Jump to content

Read Majors' column in the latest The Judge


Shop Rat
 Share

Recommended Posts

He forgot to quote the whole General Policy. And implied that we accept that "and dealers, then and now, will do whatever is possible to make the customer happy. We must understand this and apply it in a reasonable manner."

That goes against everything in the rest of that policy. We are taught year after year that only factory authorized options are to be accepted without deductions.

The rules have not changed. Otherwise we will be judging street rods, rat rods and modifieds.

The General Policy should have been quoted in it's entirity. Not just the part that many want to use to do what they want.

Edited by Shop Rat (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of "context", did we read his last paragraph?

 

"Now, before some of you purists vapor-lock, let me add this... As judges, we are the gatekeepers to our award system and, in many ways, to the integrity of our old car hobby. None of us want a car to display an award that does not deserve it."

 

Reid may have gone too far with his comments about what dealers might have done, but let's look at the first part of that section, which says, "Ask anyone who has worked in an automotive factory...."  I'm privileged to correspond with a former Chevy factory manager about one of the AACA cars I own.  He constantly says, "We built cars to sell, without even thinking that some day you would restore it."  So far, the model specific website for that car has identified several dozen bolt head markings for the same application. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes but none of those bolts were installed by a dealer and sourced from the local hardware store. They were all installed at the factory thus "factory authorized". There is no disputing that there were differences at the factory. The point is the rule is "As the dealer might have prepared the car for the purchaser using factory authorized accessories, not accessories the dealer sold on his own.rized".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I read the other part of his statement. The first part of the General Policy should always be displayed with the qualifying portion as well.

The part about the purists not vapor locking smacks very much of him being okay with modifications. If he is then he should not be implying that the rest of us should. Like I said, the rules have not changed. If they do many "purists" will ditch the AACA like rats jumping off of a sinking ship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...