GM factory authorized generator to alternator update kits

[rocketraider]

Picked up some 60s United Delco Service Parts  catalogs at Spring Carlisle and digging thru them found that, by 1965, GM Service Parts was offering kits to update 1953-62 12v GM cars from generators to Delcotron alternators. Whole shebang- 42 or 55 amp Delcotron, pulleys, mounting brackets, regulator and wiring adapter harnesses, all with GM part numbers.

 

What is AACA's take on this update should a car show up with a documented one?

 

It gets even hairier in that GMSPD also offered these kits for Ford, Chrysler (why, when Chrysler already had alternators, IDK) and independents.

 

I can imagine the havoc they created in parts houses back in the day... "That car didn't come with an alternator".

[MCHinson]

While an interesting update, it is a simple question to answer. Could a vehicle have been delivered to the owner by the dealer with that kit installed? If the "update" came out a year or more later than the year of the vehicle, I think it is clear that a vehicle could not have been delivered to the original owner by the dealer with that kit installed, so it would receive the full deduction for the Generator as the update is not authentic original equipment.

[Frantz]

That's a sure no-go. Heck, you can still buy "upgrades" from the manufacturers, but that doesn't make them factory correct parts.

[Restorer32]

You answered your own question. "That car didn't come with an alternator".

[hidden_hunter]

Is it not inconceivable that some of the cars if they'd been sitting on a lot that a dealer may have added them?

[MCHinson]

4 minutes ago, hidden_hunter said:

Is it not inconceivable that some of the cars if they'd been sitting on a lot that a dealer may have added them?

 

I don't think that any 1962 or earlier cars were still sitting on the new car dealer's lot in 1965 when the kit came out. Even if there was one still on the lot, this option was not  a factory authorized option for the year of manufacture, so it is inauthentic and would deserve the full deduction.

[hidden_hunter]

Just now, MCHinson said:

 

I don't think that any 1962 or earlier cars were still sitting on the new car dealer's lot in 1965 when the kit came out. Even if there was one still on the lot, this option was not  a factory authorized option for the year of manufacture, so it is inauthentic and would deserve the full deduction.

 

fairs enough, what about in a scenario where it was say less than a year? e.g some car dealerships here are still flogging last years cars for less popular models - if there was some 'upgrade' they put on the car to help sell it would that be the same?

 

Not that any of my cars are ever going to judgement worthy

[MCHinson]

Still inauthentic.

[John348]

The owner would still have to provide documentation to prove that scenario, which could be hard if not impossible to produce. I was honored this year at Hershey that the Judging Team had asked for documentation on a few items that might be considered questionable. 

[Frantz]

As said above, it's not a matter of being dealer added or even a factory produced accessory, it's not authentic to the car. I have a Ford Racing Product short throw shifter on my car, but it's not a factory option. It would NOT be correct should the car survive to AACA age even though I had the part added to my original bill of sale.

Edited October 18, 2017 by Frantz (see edit history)

[real61ss]

How about a dealer recall? in 1966 Chevrolet had a lot of problems with broken motor mounts. They later changed to the modern style motor mount that will not allow the motor to lift up if the mount breaks but during the time between the two different mounts they had a recall that had the dealers place a bracket on the engine block with a cable looped around the left upper control arm. I have seen cars on the show field with these, would these be acceptable or would it be a deduction?

[MCHinson]

My opinion would be that the General Policy of AACA Juding would allow that as long as the factory authorized that part for that model year vehicle. If it were questioned, the factory documentation should eliminate any problem with that question. 

 

"The objective of AACA judging is to evaluate an antique vehicle, which has been restored to the same state as the dealer could have prepared the vehicle for delivery to the customer. This includes any feature, option or accessory shown in the original factory catalog, parts book, sales literature, or company directives for the model year of the vehicle..."

[Larry Schramm]

8 hours ago, real61ss said:

How about a dealer recall? in 1966 Chevrolet had a lot of problems with broken motor mounts. They later changed to the modern style motor mount that will not allow the motor to lift up if the mount breaks but during the time between the two different mounts they had a recall that had the dealers place a bracket on the engine block with a cable looped around the left upper control arm. I have seen cars on the show field with these, would these be acceptable or would it be a deduction?

 

If the car was involved in a recall and the manufacturer paid for the repairs, would that not be considered "factory"?  The motor mount cables of GM cars of the 60's would be a classic example.  Also a safety correction/upgrade.  ps: I think that was the first government mandated recall.

Edited October 19, 2017 by Larry Schramm (see edit history)

[Frantz]

Larry is correct in that it would be considered a "safety item" in terms of a recall. A copy of the recall notice would be good for documentation should you ever need it. The guidelines don't go into this specifically but I can't see any other way to read them either. 

 

Quote

...accepted as safety items, so long as the installation is done in a workmanlike manner in keeping with the design and era of the vehicle, using authentic wiring, and in good taste