORRECTLY restored car!

Some parts and pieces are very hard to find and money here is not unlimited...
.." it ain't a perfect world ".

I would like to see a more cut and dried look in the JS, in some of the areas would help, and again I say, the paint thing is driving me nuts, also scratches & runs. Also
the time lines when the parts changed....plus the 60 days.

NOW does this help....

[WTSHNN]

Just a question for the fine point guys. What is your experience of non-judges entering cars they restored (by hand, not check)? How important is it to have someone be a judge that is going to enter a car into fine point in order to get in the mindset of what the judges are looking for? I know that if you follow the standards closely you can go far but the standards, as evidenced by the oft clarification posts made on this site, sometimes open ended or vague.

Thanks
-Tim

[Marco Tahtaras]

Originally Posted by WTSHNN

Just a question for the fine point guys. What is your experience of non-judges entering cars they restored (by hand, not check)? How important is it to have someone be a judge that is going to enter a car into fine point in order to get in the mindset of what the judges are looking for? I know that if you follow the standards closely you can go far but the standards, as evidenced by the oft clarification posts made on this site, sometimes open ended or vague.

Thanks
-Tim

Hi Tim,
It's all about education which comes in many forms. Exposure is one of the best methods and judging provides access and exposure for folks that may otherwise not be available. It's important to do so on a national level as local meets will not provide the same level of exposure. In my case most of my judging experience came AFTER producing a high point car for someone else as an experiment of sorts. I was already knee deep (maybe only ankle deep) in research when I did this 27 years ago, so I did it somewhat bass-ackwards. I was pretty successful however.

It's worth noting that most of the high scoring cars done the last fifteen years were restored by the owners 60%or greater.

[Steve Ciccalone]

Its not manadatory, but most fine point car owners participate as it is an excellent way to see the cars up close and personal and learn.

[peters180a/170b]

Better way is A.A.C.A. i must say on this note! Its called {C.J.E.} Class..They go around to cars with a group and show how to judge ,,,what to look for and how to make the call. You DO NOT have owners that have their cars in competition with your car and they are judging your car but stepping back on theirs. The 2 should part ways...If you have a car being judged you should have no right to be a judge at that meet.Thats my 3 cents. First question A,A.C.A ask [Neigher i nor anyone in my family will have a vehicle registered in any class that i have picked.