Spark Plugs and judging

[Guest imported_washburn]

Hello,

I have a question concerning spark plugs and judging, it is just a point of interest not anything else.

I see that it states that cadmium plating was not used until 1956 on spark plugs and a deduction will occur if the plugs are incorrect. My question is are we talking about Champion plugs? AC did not change to cadmium in 56, did they?

Anyone have any insight?

John Washburn

Confused in Elizabeth, CO.

[MCHinson]

I know nothing about spark plugs of the 50's.

My best guess, and how I would interpret it is, that no manufacturer produced cadmium plated plugs before 1956, and thus if cadmium plated plugs are in a car earlier than 1956, a deduction would be in order. That does not mean that all plugs changed to cadmium in that year. It might be correct to have blued plugs after that date, but not cadmium before that date.

Any plug, or other part, that was used originally by the manufacturer at the time of manufacture (with supporting documentation) would be accepted without deduction no matter what the judging guidelines show as the correct date on any issue like this.

[Shop Rat]

John, I copied and pasted your question and sent it as an e-mail to Terry Bond. He collects spark plugs (LOTS of spark plugs ) and has displayed them at the AACA Headquarters. Not sure if he will come here with an answer or send it to me. Either way hopefully he can help.

[Guest windjamer]

I interpreit it the same as Matt.

[Terry Bond]

Matt is on target. The 1956 date means that if you have an older car with cad plated plugs, it's incorrect, unless you have some documentation that shows otherwise. That doesn't mean that everything made after that has cad plugs. In fact AC used the blued steel plugs long after that. For info, a lot of early plugs were made of brass and many were nickle plated. Others used copper plate and one popular collector plug used gold plating.

If you need to darken some cad plated plugs for show, a black magic marker is a popular choice.

Terry

[Guest Bluesky636]

I am curious.

In looking over numerous photos of engines I have taken at various shows, I notice that some sparkplugs in pre-1956 cars are fairly visible, while others are covered by a partial or full rubber boot. Which part of the sparkplug is blued steel/cadmium and how does a judge tell the difference if the sparkplug is not open to full view?

[Terry Bond]

Bill, obviously it is the metal part of the plug that we are talking about. If it is visible and incorrect a deduction is appropriate. If it isn't visible then no deduction since judges do not remove parts or judge with anything other than their eyes. Just be sure the rubber boot is correct and in like-new condition.

Terry

[impala]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bill_Haegele</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am curious.

In looking over numerous photos of engines I have taken at various shows, I notice that some sparkplugs in pre-1956 cars are fairly visible, while others are covered by a partial or full rubber boot. Which part of the sparkplug is blued steel/cadmium and how does a judge tell the difference if the sparkplug is not open to full view? </div></div>

It's the metal body of the plug, the part the socket goes on. Most are visible in that area. On some engines, as an example the Chrysler Hemi, the plugs are not visible and I don't believe judging permits removal of a part to inspect something that is not visible.

impala

[Guest imported_washburn]

Folks,

I am still wondering which plugs began using the Cadmium plating in 56? Was it just Champion or others?

John W

[Guest Bluesky636]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Terry Bond</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Bill, obviously it is the metal part of the plug that we are talking about. If it is visible and incorrect a deduction is appropriate. If it isn't visible then no deduction since judges do not remove parts or judge with anything other than their eyes. Just be sure the rubber boot is correct and in like-new condition.

Terry

</div></div>

So if a part is present, visible, and incorrect, a deduction is taken, but if a part is present, NOT visible, and incorrect, a deduction is NOT taken. Somehow just doesn't seem quite fair to me. Oh, well. Just another reason I don't have my car judged.

[MCHinson]

Bill, to each his own, but...

You can't deduct for a problem if you can't see it.

[Guest Bluesky636]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MCHinson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Bill, to each his own, but...

You can't deduct for a problem if you can't see it.

</div></div>

Here's the scenario:

Two different cars. Each absolutely perfect. Except on one car the plugs are visible and incorrect so points are deducted. The other car has its plugs completely covered by a rubber boot so it is impossible to tell if the plugs are correct. Therefore no points can be deducted. How is something like that handled? How can the judging of the two cars be fair?

[MCHinson]

If the hypothetical cars are identical, probably one is wrong for having the rubber boots or the other is wrong for not having the rubber boots.

Other than that, judging is evaluating what you can see and taking appropriate deductions for the things that you can see that are wrong. It can't get any fairer than that. We can debate this until the cows come home and that fact won't change.

Besides, on your example, each should fall within the 10 point rule and both would receive a 1st place award!

[ted sweet]

exactly, on a mopar with a hemi you have to remove the plug wire to even see the plugs.

[novaman]

You need to remember that in AACA, we judge all makes & models. Yes, sometimes somethings seem a little unfair but it is hard to make the rules apply to ALL vehicles and be 100% absolute fair to everyone. There needs to be a little common sense used.

On a 1960's car you judge the battery but on some of the early cars, the battery is hidden under the seat. So do you:

A) judge only the batteries that can be seen

do you make the owner remove the seat and possilby scratch his vehicle

C) not judge any battery on the field?

Many more modern cars have hidden headlights, where the older ones don't. So in this case do you:

A) judge only the headlights that can be seen

make the owner operate the headlights which may require hunting down the onwer and getting him back to his vehicle so he can open them which all slows down the judging process

C) Not judge any headlight on the field?

In some of the sports cars, the engine is mid-ship and requires the removal of a very large trunk panel (it is the entire trunk) So in this case do you:

A) judge only the engine components that can be seen

Make the owner get out the tools required to remove this to access the engine compartment and possbily scratch the vehicle

C) Not judge any engine component on the field?

In the case of a Jeep, the top/roof is an option. So in this case do you:

A) judge the top/roof on vehicles that have a top/roof

Not judge any top/roof area on the show field?

Model A's don't have a radio AM or FM. So do you:

A) judge the radio on vehicles that have a radio

Not judge any radio on the field?

The '57 chevy has something 60 options for it, so do you:

A) require every owner to get and install every option available

judge each car with the the options the onwer decided he wanted and take points accordingly

C) mandate the every car can not have any options so there can be no points taken for condition of the options.

My point is, that the rules are written to be as fair as possible to everyone considering that we are not judging identical vehicles.

[Jim Bollman]

I think we should do full tear downs on the field to make sure everything is correct. No aluminum pistons in older cars that are suppose to have cast iron, no new style seals, make sure they haven't been bored out (street rod), etc. While we are at it all these modern paints should be deductions. How about multi grade oils in older vehicles?

[Guest Bluesky636]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MCHinson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If the hypothetical cars are identical, probably one is wrong for having the rubber boots or the other is wrong for not having the rubber boots.

Other than that, judging is evaluating what you can see and taking appropriate deductions for the things that you can see that are wrong. It can't get any fairer than that. We can debate this until the cows come home and that fact won't change.

Besides, on your example, each should fall within the 10 point rule and both would receive a 1st place award! </div></div>

I didn't say the two cars were identical, just that they were equally perfect except for the differences in spark plugs.

Your last sentence provided just the information I was looking for. Thanks.

[Guest Bluesky636]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jim Bollman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think we should do full tear downs on the field to make sure everything is correct. No aluminum pistons in older cars that are suppose to have cast iron, no new style seals, make sure they haven't been bored out (street rod), etc. While we are at it all these modern paints should be deductions. How about multi grade oils in older vehicles?

</div></div>

Sure. While a car may APPEAR perfect, it may actually be a pile of junk inside.

Yes, I recognize your sarcasm.

[Guest Bluesky636]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: novaman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You need to remember that in AACA, we judge all makes & models. Yes, sometimes somethings seem a little unfair but it is hard to make the rules apply to ALL vehicles and be 100% absolute fair to everyone. There needs to be a little common sense used.

On a 1960's car you judge the battery but on some of the early cars, the battery is hidden under the seat. So do you:

A) judge only the batteries that can be seen

do you make the owner remove the seat and possilby scratch his vehicle

C) not judge any battery on the field?

Many more modern cars have hidden headlights, where the older ones don't. So in this case do you:

A) judge only the headlights that can be seen

make the owner operate the headlights which may require hunting down the onwer and getting him back to his vehicle so he can open them which all slows down the judging process

C) Not judge any headlight on the field?

In some of the sports cars, the engine is mid-ship and requires the removal of a very large trunk panel (it is the entire trunk) So in this case do you:

A) judge only the engine components that can be seen

Make the owner get out the tools required to remove this to access the engine compartment and possbily scratch the vehicle

C) Not judge any engine component on the field?

In the case of a Jeep, the top/roof is an option. So in this case do you:

A) judge the top/roof on vehicles that have a top/roof

Not judge any top/roof area on the show field?

Model A's don't have a radio AM or FM. So do you:

A) judge the radio on vehicles that have a radio

Not judge any radio on the field?

The '57 chevy has something 60 options for it, so do you:

A) require every owner to get and install every option available

judge each car with the the options the onwer decided he wanted and take points accordingly

C) mandate the every car can not have any options so there can be no points taken for condition of the options.

My point is, that the rules are written to be as fair as possible to everyone considering that we are not judging identical vehicles.

</div></div>

Most of your examples are invalid because the cars you compared would obviously be in different classes.

The point I was trying to make/understand was how does a judge make a decision regarding two otherwise perfect cars. Mr. Hinson has provided an answer that makes sense to me.

[novaman]

Jim.... That wasn't very helpful

[novaman]

Yes, the cars I used in my example would be in different classes I used, BUT all the variations like the hidden headlights, engine placement (Louts mid-ship but other sports cars up front),a CJ Jeep can be in class 26 a,b,or c which is late 40's early 50's production cars, and battery placement do still apply because they also can all vary within a class. I have one '63 Chevy II that has no radio and 2 '63 Chevy IIs that do have an AM Radio. Therefore they are not invalid.

Back to the fact that AACA judges everything, The rules need to be simple enough that the judges can move around in the classes without a 50lbs book stating what can and cannot be judged in a certain class considering there are over 100 classes total.

And yes Matt's answer is correct and that helps to balance things out too.

One thing to keep in the back of your mind while here, Matt is fairly new to the AACA judging system and he of course see things from a different angle than say ShopRat, Jim or I (I've been a judge for roughly 20 years). When people post things like you did on here, the three of us will sometimes go into more of a defensive mode because we are use to people trying to bash the system. This is what I sort of did with your post. I try to explain why we do what we do and sometimes get to technical for some. Which in your case wasn't even really the answer you were looking for, and I do apologize. ShopRat, Jim Bollman, Ex98thdrill, Matt H. and I are here to try to help others understand the AACA judging system. Sometimes you may need to take our replies with a grain of salt (Things don't alwys get interpeted correctly in reading text) but our intention is to be helpful not to try tearing someone apart because of what they said. Our goal is for you to understnad the system, and hopefully come out and join us either with your car and/or join us as a judge.

[Guest Bluesky636]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: novaman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Jim.... That wasn't very helpful </div></div>

I thought it was hilarious.

[Guest Bluesky636]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: novaman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yes, the cars I used in my example would be in different classes I used, BUT all the variations like the hidden headlights, engine placement (Louts mid-ship but other sports cars up front),a CJ Jeep can be in class 26 a,b,or c which is late 40's early 50's production cars, and battery placement do still apply because they also can all vary within a class. I have one '63 Chevy II that has no radio and 2 '63 Chevy IIs that do have an AM Radio. Therefore they are not invalid.

Back to the fact that AACA judges everything, The rules need to be simple enough that the judges can move around in the classes without a 50lbs book stating what can and cannot be judged in a certain class considering there are over 100 classes total.

And yes Matt's answer is correct and that helps to balance things out too.

One thing to keep in the back of your mind while here, Matt is fairly new to the AACA judging system and he of course see things from a different angle than say ShopRat, Jim or I (I've been a judge for roughly 20 years). When people post things like you did on here, the three of us will sometimes go into more of a defensive mode because we are use to people trying to bash the system. This is what I sort of did with your post. I try to explain why we do what we do and sometimes get to technical for some. Which in your case wasn't even really the answer you were looking for, and I do apologize. ShopRat, Jim Bollman, Ex98thdrill, Matt H. and I are here to try to help others understand the AACA judging system. Sometimes you may need to take our replies with a grain of salt (Things don't alwys get interpeted correctly in reading text) but our intention is to be helpful not to try tearing someone apart because of what they said. Our goal is for you to understnad the system, and hopefully come out and join us either with your car and/or join us as a judge.

</div></div>

I appreciate your response and no apology necessary. I am an engineer. When I don't understand something, I ask questions. And no, I am not really interested in judging or having my car judged. I built my car to have fun driving. Shows are secondary.

[novaman]

Jim's post although hilarious, wasn't really helpful, but sometimes that seems what some people think we should be doing when we judge. It takes NASCAR several hours after a race to do an inspection like that, I don't even want begin to think of how long it would take to do several hundred vehicles at a show.

I have three Chevy IIs. 1 that I do show at AACA national meeets in the HPOF class. I like that, you show up, park it maybe a quick wipe (can't polish my car due to dead paint or it will turn white) and go enjoy the show. I have two others I'm restoring and both of them will be going into the DPC class if I take them to a national meet. I'm like you and like to drive the cars and I don't want to have deal with the things you need to, to have the car judged. The awards aren't that important to me.

[Durant Mike]

As a fairly new judge, I think our judging rules are great and fair as they can be under the circumstances. With over 100+ years of automobile manufacturing and the dozens of different makes, how can one judge be an expert in all fields. At the recent Hershey I was assigned to judge a class of cars made in 1957. Although I am familiar with these cars, I'm more familiar with the era I am restoring the 1920's car, which I have come to know and understand the basic construction, engineering, various types of wire, plugs, parts etc. With our current judging rules I can use these to really judge just about any car that I'm assigned and at Hershey my judging was much easier. With these rules I'm able to understand what the judges will be looking for and I'll be able to restore my car to show condition and hopefully win a Senior some day. I think many who enter their cars in competition just do not want to take the time to learn what is expected of them, and want to argue when they car does not win what they think it should win. It's a matter of egos, not what is really correct. If someone takes the time to study the car they are restoring, sales literature and other things then they should be able to bring it back to it's former glory and win at a show.

[Jim Bollman]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: novaman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Jim.... That wasn't very helpful </div></div>

Ah Dave, it would be so much fun. I only suggested the tear down, not the put it back together.

[novaman]

Now that thought made my day. :)Actully even was the bright spot in my week.

I found out Tuesday from our parts man here, that a guy that he and I use to work with hung homself over the thanksgiving weekend. One of the last people you'd expect that type of action from. Then Dad ended up in the ER at vetern's hospital for about 8 hours yesterday on a heart monitor to have tell him they couldn't find the source of the problem.