The new rule for headlights in the 2009 Judges Guideline Book.

[SolidAxle]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Shop Rat</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Biscayne John has posted that he plans to send a letter to support the removal of this rule for the future. I think that the two of you, and anyone else that feels that the rule is incorrect, join forces with the information that you have and petition to have it changed. But start as soon as you can so that it will not take several years to get it done.

</div></div>

Susan,

Thanks for clearing the intent up. So, just for my personal information, do YOU think the rule is incorrect?

[SolidAxle]

Unless I don't understand something.... It seems to me that a 1970 Triumph TR-6, as delivered from the factory, could in fact have these headlights on them. Just not if sold within the US. So, they are in fact era correct headlights and they "could have been" on the car as delivered by the factory.

So it seems that regardless of the 2009 rule change regarding headlights, they would suffer no deduction. With the 2009 rule change the argument becomes even stronger as these headlights are era correct.

I do not see where destination of vehicle plays a role in this issue.

Am I missing something here?

[Shop Rat]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SolidAxle</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Susan,

Thanks for clearing the intent up. So, just for my personal information, do YOU think the rule is incorrect? </div></div>

You are welcome.

As to whether I think the rule is correct, it is as of right now and the rest of the 2009 show season. Why? Because as of right now, due to people's lack of knowing about it (and the people that did know did not pursue having it changed since 1994), no effort has been made to update the judging committee on the availability of T-3 replacement bulbs and a list that says what goes in which vechicles.

But now that people know that can supply supportive information, and a list that could be provided to the Team Captain for use in classes where they apply, it would bear being re-visited. And I am sure that the judging committee would do just that. Heck, they listened to me. Why not to you and others? But someone has to take the lead and present the facts for it to be considered. I am not against it being reversed.

[Shop Rat]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SolidAxle</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Unless I don't understand something.... It seems to me that a 1970 Triumph TR-6, as delivered from the factory, could in fact have these headlights on them. Just not if sold within the US. So, they are in fact era correct headlights and they "could have been" on the car as delivered by the factory. </div></div>

Sure they could have if they were manufactured and sold to dealerships other than in the U.S. Dave@Moon said they are for a left-hand drive vechicle, not available in the U.S. and not even legal here until later. If someone has a left-hand drive Triumph that came here from somewhere else they most likely have documentation to support that the lights are correct.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I do not see where destination of vehicle plays a role in this issue.</div></div>

It does if someone puts items on a vehicle that were not available for that model going to a particular country. Now if it was a factory error like a truck we saw a few years ago, the front half had Chevy emblems and the back half had GM emblems, it could be interesting.

We had a Jeep Grand Cherokee that had mixed electronics from the factory. Part of them were for a U.S. Jeep. Part of them were for an Australian Jeep. It took the dealership quite awhile to figure out why certain things were malfunctioning. Turns out the two halves didn't communicate well.

[SolidAxle]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Shop Rat</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Sure they could have if they were manufactured and sold to dealerships other than in the U.S. Dave@Moon said they are for a left-had drive vechicle, not available in the U.S. and not even legal here until later. If someone has a left-hand drive Triumph that came here from somewhere else they most likely have documentation to support that the lights are correct.</div></div>

OK so, Triumph made TR-6's that were left hand drive and sold other than to North America. They were, however, original equipment for all TR6s outside North America as Dave@Moon indicated. But if the vehicle is on the field with these lights the owner needs to provide proof of vehicle destination and legitimacy of the lights in order to avoid a point deduction?

I am struggling with this concept as it appears to lack some common sense. We accept GE & Westinghouse lights that we KNOW were NEVER installed in 53-67 GM products no matter what the original destination of the vehicle was. But we potentially challenge a left handed drive TR-6 with rare Europeon lights, era correct, because we are not sure of the vehicle's original destination?

I thought we accepted matching era correct lights in lieu of correct originals brands? The GE and Westinghouse lights could NEVER have been on the GM Product but the rare lights on the TR-6 COULD in fact have been installed on a left hand drive vehicle with original destination outside North America and we potentially challenge it?

Why does this seem so counter intuitive?

[John348]

No one has addressed the fact that the headlights that are not correct do not follow the mission of how it was delivered! and that the ruling is not consistant to the rules

This has been side stepped!

John

[Stan Kulikowski]

So the cars have to be restored as they were delievered to the dealer, I get that. But where to you draw the line on brand-specific parts?

The GM Power Beam headlights aren't available as reproductions for 1970 two head light systems. I happen to have a few sets so that I have the correct ones and while they're expensive, I have seen them in swap meets. I've never seen the correct lights for my 73 Ford. I can't remember the brand off the top of my head but they have a small TS logo at 6:00 position. If I have to replace one of those, I'm up a creek.

If I follow the logic of the head light brand discussion, this should go to my 73 Ford and Monte Carlo tires as well. The factory documentation for the Monte Carlo states that they are G70-15 Wide Oval tires. These tires are available as reproductions. The 73 Ford is very different. My factory documentation states that it came with G78-15 Firestone Brand Tires. These tires aren't available as reproductions so I but a set of J78-15 BFG Silvertowns on the car to be correct as an optional size. If the logic of the old head light rule is applied, I should have a 15 point deduction because the tires, while an optional size for the year, are not the correct brand.

I know that the tire rule specifically states that there is no specific brand required. I'm just trying to illustrate some inconsistencies in the logic between two parts that need to be replaced often. If you apply brand specific logic to one area, why not apply it to all?

[SolidAxle]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Biscayne John</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No one has addressed the fact that the headlights that are not correct do not follow the mission of how it was delivered! and that the ruling is not consistant to the rules

This has been side stepped!

John </div></div>

Don't confuse me with facts. My mind is already made up!

[John348]

Stan,

then the mission should be "as close as we feel it should be to the as delevered state" The only person who gets hurt is the one who finds the correct part. It is not like the headlights have to work like in other clubs so it is very possible. As Solid axle says, lets not confuse ourselves with facts

John

[Guest resq302]

Ok, since the topic is headlights, here is an issue with the rule that I have a question about. Since I now own two Mopars, back in 1969, when my charger was produced, Mopar had 2 different manufacturers of the sealed beam headlights. One supplier was GE and the other was Westinghouse. Now, depending on what stock was on hand, you could have had any number of combinations of headlights and high beams by each manufacturer. It all depended on what the worker pulled out of the bin at that day and that time. I have seen where some Mopars have had 3 Westinghouse and 1 GE bulb. Most of the time, it was the GE bulbs on the low beams and Westinghouse on the high beams.

In this case, how would I be judged? Would I have 2 points or so deducted for unmatching bulbs?