if its over retored it isnt as made at the factory.

I agree, but it is hard to decide where the line is for over restored.

Sometimes it is unavoidable. The paints of yesteryear are no longer available. A lot of that stuff has be outlawed because of what it does to the evironment. So they have to use paints and techniques that were not available. So the finish comes out better than it was.

I wish I could remember Eric Marsh's comment about this subject in New Bern. Something to the effect that if you come over to where he teaches he will take your money and teach you how to mess up an expensive new paint job to make it look correct.

Alot of shops use Base coat/clear coat due to it's ease of application and minumim amount of work to get a teriffic shine.
But it looks way out of place on a Model A Ford or any other car where lacquer was used originally.

That said- When I paint a Model A (and I paint at least one a month) I'll use single stage urethane on the body and base/clear on the fenders, splash aprons to more closely replicate the brilliant shine the dipped enamel produced back then.
To me SS urethane once it's cut & buffed resembles the original lacquer used on the body.

I am sure that chrome is another area where it is restored to better than orginal. But what chrome shop is going to want to put out "factory quality" chrome? That is not what gets more business for them. People are looking for perfection for the price they are paying. So....

In the case of our fire truck, if we didn't over restore that truck and did it the way it originally was, the judges would tear it apart for being a sloppy restoration.

Originally on the radiator, there were red stripes on the radiator where American LaFrance painted the grill and never taped off the radiator. The whole frame and underside of the fenders left Dearborn as a black frame, but then after it left American LaFrance part of the frame was still black, part of it was red, and part of the frame was black with red overspray. When we took that truck apart, the top frame rails were painted red, but the top frame rails where the cab was bolted to it was still black. In the eyes of a novice judge, it would be defined as a sloppy restoration.

In simpler terms, where the spray gun could reach, the frame was painted red, where the spray gun couldn't reach the frame stayed black, and someplace in the middle you had black with red paint dust. In the area directly over the wheels, behind the running boards, and behind the grill bars, that fire truck of ours was still black.

Now when we got to the cab, the floorboards were painted olive drab. When the cab was taken off of the frame you would see where American LaFrance red and US Military Olive Drab, intersected. The firewall behind the engine and going down to the bellhousing was olive drab, but it was painted black with a brush before it went to American LaFrance.

Today the attention to detail was spent to ensure that the entire frame and cab was painted red. The firewall and all of the interior is now painted black, and the fuel lines and brake lines are of a natural finish. If that truck was not over restored, there would be overspray all over that truck, brush marks in the paint, multiple colors, etc. Unfortunately, my dad and I take more pride in our vehicle to do it the way it should've been done.

The beauty of all of this, it has made us better judges. After doing a restoration ourselves, we are aware of the inconsistencies and poor workmanship that these factories do. With that in mind, we are less prone to deduct for something that is equivallent and/or better than factory original. If AACA penalized vehicles that were over restored, the chances of a vehicle winning a Grand National Award would be pretty slim. With the vendors selling reproduction parts, and with the better materials being produced for restoration supplies, the competition and the cars are probably the best that they've ever been.

The issue shouldn't be punishing someone for over restoring a vehicle, the emphasis should be placed on understanding the factory standards of production and not penalizing the vehicles for flaws that were originally there.

Over restoration is a real sore spot with me. 3 times I have lost the award I was seaking, twice at grand nat and once for senior. Each time I was told the ten point rule bit you.In outher words I had points enough to rec. the award but not within ten points of high point vech. Each time the winning vech apeired to have been placed on a rotisery and over restored to a work of art. OK , I wont have to compeat with him next year I can live with that. What realy hurts is I just returned from a local show. I judged a class that had a brand new senior in it.I dont want to sound like a poor loser, but I would have trouble giving the guy the 350 pts needed for a preservation award.

Another problem with over restoration is the cost. It now is nearly prohibitive to prepare a winning car and this is a major reason we do not see new members or cars. Even cars with winning records can not be maintained in winning condition for long. My background is with English sports cars which were often ridiculed when new because of low build quality, yet we now see vehicles remanufactured by professionals far superior to the new condition at costs far greater than new, even after inflation. Perhaps we need a new category between DPC and 1st Junior that would allow some degree of success for the DIY and true OEM condition restoration.

The biggest problem would be policing it. The DIY class idea has been brought up before. Here is something to think about. I was at Hershey a few years ago and this gentleman was standing by his car, talking to a group of people about it. The question was posed, “Did you do the restoration yourself?” “Yes”, he replied. After a few more minutes it came out that he owns a car dealership with a mechanical and body shop. And then the truth came out, that it was the guys in the shop, that did the work. As much as the idea id good, there are too many that’d try to take advantage of it. Plus there are the DIY guys out that I’d hate like heck to compete against, Ex98thdrill for one and we had a gentleman here locally that’d fall in that good too.

David, there you go trying to put us on a pedestal again

What can I say??

My dad and I are a couple of Army retirees who have "attention to detail" burned into the brain after all these years. The problem is that we take that same attention to detail and apply it to our vehicles. Some of you who saw the fire truck sitting on the trailer in Binghamton saw the detail that we put into our vehicles.

Bear in mind that when we do something and we don't like it, we do it over until it meets our satisfaction. Our vehicles still aren't perfect, but they're not too bad either. When we don't have to pay for our labor costs, we can afford to do that with our vehicles.

Basically what we have done is between doing the research, learning the judging program, and paying a lot of attention to detail, we have applied everything that we have learned, applied it to our vehicles, and have been very successful. In six years we have restored four vehicles, won two Senior AGNM awards with two vehicles, and two Senior Awards with the other two. If it wasn't for my father and I sharing expenses and doing our own work, we would never be able to afford to participate. In comparison to some, we're doing things "low dollar" and doing things as we can afford things. Some of the parts that we've had for these cars have been in storage for over 20 years before we could do things.

David, once again thank you for the compliment, but remember that with some time, a lot of determination and attention to detail, anyone can do what we've done.

Here's a case where you, Dizzy Dale, Peter Heizmann, and the folks at GVACS have firsthand knowledge of what we do and how it's done.

Just a thought on the paint issue and over restoration. I have a copy of an original film made about 1923, one of those silent ones about the assembly line of a Durant plant in Canada. It shows them painting the frame and body of the car which is a touring car. The frame is spray painted, or what appears to be spray painted, but the body the guy is using what looks like a garden hose with black paint, and kind of flowing it over the body from the top, letting it run down the side to the bottom. So much for pristine paint jobs, I'm sure there were runs etc in the paint when they left the factory.

I just wanted to bring this back to the top again so we can think about it. Bringing a new car to school so we can look at factory work is an ex. idea. They dont leave the factory looking like a work of art.Now we need to look at the differance between simi gloss and powder coat. I had a road runner with a polished brass rad. top. Chief judge told me (Damm thats pretty,but paint it black or give up points.)If your reading this judge I painted it black.I sure hope every one read Hulon McCraw's column on common sense judging.

Face the facts. New car standards 30 years ago would not win a first place today. I bought a new 1973 Buick and the paint had sags and heavy orange peel effect, the interior/headliner was so bad it had to be redone and parts of the chrome peeled within a year. The front axle and parts of the frame were bare steel. Basically, the cars are judged on how someone expects a new car should look.

My gripe with the term "over restoration" is more towards the areas on Fords and GM Products that are painted high gloss black under the hood. These areas were a satin black. (inner fenders, etc) Someone correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that this is considered "over restoration", while at a Ford or GM show it would be considered incorrect.

Windjamer...your Road Runner should have had an all black radiator to be correct.

No, to the best of my recollection, every time this question has come up, it was considered incorrect, Not over restoration.

"A vehicle may be painted any authentic
color available for the model year of that
vehicle. Any type finish (lacquer, enam el,
acryl ics, etc.) may be used if the final finish
simulates the original finish."

This is the best quote that I can come up with from the Judging Manual. My interpretation, and the way I would judge it, is that a gloss finish does not "simulate" a satin finish. I would consider the wrong type of finish as incorrect and deduct accordingly using common sense judging.

THANK YOU MC. AT Last some one to agree with me that powder coat is WRONG. Only problem is a second paragraph in the book says paint with a finer finish would be considered over restoration. Mc I agree with you but we cant win. Hey Matt, go back and read the post on my roadruner again I PAINTED IT BLACK.

You can have powder coating that is stain black and you can't tell the differance unless you scrap at it.

There are so many different shades of black now available in power coating as you stated you cannot tell the difference to the factory shade and appearance is identical. Short of scraping or hammering the finish no one would every know something is power coated.

Yeah, I want to be standing WAY back when some judge tries that. I don't want to be collateral damage when the owner beats the snot out of the one who tries it.

You mean you guys don't carry hammers?

Actually I use power coating on my jacks and handles. You can use them without worrying about taking the paint off and you can not tell the difference from a factory painted one.

Naw, I carry a rock. Smaller, easier to hide.....or throw at mad owners.

So is ceramic coating, but there isn't a high temp paint that I have been able to use that was durable enough to hold up on our exhaust manifolds. After three restorations, we had our exhaust manifolds ceramic coated on our fire truck, we've run the truck about 300 miles and the manifolds look the same as they did the day that they were put on.

If we leave the manifolds alone, the judges deduct for rust, if we run the vehicle with the high temp paint, the paint burns off, the manifolds rust again, and the judges still deduct for rust.

We're sold on the ceramic coating..

Windjamer, I may have not been clear in my previous post. I was not bashing powdercoating, just the wrong finish be it gloss, satin, or flat...

If it looks like it did originally, paint, powder, ceramic or anything else you can come up with, it is OK. What matters is how it looks. If it is gloss black when it should be flat black, it is wrong, but it does not matter what modern finish material is used as long as it "simulates" the original appearance.

MC, I should not have used the words powder coat. What I ment was a lot of owners are makeing the finish so shiney you need sun glasses to look under the hood. Example, a car owner I know had his 72 GM car inner fenders painted high gloss black and then had them clear coated to bring out add. shine. Same with his valve covers and air cleaner. They shine like they where powder coated. Dammit this is wrong. To the best of my knowlage GM has allways been SIMI gloss__ 98 I have seen your beutiful truck.No offence but in your own words (IF WE DIDNT OVER RESTORE WE WOULDNT STAND A CHANCE) also I spent about 6-7 hrs. wire brushing my exhaust manifolds.Yes off the car. I hand sanded hard to get spots and then wiped them with lacqure thiner to remove any oil I might have left from my hands. I painted them with one coat of por15 and let them hang three days. I painted a second coat and three days later a 3ed. This was 1995, I tuched them up with a artist brush befor hershey this year. I hope I dont sound offencive, I dont mean to.

There was an extensive discussion on the forum last year about a car with high gloss black paint where it should have been semigloss under the hood. Hopefully I am not opening up that discussion again, but I agree that high gloss where the factory used semi-gloss is incorrect. In my limited experience, that seems to be the consensus interpretation by our judges. That is how I read the rules, and how I will continue to judge unless instructed otherwise in a judging school.