send in the clones?

[rodlars]

What is the AACA's stance on cloned cars. By this, I refer to super cars from the muscle car era being recreated from more pedestrian donor cars. For example, a 426 Hemi Cuda being created from a base model Barracuda or perhaps a 383 Road Runner now boasting a 426 complete with all of the tags and chassis upgrades etc. These cars are a step up from a replicar but still aren't the real thing. Just curios.

[ronbarn]

Our position is easily stated - we judge the cars as they left the factory. Any changes from the original, e.g. engine swap, chassis changes, etc. results in deductions.<P>The problem, of course, is can the judges catch these clones? In all honesty, if I were assigned to the muscle car classes, I probably would not catch the changes. Sure, I could catch the Shelby Cobra with a 6-cyl engine (one of these "clones" actually showed up at a local meet several years ago). I am not an expert at all in those classes and that is why I judge in other areas. Hopefully the judges assigned there will be knowledgeable enough to properly judge the clones. If this is the area of your interest, we sure would like you to be on the judging team.<p>[This message has been edited by ronbarn (edited 09-22-2000).]

[rodlars]

For the past three years I have been involved with a local concours as registrar and chief judge. Due to the overwhelming volume of work that was accumulating I have elected to resign from the show committee. I have considered AACA judging for a few years and think I will begin to pursue it now that I have freed up some extra "car time". The addition of the new muscle car classes works out really well because it allows me the opportunity to concentrate my efforts and knowledge on a single marque (Mopar) which I am most familiar with. There are so many intracaies involved with this era of automobile that it is quite difficult for one person to consider themselves a true expert in all makes. I am glad to hear that the AACA strives to validate all of its entries as best as possible. I have nothing against clone cars personally since quite often they are built for the express purpose of being fun drivers and are neat to see out on the streets but a meet the calibre of an AACA National should be reserved for the genuine article. <P>I will have my genuine 1970 Dart Swinger 340 (documented back to owner #1) at Hershey in class 27-I. If you get a chance, stop by for a quick hello.<P>Rod

[ronbarn]

rodlars, Welcome to the AACA judging scene. Recommend you register for the DF and become one of the regulars who help us understand some of the newer models being entered in our meets. We really do think that the muscle car classes will be a super success.<P>You did pick up on one of our major concerns in addition to clones. Being a marque expert is good. For example, I probably know more about Kellers than any other car collector. But if I am assigned to judge the class where they are entered, I have to be able to fairly judge other cars in the same class - cars I do not know that much about. Some classes are limited to a single marque, but most include multiple makes and models. That is our challenge and we work hard to make the judging system equitable. Come on out and help us. Thanx!!

[rodlars]

When running the concours, I came accross the same problem. There were 2 judges per class of 12 vehicles. Most of the classes were generic in nature and the judges usually had expertise in a single brand. In order to keep things fair, I instructed the judges to overlook matching numbers, etc... since it would place some vehicles at a disadvantage. For example, I can pretty well spot most innacuracies in a Mopar but am pretty much lost on Fomoco's and GM's. It would not seem fair for me to take the Mopars to task while simply assuming that the Fords and GMs were correct. I have to commend the AACA on making life easier on their judges by placing what I would consider to be "high risk" vehicles for bogusing in separate classes, eg. Corvettes, 5-6-7 Chevys, muscle cars, Early V8 Fords, etc. Once again, as the owner of a legit vehicle, I certainly appreciate being at a show where an attempt is made to validate and appreciate the authenticity of my vehicle. I look forward to sharing any little nuggets of knowledge and info which I might have.

[novaman]

I feel that as a judging team, we are to work together to judge the cars to the best of our (the teams) ability. To me that means if I as a Chevy/Willys person go to a car to be judged and I see something that is wrong, it is my duty to mention it to the judge covering that area of the car. <BR>The teams I have been on over the years usally had a Chevy, Ford , and Mopar person on them. Normally at breakfast while talking, we try to find out were each other strong suits are, so we can help each other.<BR>When signing up to judge, You normally put in for classes that you something about the cars. I wouldn't put in for the Model A classes, becuase I know I couldn't tell if the front and rear bumpers were on the wrong ends of the car. <BR>I don't think we need to check VIN numbers to authenticate the car unless you see "red flags" exmaples: The car is enter as one year and all then trim is wrong for that year, Hood scoop on car with wrong eninge size to go with it, a 62 SS Nova (seen one advertised for sale. Nova SSs started in '63), or a 62-65 Chevy II Nova with a choke knob on the dash while the car has a 6 or V-8. (manual chokes were only on 4 cyl cars). these are just some of the things I've seen that not just anybody would see. <BR>As the cars keep getting newer, the VIN does tell us more and more infromation about the car. I feel we should treat it as we would documantion for answering a question only if the is one raised one wether or not it is right. If that person can build a, say Superbird, to the point a mopar person can't tell it's wrong without looking at the vin, fine. If he made errors that the mopar person found without the VIN number's aid, then start taking points. Remember, the judging sheet is broken down into the different parts, take points off for wrong parts, decals, accessories, etc.<P>Hope that made some sense. <p>[This message has been edited by novaman (edited 09-23-2000).]

[ronbarn]

Me again!! This all makes a lot of sense - one other important point based on novaman's input - learning more about vehicles never stops, even when one is a certified genuine AACA judge. Listen to your judging teammates and learn, but be somewhat cautious of the self-proclaimed expert - sometimes we "learn" the not so valid authenticity. <P>Share your knowledge and be willing to learn something from others. This will make our judging teams more proficient and make our system even better. This is a good thread. Thanx!!

[rodlars]

In response to novaman's points, I think it is easier to check vin first rather than search the entire vehicle for inconsistencies. Whenever I am at a show or cruise night and happen upon a Mopar muscle car, the dash vin is one of the first things I check on 1968 and newer models. 10 seconds and you know whether or not you are looking at the genuine article although I must admit, sorting out a car where the owner has gone to illegal lengths to create a bogus machine (fake vin, fender tag, restamped block, etc)would probably not be able to be identified in the 10 minute judging time allocated to each car. It's funny that you mention obvious discrepencies in trim packages on a vehicle vs availablity for certain years because a 1999 National Annual Award winner fell under this umbrella. A sure sign that things need to be adressed.<P>The point about dealer package cars is very valid as well. Perhaps it should be required that the owner provide paperwork to legitimize the car. The base vehicles were modified at the dealer before delivered to the customer so I don't think they are any less authentic than a custom bodied Class 19 car from the 30's<P>One final point, a little off-topic. I think the class 36 descriptors a little too narrow. In the Mopar group for example, the "invited" cars are 300 letter cars, max wedges, six barrel, and hemi cars. I'm not sure if it was an honest oversight or what but the 383, 440, and 340 four barrel powered cars are not mentioned. When I entered my Swinger 340 in the Fall National in Charlotte this year I was not aware of the new classifications. When I consulted the new judging manual at registration, my vehicle did not match the criteria for the class so it remained (and still does for Hershey 2000) in class 27-I despite being a full fledged member of the Dodge Scat Pack for 1970. This is probably something that might be considered for a revised manual when the time comes. I am more than willing to offer my assistance to anyone who might require it.<P>Only 2 more weeks til show time! Sunshine and mid-70 temps sounds just fine to me!

[Tom Deering]

These new classes (36 a-d) are proving to be very interesting. I think there are some potential pitfalls though. rodlars observation and concern is certainly valid and one that I share. It is my understanding that other classes do not have their "Pedigree" authenticated by their VIN Plate or "Build Sheet". Most Ford products (except Lincoln) built during the '50s & '60s, had their engine size and/or their body styles identified in their VIN. I really doubt they were ever checked during AACA judging.<BR> I'm only a casual observer of this generation of automotive history, but; I thought Yenko Chevys were dealer modifications. Same thing with Baldwin Motion Chevys. What documentation or authentication would be required for them? <BR> In order to maintain a universal judging standard among classes; should vehicles in this class have their origin challenged more than any other class? What do others think? <BR> These issues probably came up for discussion during the committee study of Class 36. What conclusions or policies resulted? Maybe this is an ideal forum for Judges to air their opinions on the subject. Let's hear from ya okay? Tom

[ronbarn]

The specified cars for these classes were well researched, however there may be some that were missed. As with other classes that have specified vehicles, Classic, Prestige, Prototypes and Limited Production, etc., there is a procedure for adding vehicles. A request with supporting documentation/justification can be sent to the VP Class Judging. A subcommittee of the Class Judging Committee will review the request and make a recommendation. <P>Good help is always hard to find. Rodlars, contact the VP Class Judging and let him know your interest. You just might end up on the subcommittee for muscle cars.

[Guest]

About clones. If the car as presented for judging is correct for that year and RPOs available for that vehicle whether that vehicle was produced that way or not,who cares. The problem is when someone takes a 64 Lemans and presents it as a GTO or a Mustang that is presented as a GT, We have a problem, especially if the intent is to defraud a buyer. It is probally a good conclusion that there are more 1966 Mustang GTs on the road today than where ever produced. In the late 60s the MFGs identified these special cars by giving them their own car line.<P>A friend of mine bought a 89 GS-80 Corvette for $14000. Good Deal? It turned out to be and unofficial Goldstrand car. It was built at Goldstrand by a Goldstrand employee using Goldstrand parts. The builder obtained an ID plate. Unfortunately, there are now 2 cars of that Goldstrand number.<P>Conclusion, clones may be fun to look at, but don't buy one or sell one unless it is represented as a fake.<P>

[Guest]

Wally, <BR>Your right... A fake should never be judged as "real"... aka a Lemans/GTO, Mustang/Shelby, Cutlass/442, etc. Just cause it's got a few extra parts and labels doesnt make it authentic. This is common sense (I hope). <P>I'd hate to see a car go through the AACA judging system, then be sold to an unsuspecting buyer, thinking that the car was authentic just because the vehicle judged well in the AACA. Any ideas on how we can stop the unintentional endorsement of these "fakes"?<P>Peter<p>[This message has been edited by peterg (edited 10-05-2000).]

[novaman]

Deering: I didn't catch your comment before about Yenko Chevys. The Yenkos were a Chevrolet Camaro or Nova that was delivered to Yenko for the modifications before going on to the dealer. It was a limited quanity option from Chevrolet. Now before i insert foot in mouth, I'm not positive on how AACA is handling them as I'm not invovled in judging those classes which those cars are in. (another part of judges learning more from each other over time.) I personally mess with the '62-'65 Chevy IIs.<p>[This message has been edited by novaman (edited 10-07-2000).]

[rodlars]

If I'm the guy who just spent 100K+ on a legit Hemi convertible and am awarded the same award as the guy with the "correct looking" clone car, I would have a problem. Clones are cool for cruising since many owners of legitimate cars are reluctant to drive them too much (very understandable with today's drivers)but I feel they have no place on the show field unless they are exhibited in the modified class. I would think that a reasonable solution would be the addition of a "code checker" to the judging team. Just a rudimentary check could identify the most obvious fakes. As far as using an AACA show record to help sell a vehicle, one has to resort to "caveat emptor". A club that judges ALL motorized vehicles older than 25 years can't be expected to be an expert on any one particular example. Btw, amazing to see that a large number of 70 Chevelle SS's in the car corral were equipped with the "rare" LS-6 option. There is no substitute for original paperwork.