TRIPLE GOLD OE DAYTONA DISPLAY 2012 Mopar Nationals

[Ghoste]

Is this the mandate of a single judge or a committee?

[ECS]

Is this the mandate of a single judge or a committee?

If the "mandate" is stated by the Head Judge, you have to assume that his "committee" is in step with his oversight.  In 2008, I entered my 1970 Challenger in the OE competition.  I received a deduction because the #1 Spark Plug Wire boot had a quarter inch split in the rubber.  Steve Been said the split must have occurred while he was pushing it onto the spark plug. He told the Head Judge that a similar occurrence could have happened at the Factory.  We were told that since we didn't have "Before" pictorial proof that the wire came that way from the Factory, it was pure speculation on our part.  I received a deduction for the split in the boot!  I am not complaining about the deduction because it was absolutely qualified.  Keep in mind however that the acronym "OE" should represent Factory protocol (Original Equipment) and not the inability of a Restorer to replicate a correct Factory process or "acceptable" Dealership alterations.

[Ghoste]

I agree.  Would other entrants not be pissed about some of that too?  The base clear one seems a biggie to me.

[ECS]

I agree.  Would other entrants not be pissed about some of that too?  The base clear one seems a biggie to me.

One thing is for sure.  The incorrect, political and subjective assessments handed down by the Judges did not change reality or the History of how Factory cars were built.  

[resq302]

Dave,

That is similar to the AACA judging as to which I have a beef with.  AACA prides themselves on factory restorations and you will get deducted for points for stuff that was not available during that model year.  Paint clearly falls into this category.  Yet they allow for base / clear as long as it is a factory optional color AND do not care if it is a different color than what the car was born with (say F8 Dark metallic green and is currently an R4 bright red color).  As long as it was factory optional for that car and year it is acceptable.  They also allow for "over restoration" which I disagree with too.  Items such as satin black suspension and under hood stuff being painted gloss so it looks nicer in my opinion should be deducted for yet they don't do.  There was also talk about them allowing for radial tires vs. bias ply tires as the radial tires are safer.  The last I heard, they upheld that if the car came with bias plys that the car still had to have them.  If you want to drive the car, do what I do and get a second set of rims and tires that have radials and use the bias plys for strict point shows.

[ECS]

......and you will get deducted for points for stuff that was not available during that model year.

Don't think that the AACA has an exclusive with "phantom" deductions.  The same year I entered my 1970 Challenger in the 2008 OE program, they gave me a "points" deduction for not having the Certi-Warranty Card!  Keep in mind that Chrysler stopped using Certi-Warranty Cards in 1968 or 1969!   

[pettybird]

Keep in mind that Chrysler stopped using Certi-Warranty Cards in 1968 or 1969!    

Do you have a closer approximation as to when that happened?  I've heard of but have not seen '69 certicards.  Did that coincide with the switchover from IBM cards for cars, or did that happen earlier?

[ECS]

Do you have a closer approximation as to when that happened?  I've heard of but have not seen '69 certicards.  Did that coincide with the switchover from IBM cards for cars, or did that happen earlier?

Hi Doug!  I know that they definitely used them on all 1968 Chrysler vehicles.  There may have been a few early 1969 vehicles (that were built in the calendar year of 1968) that made it out of the Factory with these cards secured to their inner fender wells.  I do not know the exact month that they started to phase them out.  Since I have never restored a 1969 or earlier vehicle, I have not researched those particular model years in detail.  I can assure you if I placed myself in the position of being an OE judge, I would know every aspect about the the vehicle I was judging.    

If the new OE program compromises Factory characteristics like Base/Clear Paint, Reproduction Components and incorrect Restoration Features, then they should not refer to the venue as "OE".  They should merge it with the Concours /Modified Class since they no longer follow Factory protocol.    

[resq302]

......and you will get deducted for points for stuff that was not available during that model year.

Don't think that the AACA has an exclusive with "phantom" deductions.  The same year I entered my 1970 Challenger in the 2008 OE program, they gave me a "points" deduction for not having the Certi-Warranty Card!  Keep in mind that Chrysler stopped using Certi-Warranty Cards in 1968 or 1969!   

Dave,

AACA gets better than just "phantom" deductions.  If you do not achieve the award you are after, you can write for and request a copy of the judging sheet.  The Vice President of judging will then send you a copy of the judging sheet back with the area highlighted as to what they deducted for.  Not how many points, no a specific location, or what the problem was.  For instance, we were going for a Grand National first place with our 70 SS el camino.  We ended up getting a second place.  We wrote to the VP trying to figure out what we got deducted for and got the sheet back with one of the areas highlighted in pink, seat belts.  All of the seat belts were in pristine shape and condition.  The only thing I can figure out is that they might have seen one of the inside buckles crossed instead of being on top of each other which the factory could have installed that way.  The AACA's attadge is that the owner is supposed to know the car and do the research on it.

[ECS]

President of judging.....

The Head Judge of OE made a public comment in MCG that stated:

Afterward, I spoke with head judge Keith Rohm. I asked, "With the high level of restoration, how do you take points away?" He told me points are deducted in as little 1/4 point increments, and every area of the car is gone over thoroughly............Could this car have a modification done at the dealership or factory? An example of this would be red power steering fluid. At the time when these cars were built, power steering fluid would've been checked at the new car prep depart- ment at the dealership. If the fluid was low, they would've installed the cheaper ATF instead of factory power steering fluid. Things like this are con- sidered when going through a car.

In 2010 they were going to deduct 1.5 points because the Valiant had clear "factory power steering fluid."  In 2005, my Cuda had clear PS Fluid and nothing was mentioned about red ATF coloring.  In 2008, my Challenger had the EXACT same clear PS Fluid and again nothing was mentioned about the color being incorrect.  His quote above basically conveys that it was the DEALERSHIP that added incorrect "ATF" fluid to the PS reservoirs.  My question is, why were they going to deduct for the Valiant NOT having red ATF fluid if the Factory fluid was clear?  Why weren't they going to deduct for clear PS Fluid in 2005 or 2008?  Did the history concerning PS Fluid color (in 1970) change from 2005, 2008 and then again in 2010?  He is STILL trying to cover for their judging error in 2010.  I know he is aware of this thread and I ask him to come here and substantiate his "ATF" comment.  Just as I provided documented Chrysler proof to the contrary, please provide just ONE Chrysler printed document that supports your "ATF" statement.  OE Contestants are required to provide proof for their vehicle characteristics!  By the same measure that you judge your OE participants, you should be willing to offer your judging "proof" as well.    

[DAY CLONA]

President of judging.....

The Head Judge of OE made a public comment in MCG that stated:

Afterward, I spoke with head judge Keith Rohm. I asked, "With the high level of restoration, how do you take points away?" He told me points are deducted in as little 1/4 point increments, and every area of the car is gone over thoroughly............Could this car have a modification done at the dealership or factory? An example of this would be red power steering fluid. At the time when these cars were built, power steering fluid would've been checked at the new car prep depart- ment at the dealership. If the fluid was low, they would've installed the cheaper ATF instead of factory power steering fluid. Things like this are con- sidered when going through a car.

In 2010 they were going to deduct 1.5 points because the Valiant had clear "factory power steering fluid."  In 2005, my Cuda had clear PS Fluid and nothing was mentioned about red ATF coloring.  In 2008, my Challenger had the EXACT same clear PS Fluid and again nothing was mentioned about the color being incorrect.  His quote above basically conveys that it was the DEALERSHIP that added incorrect "ATF" fluid to the PS reservoirs.  My question is, why were they going to deduct for the Valiant NOT having red ATF fluid if the Factory fluid was clear?  Why weren't they going to deduct for clear PS Fluid in 2005 or 2008?  Did the history concerning PS Fluid color (in 1970) change from 2005, 2008 and then again in 2010?  He is STILL trying to cover for their judging error in 2010.  I know he is aware of this thread and I ask him to come here and substantiate his "ATF" comment.  Just as I provided documented Chrysler proof to the contrary, please provide just ONE Chrysler printed document that supports your "ATF" statement.  OE Contestants are required to provide proof for their vehicle characteristics!  By the same measure that you judge your OE participants, you should be willing to offer your judging "proof" as well.    

Dave, I can relate your angst about this judge's decision to my roadtest to obtain my driver's license many, many decades ago ....When I questioned the examiner's results of a 98 points scored after the test, I asked why I lost 2 points?, as there was no indication why on the score sheet,... he replied "speeding"....so after questioning him as to where/why/how, I replied that I was maintaining speed with the current traffic flow, rather than impede the traffic by actually driving the speed limit, which was clearly outlined in the driving manual supplied at the time, his response to that was "Your RIGHT, but NOBODY gets a 100 POINT SCORE with ME!, ...NOBODY!"......


Mike

[Ghoste]

In both cases it seems like the old crappy combo of little men with big egos and a dash of authority to make a big jackass.

[ECS]

.......seems like the old crappy combo of little men with big egos and a dash of authority........

You hit the nail on the head.  At the show in 2010, we were told that a 1.5 point deduction was taken due to the absence of "red" Power Steering Fluid.  The Monday following the Nationals, there was a Moparts thread about the Valiant and someone asked what deductions had been found.  The red colored PS fluid was mentioned.  The head OE Judge publicly posted on that thread how "they didn't miss things that many Contestants think they can sneak by them".  On Tuesday we found Chrysler service information that PROVED his ATF scenario was wrong.  I sent private emails to him with 4 separate attachments illustrating that using ATF in Chrysler vehicles could cause damage to the Power Steering System components.  His response was that I should "Keep Pandora in her Box" regarding the subject matter!!  I responded by saying that people might put ATF in their Chryslers due to the erroneous information he posted and that he needed to correct his statement.  After a couple of days he did nothing, so I went on the Forum and disclosed his incorrect judging information.  That hit a nerve and made me an instant bad guy with him.  He was willing to let his incorrect judging assessments possibly cause someone component damage by using ATF in their Power Steering Reservoirs.  As evident by the recent MCG article, he STILL continues to spin and mislead about this topic because he can't admit being wrong.  Here (again) is one of the 1970 service bulletins that I forwarded to the head OE Judge a couple of days after the Show in 2010.

[Ghoste]

That kind of thing bugs me.  It would be one thing if they were willing to ACCEPT the red fluid based on the premise that some dealerships might have added ATF but to deduct points even without the benefit of the service bulletin seems stupid to me when it should be well known that the FACTORY fluid was clear and the only way to have red would be for the dealership to install it.  Whether it was right for the dealership to do it or not is moot when the factory put in clear.  You may as well deduct points from all three of this years Daytona's because the dealerships that sold them new didn't install Mod Top vinyl.  What about dealer installed aftermarket wheels?  By this logic it would mean you lose points for having factory rims since some dealerships MIGHT have installed aftermarket ones.

[resq302]

Great point Ghoste.  I have a friend who sold some cars new in the mid to late 70s and they told me that it was pretty common if a customer wanted a certain rim / tire combo and they had a car on the lot that had them, they would swap them out and just charge or credit the customer the difference.  How would something like this come into play for judging?

Also, Dave, would this certain judge happen to own or work for a steering component rebuilder?  To me, that would be the only reason why they would try and with hold this important info otherwise a lot of people could end up damaging their steering systems or worse, have the hose soften, rupture, and then start the whole car on fire.

[ECS]

....would this certain judge happen to own or work for a steering component rebuilder?

You're getting close.  The head Judge for the Mopar OE program worked for and retired with Ford Motor Company.  As you know, I am a Licensed Manufacturer/Supplier for Chrysler, Ford and General Motors.  I have a fair amount of knowledge for all 3 venues regarding their early 70's vehicles.  IT WAS FORD MOTOR COMPANY THAT USED AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION FLUID (TYPE F) IN THEIR POWER STEERING SYSTEMS!!! He switched the Power Steering fluid requirements between Ford and Chrysler!  Rather than admit the error, he is trying to save face by blaming the Dealerships for something that cannot be proven or documented.  Check your original Owner's Manual for ANY 1970 Chrysler vehicle.  They ALL say:

Only petroleum fluids specially formulated for minimum effect on rubber hoses should be used.  Power Steering Fluid (Part No. 2084329) is recommended.


On the flip side, the original Owner's Manual for my 1970 Boss 302 Ford Mustang says:

LUBRICANT SPECIFICATIONS/ Power Steering (Pump Reservoir) and Convertible Top Reservoir - Automatic Transmission Fluid - Ford Part No. C1AZ-19582-A - Ford Spec # M2C33-F (Type F)


It appears my Valiant Power Steering System was being judged using Ford guidelines at the 2010 Mopar OE Nationals!  

[Kismgby]

del, nah, im not gonna clean off the overspray, but ill betcha ill have a sheet to display with the car detailing the reason why its there, cause ill get worn out real quick splaining that, over and over

On one of the Power Tours, a guy I was running with started answering questions when I was away because he said he heard them so many times.  And this was after three days!

Applause applause for keeping that bar raised SO painfully high that I'll just have to say "forget it" and keep driving the snot outta mine!   

[resq302]

C'mon Dave.  You mean to tell me that Ford and Chrysler and GM didn't have all the same service practices?  You say that we can't put the orange Dex-cool (or as I like to call it DEATH-cool) coolant into my Ford that requires the Gold coolant?  While we are at it, why don't we just start using motor oil in place of the brake fluid.  This way it will keep all the seals lubricated and prevent any rusting of the cylinder bores!   

[ECS]

You mean to tell me that Ford and Chrysler and GM didn't have all the same service practices?.....

Well Master Brian, it doesn't appear a response will be given concerning the judging information being discussed here.  Not surprising!  I hope the detractors who characterized my assessments as a "crazy conspiracy" realize that the ensuing 2011 year was in fact, an attempt to lower the bar we had set the year before.  Coincidently, reproduction parts and incorrect paint jobs became the new protocol after we exposed the judging errors/inconsistencies from 2010.  It is obvious that the judges had no idea or appreciation of the Factory correctness that the Valiant conveyed.  Below is a current link showing the "Assembly Line" restoration and processes we performed on the vehicle.  It was stated in the 2011 Mopar Nationals Trailways brochure that the OE standards were actually HIGHER in 2011. Maybe one the participants from that year can showcase their entry in order to substantiate that claim!    

http://www.cuda-challenger.com/cc/index.php?topic=84614.0    

[resq302]

What I don't understand is how a judging system could be higher one year than the next or previous years.  Did the structure of the system change?  Was new information found on ways certain things were installed or made?  To me, it should be like say AACA or ACES and start with a set point total (ex. AACA starts with 400 points) and then deficiencies get subtracted from the total.  Just out of curiosity, but does anyone know what the total possible points were (perfect score) in 2006, 2008, 2010, and 2012?  My assumption was that the point total was always the same.  Maybe I am wrong.   

[ECS]

What I don't understand is how a judging system could be higher one year than the next or previous years.  Did the structure of the system change?  Was new information found on ways certain things were installed or made?

My 1970 Cuda and 1970 Valiant were judged on a 2250 point scale.  Those years were 2005 & 2010.  In 2008, my 1970 Challenger was judged on a 2801 point scale.  There were 3 different point levels.  I am not sure what the other total was.   Due to the changes in the OE program, I have decided to bring my Hemicuda out of retirement and give it another try.  I choose this car because it has the best chance of scoring high points under the new judging criteria.  It has a Base/Clear Paint job, reproduction glass, a reproduction battery, a Legendary reproduction leather interior along with some other non "Original Equipment" features that are currently being accepted & overlooked by the OE program.  I would have chose the Challenger or Valiant but I didn't want to expose any additional contradictions or shortcomings that probably exist in the program.  Those who have benefited from this abatement can continue to spin reality and feel good about their substandard work.  
 
With that said, I was hoping to get some input on a "judging" dilemma I am faced with.  I recently saw a picture of a 2012 OE vehicle that had a very impressive, LARGE Broadcast Sheet taped to the hood of the car.  I too would like to add some additional, incorrect features to the Cuda before having it judged again.  I can't figure out if I should tape one of those big "Bingo Cards" to the hood or plaster the car with the individual Broadcast Sheets.  (Either display is basically conveying the same thing.)  First, I have to figure out how to spin the story with the Judges.  I could start by having an "Expert" validate this Build Sheet scenario with a scripted & fallacious letter.  I understand this works when something like a service replacement grill needs to be underhandedly legitimized as being Factory correct.  Below are a couple of pictures showing the two options I am faced with.  Which one will provide a greater diversion from the other incorrect aspects that will be displayed when the Cuda is re-judged?  

[UFO]

I like the "bingo card" idea.(Don't need glasses to read it)
Can I get one??

[resq302]

Now Dave, why don't you just take post it notes and go all over the car!  This way you can give it a custom stripe with a different color post it note.      Honestly, that would be cool to have the large broadcast sheet with a car.  I have only seen one of those large ones once and that was at a Dodge Charger meet and the guy had a silver charger with black vinyl top and the strobe orange to yellow to red stripe on it.

[ECS]

Now Dave, why don't you just take post it notes and go all over the car!  This way you can give it a custom stripe with a different color post it note.      Honestly, that would be cool to have the large broadcast sheet with a car.  I have only seen one of those large ones once and that was at a Dodge Charger meet and the guy had a silver charger with black vinyl top and the strobe orange to yellow to red stripe on it.

All joking aside, it is the little things that most "experts" overlook when researching Assembly Line protocol.  Many believe that simply studying the cars and tearing them apart will provide the necessary information for identifying OE characteristics.  This misconception is a HUGE mistake when trying to understand the subject matter.  It is the peripheral or cryptic data that provides a factual history for these cars.  You need to study the criteria that was established under SAE Law and the DOT specifications that were mandated PRIOR to the manufacturing process.  When you understand the guidelines that were established by these committees, the pieces fall into place.  When ignored, incorrect translations for the way these cars were built is the common result.  

"Experts" resort to filling in the blanks with unsubstantiated and incorrect data.  Examples of this are not knowing when the DMV changed Engine Block (stamping) Fonts, not knowing when NHTSA changed emission standards and equipment, not understanding how DMV law was used in formulating a Monroney Sticker, not correctly translating the physics of a Factory Paint procedure, not understanding the process/logic for how Broadcast Sheets were processed, not knowing what parts were Original vs Service Replacements, etc......  These small (but crucial) details are what exposes the contradictions in many OE Restorations.  Knowing the information that shaped the Automobile Industry can help to eliminate a multitude of embarrassing fallacies.  The same rationale can be used when pursuing Judging knowledge.

[resq302]

So what would happen with say, a recall where the vehicle would have been brought back to the dealership to get a recall part replaced.  Now that original part would no longer be on the car, yet be correct for the car to be an "as delivered / produced" car.  Would such a car lose points over not having a part that was recalled?  For example, a car with the famous Recall wheels.