QUIT USING NEW OLD STOCK

[lrlforfun]

OK Lamarr: Here is my request.  I'm hopin' you can fill it.  The request?  Please have people quit using the term "New Old Stock" on this forum.  Here's my reasoning......

 

1. If it's old....it ain't new.  It's only new if it was recently manufactured.

 

2. People have unreasonable expectations. So many think they are getting a product in the same condition as if they were to purchase it from a store during a time when the product was indeed recently manufactured. Not necessarily true.

 

3.  Father time has done his magic on me, the next guy and the Universe.  A bunch of old parts un-used can be anything but perfect.  Chrome sittin' on the shelf can be pitted. Soft parts can get brittle and of course, oxidation never sleeps.

 

4. Safety.  How'd you like to rebuild a carb with an un-used old kit and it leak and the car catch fire?  How 'bout un-used brake parts that fail due to the fact the components  deteriorated from sitting?  It can easily happen!  I'm sure the folks reading this paragraph can add to the list.

 

5.  Industry standards have adopted the term New Old Stock.  I suggest it is misleading and our hobby has made a  big mistake in adapting it's usage. My suggestion is to make a rule ON THIS FORUM  that if a person wants to sell a product that is un-used they call it "UN-USED old stock.  They can also describe it's condition to their prospect.

 

6. This forum carries a lotta pull and I believe that if you pull the trigger on the re-naming other forums will consider might just follow suit.   

 

Thanks for your consideration,  Mitch

[RivNut]

So to simplify matters do we now type in UUOS?

[dship]

The "New" in NOS means "Not Used".  It was never intended to mean "recent".

[NTX5467]

I'll concur with many of Mitch's orientations.  There are some things which age on the shelf (i.e., paper gaskets dry out, oils in the rubber items evaporate out . . . even when packaged in plastic or similar).  Some of these things can be still used with the correct care and in some situations, BUT it's best to seek out the newest or most-recently-produced item (at a reasonable price) than to sink "gold' into the same thing but "original stock".  UNLESS . . . the item you are purchasing has the correct date code and other factory productions marks and such needed for a full-correct-numbers match restoration.

 

In the realm of body parts, finding a NEW OEM fender or similar can be better than a non-licensed replacement fender or other body panel.  Correct fit/finish should be better, but it just depends upon where it comes from.  OEM-licensed sheet metal should have "factory fit and function."

 

ONE caution is to really KNOW what the part/item In "NOS" really looks like!  Any part that sits in inventory for a long time might not  be what the box claims it is!  Somebody might have swapped something incorrect into that box for the part they needed many years ago.  Then it was returned to the seller who then sold it off to somebody else.  All "NOS", but not correct.

 

NTX5467

[SpecialEducation]

Some parts that may be found in true NOS condition can be great (like the afore mentioned body parts), while some NOS parts I wouldn't touch with a 10ft pole. Obviously polymers don't last long (shelf life of maybe 7 to 10 years) and some are junk just because metal technologies are much improved using modern materials. I wouldn't use a set of NOS bearings or rings in an engine overhaul unless there were absolutely no alternatives. 

[Matt Harwood]

While I'm often frustrated by the lack of precision in the hobby's language ("restored" does not mean a brand new small block Chevy engine in your Ford roadster), I think the meaning of "NOS" or "New Old Stock" is such that everyone in the hobby knows what it means. It is not a term that is abused like "restored," "classic," or "original,", but rather one that can potentially be naively mis-interpreted as the OP suggests. However, unless you're a total rookie, I don't think you'll be swindled by someone using that term to describe a part that was made in-period and never installed or used on a car. Everyone pretty much agrees on the definition of NOS. Nobody's buying an NOS fender for their 1940 Buick thinking that GM just stamped it last week because of the word "new" in its description.

 

Now the condition of NOS parts is something else, but that's probably not something that can be remedied by changing the terminology we use to describe vintage parts that have not been used. I wouldn't use an NOS carburetor kit, but I understand perfectly that it is a carburetor kit that was made in-period and never used. There is exactly zero confusion over what it is when it is described as "NOS." It is still technically new and unused, but it was made a long time ago. No confusion, especially not with the weight of decades of proper use behind the term.

 

I think this particular issue is a solution in search of a problem.

[lrlforfun]

OK: 

 

Ed.    How about UOS? Simple enough.

 

Ship. It needs clarification.  Who knows how this inaccurate phrase came about? 

 

Matt H.  Unused would simplify the confusion.

 

AND....a similar deal in which consumers are given another ride to where they really don't know where they're going is "Salvage Title".  When a title is branded by most  states it doesn't say why. It just says ....red flag.  This really doesn't help the consumer that much. Maybe it's better than nuthin' but all in all it's way too vague.   Mitch

[Grimy]

An uphill battle, to be sure:  I've been looking at stuff termed "NOS" for 55 years, and that's a lot of custom and tradition to overcome....

[carbking]

Definately a "slippery slope" when trying to undo many years of use.

 

And, if a problem, one that will eventually go away on its own, as new old stock parts are disappearing every day.

 

And to counter the point made in the original post: No, I would not wish to use a new old stock carburetor kit in its entirety; BUT most of a new old stock kit is much superior to the *&^%$#@ NEW *&^%$#@ currently being made on the other side of our planet! I would dislike very strongly being a part of diverting someone from superior parts (some of the new old stock) to new *&^%%$#@ !!!!!

 

Personally, I think a better plan is educate new enthusiasts to the true meaning and limitations of new old stock, and leave the existing term alone. I have had this discussion with "youngsters" (those younger than me  ) countless times in the past, and will continue to do so in the future.

 

My 2 cents.

 

Jon.

[jscheib]

I think it is too much water over the dam to change especially as this forum reaches such few people in the hobby , so to me NOS means never used old stock.  Gaskets and similar products should not be expected to be original and still be usable unless some sort of vacuum sealed and that would not be likely.  Also, one would expect probably some surface rust on unused parts.  And yes, some are still found.  As the saying goes, "buyer beware".

 

John

[billbuickgs]

Simply "Leave things alone !!!!. ITS A NEW PART, ITS AN OLD STOCK ITEM . and ITS NOT STOCKED BY THE DEALER !!!!

Again  NEW OLD STOCK     " NOS" 

Bill

[39BuickEight]

As stated in the opening post, industry standard is to use the term.  End of discussion.  If a person wants to they can take any term and define it into the ground, but to what end?  I mean, there are a million ways to define the term "features" when you take it out of a context.  Are we going to drive it into the mud when discussing the HOPF class?  No, it's done.  We use the term and we know what it means.

 

Words.

 

You cant save people from themselves if they want to use a bad NOS part.  Some NOS parts are essentially useless.  Some are golden.

 

Examine the old part.  If you want it at the offered price, buy it.  The way it is advertised is essentially irrelevant anyway because you really never know what something is until you examine it.  It's no different than buying al old car, old jacket, old bicycle, or old anything.

[avgwarhawk]

NOS indicates to me it is stock that was never used and considered new.  Does not indicate the actual condition of the item but it is inferred the item is in grade A condition.   If we are talking hard parts(metal products) many understand these items endure the test of time.  Rubber and plastic products not so much.  

[NC-car-guy]

Well if one wants to use NOS rubber brake lines, I guess Darwin gets his way.   Sorry as the safety and environmental manager in a major auto parts factory, I am bitter and get tired of all the extra work engineering around stupid.

[60FlatTop]

Change it. Most will call it the same or "what they used to call NOS" I used to be a sailor. When I want to sound sailorish I think "ummm, left, oh, that's port." Just an added step.

 

The whole Darwin thing entertains me. If someone is beyond reproductive age and dies from a Darwin folly does it still count? I figure only the young ones are eligible.

 

Along the same lines, I tell people I am the genetic culmination of all my ancestors under 30 years old. Those old wise ones weren't reproducing.... too old.....too wise.

 

Oh, the first engineers had just designed the first foolproof device. They celebrated around a camp fire and the leader channeled the gods to ask their favor on the job. Since zero did not exist yet, he threw nine sticks onto the ground in front of the fire. The sticks fell into a sardonic message from above- WTF

 

Back to the drawing board.

 

NOS, huh.

Bernie

[lrlforfun]

OK Buick People: So by changing the terminology, it would also send a signal that the old car community is looking after itself. Change can be good. In this case, very good. How many more reasons do I need to give?

 

 

LET'S DO IT!   Mitch

[carbking]

Why not each of us use the term as we see fit.

 

I am a diehard and will continue to call new old stock............new old stock or NOS.

 

As for changes being good: About 35 years ago, a really close  friend was the owner of an import car dealership that sold several brands of import vehicles. One, known for its reliability, was having significant reliability issues at the time. My friend, his parts people, and lead mechanics all attended a new sales seminar where a company rep talked about all of the significant improvements in the new models. My friends shop foreman, and one of the better mechanics I have ever had the priviledge of knowing, finally commented "Huh, xxxxx doesn't make improvements, they just make changes!". The comment almost brought down the house.

 

Sorry Mitch, I honestly do not see this change as an improvement.

 

Jon.

 

 

[Bhigdog]

1 hour ago, lrlforfun said:

How many more reasons do I need to give?

 

1. There's more important things to waste time on........................

2. The vast majority know what NOS means...............

3. UOS vs NOS.........A turd by any other name is still a turd.......................

4. This is a solution looking for a problem................Bob

 

Edited May 11, 2017 by Bhigdog (see edit history)

[Ben Bruce aka First Born]

3 hours ago, lrlforfun said:

OK Buick People: So by changing the terminology, it would also send a signal that the old car community is looking after itself. Change can be good. In this case, very good. How many more reasons do I need to give?

 

 

LET'S DO IT!   Mitch

 

  Nah!!!

 

  Ben

[MrEarl]

On 5/10/2017 at 9:56 PM, lrlforfun said:

OK Lamarr: Here is my request.  I'm hopin' you can fill it.  The request?  Please have people quit using the term "New Old Stock" on this forum. 

 

Mitch my friend, if you are serious about this then I am afraid I must disappoint you. This term has been used and abused throughout the world and for as long as I have been buying car parts and before and it is certainly beyond my pay grade or anybody else within the BCA or AACA to  make a ruling that the term NOS be forever abolished, even if we agreed with your reasoning.

But I do want to thank you for bringing up an always interesting subject that has been discussed more than once here before. Posts such as this are certainly educational to those who may not know the possible pitfalls of buying items sellers refer to as NOS. I have no problem with vendors using the term as I know what type of old parts are likely good and usable and what type of old parts to stay away from. It's the parts that were bad or didn't fit and were put back on the shelf  and sat for 50 years that are the problem. I suspect 99% of the members here are also wise to the term NOS and buy accordingly.

 

 

[Matt Harwood]

5 hours ago, lrlforfun said:

OK Buick People: So by changing the terminology, it would also send a signal that the old car community is looking after itself. Change can be good. In this case, very good. How many more reasons do I need to give?

 

 

LET'S DO IT!   Mitch

 

Huh? Are you reading the same discussion I am? You asked for opinions and you got them, all unanimously in favor of NOT changing the term NOS. There's exactly zero support for the idea here and I have not seen one compelling reason to change other than "someone might be really stupid and if they're really stupid, they might think that an old part is a new part because you guys are using a very common, decades-old definition that has the word NEW in it."

 

If people are dumb enough to think that the term "new old stock" means a brand new part recently made by the OEM for their vintage car, that's on them, not the rest of us who are using the term correctly and without confusion. Nobody's abusing the term and it has an accurate, established, and widely-known definition that isn't complicated. Nobody is using the term NOS to swindle people, and if they are misidentifying parts as NOS, that's on the buyer. But I don't see any advantage to changing the term just because someone, somewhere might get confused by what it means--they'll learn just like the rest of us did. This is like saying, "Let's stop calling it a left turn and instead refer to it as three right turns. It's more accurate that way."

 

Changing the way we do things so that stupid people don't suffer due to their stupidity isn't something I care to do. Stupidity has to learn from its mistakes or die trying.

Edited May 12, 2017 by Matt Harwood (see edit history)

[trimacar]

Matt: "Changing the way we do things so that stupid people don't suffer due to their stupidity isn't something I care to do. Stupidity has to learn from its mistakes or die trying. "

 

Matt, I agree with your viewpoint.  Changing the term NOS to anything else is meaningless, whatever the term might be, if one can't comprehend the intent then it's wasted effort.

 

Unfortunately, regarding your comment, technological change just reinforces stupidity.  Cashiers who can't make change until their register tells then what it is, that's one example.  As to cars, now the technology is here for "collision avoidance".  I'm sure in some cases that will be a life saver, but if stupid people would just quit tailgating, texting, and otherwise being brainless while driving, then collisions would drop dramatically.  I'm tailgated daily, and even had one driver yell at me that I'd get arrested for "impeding traffic" (I was driving the speed limit, God forbid).  Makes me want to have a bucket of paintballs in my console, to throw out the window backwards, but then I'd be the one in trouble....

 

One fun thing about this forum, you never know what topic might pop up to entertain and amuse!

[NTX5467]

Something I would NOT purchase "NOS" is rubber weatherstrips.  Other than the shelf-aging issues mentioned by myself and others, I found some weatherstrips for sale as "NOS" for sale on an internet sales website.  When I purchased one 30 years ago, while they were still available from the OEM, the part was rolled into a coil and put in a box (normal practice).  Although just a few years old, it would have taken about a week of "sitting out" to get the part to where it was useable in a reliable-sealing manner.  That was then!  Now, a similar part (packaged similarly) was listed at $150.00 where the one I purchased was closer to $40.00.  If it was hard to use back then, NO WAY would I purchase that "NOS" part now, especially for the elevated pricing and then expect it to work, perform, and last "as new".  The only way the particular NOS part might be of limited value would be as a pattern to find some newer rubber items to use in its place.

 

NTX5467

[PWB]

The term should have initiated as OLD - NEW STOCK. ONS!  

 

As is,  "Do you have any old new stock items?"

 

 

 

[60FlatTop]

Dropping NOS would make NORS more nebulous. How would you describe new stuff, not made by the original manufacturer of a vehicle, that had been languishing on shelves for decades, mainly due to its poor quality?

 

Anyone interested in a big box of Sosmetal NROS parts for their restoration?

 

Bernie

[NTX5467]

There's probably NO real "best answer" as it depends upon if you are the buyer or the seller.  To a seller of new parts, in the business at some point in the selling chain, it's "old stock" that wasn't or couldn't be sent back to where it came from, when it didn't sell.  Inventory control was not the best for some retailers.  All parts are implied to be "new" unless otherwise stated.

 

To the buyer seeking a better (allegedly, or OEM with the needed date code), it's still "old stock that is new", but the "new" description is important, so it gets to be "new old stock" or "new old replacement stock" (for non-OEM-sourced items).  The "old stock" part indicates it was more special and desirable AND usually worth more money, "A Find".

 

In any event, "old stock that is new, uninstalled", for certain parts, might not be the best part to purchase.  Knowing what doesn't deteriorate with time in a box on a shelf is important.  But you also have to understand that "rust" can still happen as there will be some machined surfaces which might have had assembly lube on them initially, but which has evaporated with time.  And, box/container condition can be important, too!  Those little pieces of cut, thin cardboard have their moisture control limits.

 

OEM date coded parts have to be dealt with as necessary . . . as to IF you really need them or not for what you're seeking to accomplish. You buy them, carefully spiff them back to "as new" condition, and install them on the vehicle.  In some judging classes, that date code can mean the difference between a first place award and not getting it.

 

Buying "NOS" does NOT universally mean it's the best part you need to buy, which some have learned the hard way.  Similar with "NORS" items, too, sometimes.  Many variable situations/orientations!

 

NTX5467

Edited May 21, 2017 by NTX5467 (see edit history)

[Pilgrim65]

Amusing read , 26 posts , a lot of views , some logical , some not.

no resolution , 

favourite quote  'a turd by any other name is still a turd!'

my opinion , term NOS , been used for to long , to many users , it's a fait accompli,  There is about as much chance of changing the term 'hamburger' as it is usually a beef burger ?

Edited May 21, 2017 by Pilgrim65 (see edit history)

[MrEarl]

26 minutes ago, Pilgrim65 said:

Amusing read , 26 posts , a lot of views , some logical , some not.

no resolution , 

favourite quote  'a turd by any other name is still a turd!'

my opinion , term NOS , been used for to long , to many users , it's a fait accompli,  There is about as much chance of changing the term 'hamburger' as it is usually a beef burger ?

 

That about sums it up Pilgrim, Thank You!!!

[old-tank]

2 hours ago, Pilgrim65 said:

Amusing read , 26 posts , a lot of views , some logical , some not.

no resolution , 

favourite quote  'a turd by any other name is still a turd!'

my opinion , term NOS , been used for to long , to many users , it's a fait accompli,  There is about as much chance of changing the term 'hamburger' as it is usually a beef burger ?

So now we should call it N-O-T?  I found out a long time ago that NOS stood for New Old Scat:  'NOS' grill for a 55 in original unopened box had severe casting defects...not good enough for a new car (or restored car), but good enough for a 5 year old one maybe.

[55 SURVIVOR]

I'm for leave it as is. N.O.S. I have bought many many N.O.S. body and trim parts when I did my 59 Plymouth. It is A standard term, and have got very good quality pieces,some still in factory wrap.As far as carb. parts, rubber, gaskets,etc. etc. etc. use your head!! Many parts I get CANNOT BE FOUND. And parts cars and junk yards good luck. Most are worse than what I have. I will always look for the N.O.S. term. And I don't need to hear "we're talking Buick not Mopars. It is the same across the board, I own both, when parts are scarce you get what you can. 99.9% of the time N.O.S. is better. alot of stuffs hide in the nooks, crannys. It was New, but Old Stocked never used is the way I see it. Just my thoughts.  Mark 

[60FlatTop]

42 minutes ago, old-tank said:

 'NOS' grill for a 55 in original unopened box had severe casting defects...not good enough for a new car (or restored car), but good enough for a 5 year old one maybe.

 

My Uncle Sam, yep I really had one, was a machinist for the Simplex Automobile Company. Then he moved on through the early auto industry and ended up with Chrysler for the introduction of the new Plymouth in 1928. He worked on the development of the Hotchkiss rear end which started the move away from torque tubes on low priced cars.

He told me that parts inspected by QC that were not high quality, but now scrap, were stored. Toward the end of the model year these "seconds" were used to get the last cars assembled. He warned me not to buy end of year production.

At the GM plant here in Rochester they sorted three grades of door lock; left hand, right hand, and scrap, in that descending quality. My personal experience is that seconds continue to go into the manufacturer's replacement parts stock when the cost justifies it.

In 1980 I bought what may have been the last '64 Riviera horn bar from stock. It was/is a very nice one. In that case production may have exceeded demand. In 1982 I painted my Riviera and factory ordered a NOS front fender script. New, in the box, it was awful. It looked like it was glass beaded and plated. I reused the old ones. It stayed in a parts locker and I showed it to quite a few people, then when Ebay came along I sold it.

 

I like the "use your head" idea. A couple of the traditional senses wouldn't hurt any. Especially touch. Being around car shows and cruise ins I can tell you for sure, touch, is the ONLY sense most people trust! Touch it like the rest of them. The last thing you want to do is take the conclusions of some old malcontent writing to an online forum. But my spelling and syntax is pretty good.

Bernie

[old-tank]

New Old Scrap...New Old Seconds

[Guest]

I bought a new old stock "NOS" radiator hose for my Pontiac  I knew it would be unusable but it provided me with an original hose to match up when looking for a modern replacement.  The NOS hose was as hard as a board.  I doubt if you could install it without breaking it but it suited my purpose exactly.  I see the seller still has some and is still selling them so I guess there are still people that need a sample when looking for a new hose.  If someone/anyone buys an 87 year old rubber hose and expects to use it on their car they deserve what they get and it is probably a reasonably priced lesson.  Caveat emptor.

[John_S_in_Penna]

I have seen the term "N.O.S." used in other hobbies,

with exactly the same meaning that we auto hobbyists know.

 

Trying to change the term would therefore be harder than you think,

and unnecessary.  Let the newcomers, unfamiliar with the term,

simply learn what it means.  

[55 SURVIVOR]

Bernie you sure know how to use your head!!!   Mark