Acceptable modifications?

[JV Puleo]

Rather than hijack another thread I have this question to ask…

There is plenty of talk here about “modifications”, another word (like "classic") that appears to have little or no actual meaning regarding antique cars. I think we can all agree that putting a modern drive train or AC in a pre-war car is a modification but what about all the little things (and some major ones) that virtually everyone does. In this sense I feel that the “just as it came from the factory” rule is unrealistic. It may be applicable to cars from the 50s, 60s and 70s (none of which interest me) but it is virtually impossible with pre-war cars and gets harder the earlier the cars get.

 

There is a general acceptance of all sorts of modifications…aluminum pistons rather than iron, modern bearings and seals, altered rear-end ratios or overdrives…the list goes on and on. How about powder coating…and all cars (except maybe Fords) prior to about 1925 were brush painted. Does anyone do that now? Instead we get color/clear coat super shiny finishes that are no more authentic than the lacquer used in the late 20s and 30s (which is authentic for cars of that period but is seldom seen today).

 

Some of these things are necessary…materials used then simply aren‘t available and we have safety considerations (like directional lights) that need to be addressed but it is hypocritical to say our cars aren’t “modified”…they nearly all are.

Edited July 19 by JV Puleo (see edit history)

[John_S_in_Penna]

Are you asking for a particular car of yours,

or to start a discussion?  If so, which car? 

[Terry Bond]

Acceptable to who and under what circumstances? Judging? Touring? Cruising at the local shopping center parking lot?

Be a bit more specific if possible.

Thanks

Terry

[Fordy]

The realistic outlook is that no car older than a few years is "as it left the factory". There are parts that inevitably get replaced with non-OEM, wear and tear sets in and things loosen up. So, unless a car has been put in a cocoon, never driven or used since day dot it will no longer be "original". 

Some "purists" consider that a car that is barely holding together with tatty upholstery and rust, bowing exhaust smoke everywhere is best left alone because "it's still original" - yet they happily put "new" air in the tyres.

Others will get a car, strip it and reassemble the lot again with every part painted with no flaws and all the flats on the hex section of bolts lined up in the same plane so "it's visually appealing" - not even a Rolls Royce leaves the factory with the level of detail that some will apply - yet they will say "its original".

I know of a few vehicles whilst outwardly "correct" in appearance are running Japanese 5 speed gearboxes and swapped out rear ends and brakes. Their owners say "its original".

Me? I will get it going with as close to what was meant to be there but adapt and modify or make where there is no really economical option. I will paint it to a colour that pleases my eye and not forensically sniff out a fleck to have analysed and reproduced. Modern materials - you bet! just try get the "correct" asbestos type brake and clutch facings now with all the OH&S mumbo jumbo around the stuff.

Each to their own - just don't turn your nose up or denigrate what others do as there is a place for each. If someone takes ownership down the track sometime and the vehicle offends their ideal of what it should be then they can choose to do what they want with it. 

I won't tell anyone what church to attend, what clothes to wear, not to colour their hair, get tattoos or piercings, who to vote for etc. etc. Yes, I have opinions, but they remain that - my opinions, so as to my cars, anyone else's opinion is wasted on me.

Steve

[ABear]

 

This ought to be interesting..

[31nash880]

Already have a drink and feet propped up. Fireworks coming.

[zdillinger]

I'm one of those "purists" that everyone is always talking about. I believe a car should have its original drivetrain and factory styled body if at all possible and, if not, at least the correct engine from the same year/make. I'm wholly uninterested in modified cars with "crate motors" or other obvious modifications, etc. and will walk past them at a show no matter what the title or owner pretends the car is. I had a guy try to tell me his "Packard" was better than my '39. He was an insulting little man in general but he took great offense when I told him he had a pickup truck that a blind man had crudely grafted the sad remnants of a Packard onto. Ridiculous vehicle made by a ridiculous "builder". I wouldn't have normally been so candid with him but he was a little s%$% who I was happy to insult.

 

That said, I have no problem with safety modifications. Turn signals and brake lights if done tastefully to jive with the whole composition of the car. Seat belts. Likewise, I have no problem with modern materials in place of period-correct ones in most cases as long as they don't alter the overall composition of the vehicle, especially in cases where the original material is no longer available or hazardous to one's health, such as the replacement of plate glass with modern safety glass.

Edited July 19 by zdillinger (see edit history)

[ABear]

Hmm.. Wonder what the "purists" would say about cars being "rebodied"? It was a common "thing" many years ago when wealthy families out grew their car, they simply had it rebodied.. Many makes and models of vehicles got that treatment..

 

Here is one example that still exists today..

 

https://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z10192/huselton-model-40.aspx

 

"Edgar's first car, his two-seater, remained with him his entire life. It was his daily driver, and in competition, for many years. After he married and had five children, he extended and re-bodied the car into the seven passenger tourer that it is today. The car remained in the family, passing from father to son to grandson. The car was donated by B.C. Huselton III (the grandson) in 1984, to the city of Butler, PA, with the instructions that the members of the Butler Old Stone House Region of the Antique Automobile Club of America would care, maintain, and store the car."

 

[Grimy]

Generally speaking and not seeking Ultimate Truth, "original" means all the factory finishes and upholstery as applied by the factory are present and are as old as the vehicle, and "authentic" means that factory colors and materials and finishes have been pretty faithfully replicated.

 

As the old Jesuit used to tell me, "Young man, define your terms!"

[Peter Gariepy]

Acceptable to who?

 

1. Acceptable to AACA, its judging system, and this forum?

 

"The objective of AACA judging is to evaluate an antique vehicle, which has been restored to the same state as the dealer could have prepared the vehicle for delivery to the customer. This includes any feature, option or accessory shown in the original factory catalog, parts book, sales literature, or company directives for the model year of the vehicle. AACA accepts motorized vehicles 25 years old or older, which were built in factories and specifically designed and manufactured for transportation use on public roadways and highways."

 

Sure, a few modifications inevitably will slip by.  Personal preference, safety, convenience, and availability of parts/materials, are all valid reasons to not be authentic.

As long as the modifications don't challenge the expectations of the AACA judging system then go for it.

 

2. Acceptable to yourself, your friends/neighbors/family/guys at the local cruise-in? Do what you want! It's a free country. 

Paint it purple. Bolt on a blower. Chrome EVERYTHING! Add dingleballs to the rear window. Go crazy.

Just don't be upset if doesn't judge well at an AACA-judged event.

 

Life is too short to overthink it.

 

 

 

 

[JV Puleo]

To answer a few questions...

No, I'm not thinking of a particular car. My 1910 Mitchell is heavily "modified" in the sense that I've re-made just about every mechanical part and changed quite a few of them with improved materials and , quite literally, fixed much of the shoddy work done by the original factory. I can't see replicating poor workmanship just because that was the way the factory did it.

 

I have no interest in judging or touring but that doesn't change much. Many, if not most "show cars" have been modified in some way. The thought for this post came to me when thinking of how many times I've heard how a car is "just as it came from the factory" when, in fact, practically none of them are. I really don't care what anyone does with their car nor am I interested in what anyone thinks of mine but I am bothered by a claim that clearly isn't true 99% of the time.

[Peter Gariepy]

10 minutes ago, JV Puleo said:

...I am bothered by a claim that clearly isn't true 99% of the time.

 

Unless a car was hermetically sealed the day it left the factory, you’re technically correct.

 

Cars “restored to the same state as the dealer could have prepared the vehicle for delivery to the customer” match the spirit and goals of the AACA and this forum. Anything beyond that is splitting hairs.

[Laughing Coyote]

I see your point. Unless you were there to purchase the car from the dealer new and put it in storage for x amount of years and pull it back out than you can say it came that way from the factory. Anymore to find any car that hasn't been tinkered on or altered even in a minor way is just about impossible. Things get changed over time on vehicles by PO's, it can range from repairs that are either done correctly with repair manuals and OEM stuff or a quick repair that just works and has stood the tests of time. The things you are doing to your car still look period correct and like you said done with more modern materials and better craftsmanship. Which intern will get you a better driving and running car down the road. To me if a car looks period correct (paint colors, interior, wheels, etc.) than that is about as close as you would get other than being bought new from the dealer.

[CChinn]

I have cars on both ends of the spectrum of this discussion. I like them both as they fulfill everything I am looking for in this hobby. The main objective for me is to drive them which I do every day. One is an AACA HPOF Original, the other I would never even dare take to an AACA sponsored event. While the exterior looks authentic, the engine and transmission are from a different era and make. It doesn’t matter to me since I enjoy them both and I get lots of thumbs up when I drive them. The hobby is more than shows and judging, although there is nothing wrong with that and I participate in that part of the hobby as well. It just doesn’t dictate what cars I like and what I do with them

Edited July 19 by CChinn (see edit history)

[Ben Bruce aka First Born]

 

 LOL!

  We all tend to forget, I believe,  which sand box we are playing in sometimes. And the owner of said sand box gets to make the rules.

    

 I understand, I THINK,  where JV is coming from and what he is saying. But, like Peter said, splitting hairs.  I go along with Fordy's last paragraph.

 

  My sand box is pretty forgiving.  Main rule???   HAVE FUN!

 

  Ben

[kar3516]

My opinion on Ranking Levels of Pre-War modification:

1.  Internal/invisible mechanical changes/upgrades to improve safety, reliability, driveability, etc - no problem!

2. Externally visible OEM mechanical upgrades (eg downdraft carb and flipped intake manifold, for one) - maybe a problem depending on your AACA event and/or audience.

3. Externally visible non OEM mechanical upgrades (eg drivetrain)- outside the scope of any AACA gathering).

4.  Externally visible non OEM colors, finishes, materials, wheels, details  changes and especially when tasteless and combined with 3 above - worst offense to any AACA event or audience.

 

I’m sure everyone has their own opinion and could add to the list

[JV Puleo]

3 hours ago, ABear said:

Hmm.. Wonder what the "purists" would say about cars being "rebodied"? It was a common "thing" many years ago when wealthy families out grew their car, they simply had it rebodied.. Many makes and models of vehicles got that treatment..

While I'm sure I don't qualify as a purist I would say that any rebody done during the regular working life of the car should be considered "original." Heck, RR of America did it themselves and, as you've said, it was commonplace before WWI for wealthy people to have an expensive chassis rebodied to bring it up to date. I don't think it has any effect on value and is an entirely different thing than taking 20s sedan and making it into a roadster in the 1980s.

[JV Puleo]

4 hours ago, zdillinger said:

I'm one of those "purists" that everyone is always talking about. I believe a car should have its original drivetrain and factory styled body if at all possible and, if not, at least the correct engine from the same year/make. I'm wholly uninterested in modified cars with "crate motors" or other obvious modifications, etc. and will walk past them at a show no matter what the title or owner pretends the car is. I had a guy try to tell me his "Packard" was better than my '39. He was an insulting little man in general but he took great offense when I told him he had a pickup truck that a blind man had crudely grafted the sad remnants of a Packard onto. Ridiculous vehicle made by a ridiculous "builder". I wouldn't have normally been so candid with him but he was a little s%$% who I was happy to insult.

 

That said, I have no problem with safety modifications. Turn signals and brake lights if done tastefully to jive with the whole composition of the car. Seat belts. Likewise, I have no problem with modern materials in place of period-correct ones in most cases as long as they don't alter the overall composition of the vehicle, especially in cases where the original material is no longer available or hazardous to one's health, such as the replacement of plate glass with modern safety glass.

I'm in agreement with you. I too would walk right past the crate engined car no matter how well done it was. Since I started this I'll add that my own rule is that I try to keep all the changes in line with the working life of the car. In my case, since it's a 1910 car (and cars of that period had a very short working life) I try not to do anything that falls outside the 1915/1916 time frame but it would be disingenuous to say these aren't "modifications" or that it could have been delivered new that way.

[ABear]

3 hours ago, JV Puleo said:

While I'm sure I don't qualify as a purist I would say that any rebody done during the regular working life of the car should be considered "original." Heck, RR of America did it themselves and, as you've said, it was commonplace before WWI for wealthy people to have an expensive chassis rebodied to bring it up to date. I don't think it has any effect on value and is an entirely different thing than taking 20s sedan and making it into a roadster in the 1980s.

Sounds a lot like "back pedaling" to me..

 

Rebody or rework isn't what it was when "it left the factory" the first time..

 

Purists motto is "everything must be the same as it was when it left the factory"..

 

The question is, which time?

 

Not to mention, was not unusual to send vehicles back to the factory to have upgrades done. Back then vehicles were evolving fast, so the next yr modifications like bigger engine/more HP and styling changes were often done..

 

Cars evolve, changes happen..

 

Back to the regularly scheduled programming

 

[Billy Kingsley]

Since I care mostly about the outward looks (design) rather than the mechanical, as long as it runs I really don't care what's under the hood. (Or seat for you pioneer era owners!) If the body and interior look right, that's what I care about. 

[Billy Kingsley]

I need to correct myself. I'm active on a lot of El Camino groups on Facebook and it drives me nuts when someone gets one and instantly wants to do an LS swap. So I guess I do care. 

[EmTee]

To me, the restoration should be at least 'factory appearing'.  The materials and application method might be modern, but the result should look authentic to what the factory would have delivered.  Things like aluminum pistons, buried inside the engine block, don't bother me and if it makes the car more likely to be driven, then I'm all for it.  Safety items as stated by others, should not be a factor as long as the implementation looks like it could have been delivered that way originally.

[chistech]

I am a person who prefers to try and be as close to original as I can. There are things that we just can’t get anymore with many materials being replaced by something different. While i always do research and try to do my best, there are times I have to use what’s now available. I’ve made molds for rubber parts that we cast in urethane. I’ve used stainless steel cast handles in place of chromed pot metal, etc. I simply try to be as original as I can. Correct colors, chrome only where it should be, proper upholstery materials, roofing, etc., are my guidelines. If I can restore a car to stay in my guidelines I feel I did the car and the restoration justice. When I see obvious things that don’t belong on other cars and the owner is making reason by saying it was listed as a replacement part (where they are not necessarily wrong) but it was available 10+ years after the car was originally made, it doesn’t fly with me. On the cars that were rebodied, most those were done at authorized shops and licensed body makers who specialized in repurposing a car during its early, initial use I have my own way of classifying them. Those cars have a different originality but I don’t see them as not have some originality. If a car was put together with all spare parts from different years or models, while it still is considered an antique, I don’t believe I would call it original but call it an assembled from parts car. This doesn’t apply to a car getting new fenders or different parts to repair damaged parts. 

[Sidemount33]

Apart from AACA standards, I suppose it depends on what the car means to you, personally, and how far down the rabbit hole you want to go in the pursuit of "total authenticity" (in whatever way you choose to define those words). 

 

A few years ago, I wrote an article which was published in the Buick Bugle about a friend's long restoration of two 1952 Buick Super Woody Estate wagons. Rob (the owner) went to the trouble of reproducing the water-transfer decal that went on the bottom of the Selectronic radio case - no one will EVER see it, unless they take the radio out of the dash. But that was just something he was able to do, so he did. 

 

Overkill? Sure - it didn't make the car run any better, or cause the three remaining AM stations to come in any more clearly. But is it a nice little finishing touch and hidden detail? Absolutely, and something that gives him a bit of extra pride in his restoration. 

 

Below is a pic from a local magazine story which featured the car. The pic is when we took it to the 2018 "World of Wheels" show in Calgary. 

 

 

Edited July 26 by Sidemount33 (see edit history)

[BobinVirginia]

I’d install a flux capacitor on my Haynes to travel back to 1921 for parts but, it won’t achieve the 88 mph needed. 
https://www.oreillyauto.com/flux-capacitor

Edited July 25 by BobinVirginia (see edit history)

[nsbrassnut]

I like to aim for near factory condition when restoring mine as a place to start. My preference is pre-42 and down to brass era. The farther back you go, sometimes the greater need for some level of "modern equivalent" replacement.

 

So yes, aluminum pistons over cast iron when replacements are needs. Wheel and/or axle bearing updated replacements, with adapters if needed, when the originals are are worn out and no replacements are available (or were a poor design to start with). Basic safety features for visibility, like brake lights and/or turn signals when they weren't originally available.

 

I would like to try to experience what the car was like to drive and operate when it was new. Again as a starting point. If I really want to drive it and if some things don't do well in today's world. Then sometimes some upgrades like improved brakes and lighting are going to be considered. But at the same time, trying to keep it suttle and in keeping with the period where possible.

[edinmass]

I won’t opine…….im fairly sure everyone here knows where I stand. 😎

[JV Puleo]

I started this topic more out of concern for the inherent hypocrisy in saying any machine is "just as it came from the factory" when this is realistically not possible. I speak here of pre-war cars and brass cars. I presume that it might be a lot easier to achieve when a car is only 30 or 40 or even 50 years old. In my own case, I've been wrestling with a car that the factory took every imaginable shortcut with in order to keep the price down. I didn't know that until I started taking things to pieces and repairing them and I admit I'd never come across that problem before. (For example...when I made the valve cages I measured one and made the parts to those specs only to find out only one fit properly. The holes for the studs were not uniform for all four cages...in fact the factory just put big oversize holes in the castings so their sloppy drilling still worked.)  I  don't begin to have the option of getting another car. This one, as bad as it was, was a stretch that was only possible because I inherited a little money when my father died so the choice I had was to fix the problems in a manner I felt was better (even if the factory didn't do it that way) or give up. I might add that replicating poorly made parts is often harder than remaking them out of suitable materials. Given a choice, I'd have preferred to buy a much better machine.

 

Fortunately, the entire "judging" thing leaves me cold so whether or not the AACA approves of my methods is inconsequential. I do think that it would be realistic to admit that certain things aren't possible and make a list of acceptable modifications. Engine parts like pistons come to mind as well as replacing pot metal with aluminum or stainless.

 

I've a pretty good idea where Ed is on this though I'd still be interested to hear his thoughts. For my part, even with a poorly made car I don't think the design is inherently bad. It's pedestrian but the problems were in the execution rather than the design.

[EmTee]

9 hours ago, JV Puleo said:

I presume that it might be a lot easier to achieve when a car is only 30 or 40 or even 50 years old.

Actually, restoring or maintaining cars currently 25 ~ 35 years old is becoming a challenge as the engine and chassis electronics used in them begin to fail.  Electronic dashboards, ECMs and emission-related hardware will require low-level repair or substitution with more modern 'functional replacements' in order to keep them usable.  I see this becoming a bigger problem for the typical classic/antique car owner than sourcing mechanical or trim parts for older cars.

[Paul Dobbin]

Things like bearing, seals, wiring, aluminum pistons, transmission gearing and all the unseen stuff is OK even with the strictest

of Judges.  As well as things like safety glass, stop lights and seat belts can be excused if done in a tasteful manor, but a V8 in

a Model A is a no no.  But to me a Model B engine in a Model A is perfectly OK.   Most people wouldn't know the difference if

they were looking right at it.   If the judge spots it, that's fine too,  Because that's what they're supposed to do.

If I had a Model A, I'd go for the Model B engine for the balanced crankshaft and the 50% increase in HP.   This is the reason I

don't get judged unless it's the Driver Participation Class.   (My 2 Cents worth)

[George Cole]

On 7/26/2024 at 7:42 AM, EmTee said:

Actually, restoring or maintaining cars currently 25 ~ 35 years old is becoming a challenge as the engine and chassis electronics used in them begin to fail.  Electronic dashboards, ECMs and emission-related hardware will require low-level repair or substitution with more modern 'functional replacements' in order to keep them usable.  I see this becoming a bigger problem for the typical classic/antique car owner than sourcing mechanical or trim parts for older cars.

It's not so much a question of 'if' the electronics will fail, the question is 'when'...as sooner or later they will.

[TTR]

On 7/25/2024 at 7:00 PM, JV Puleo said:

I started this topic more out of concern for the inherent hypocrisy in saying any machine is "just as it came from the factory" when this is realistically not possible. I speak here of pre-war cars and brass cars. I presume that it might be a lot easier to achieve when a car is only 30 or 40 or even 50 years old. In my own case, I've been wrestling with a car that the factory took every imaginable shortcut with in order to keep the price down. I didn't know that until I started taking things to pieces and repairing them and I admit I'd never come across that problem before. (For example...when I made the valve cages I measured one and made the parts to those specs only to find out only one fit properly. The holes for the studs were not uniform for all four cages...in fact the factory just put big oversize holes in the castings so their sloppy drilling still worked.)  I  don't begin to have the option of getting another car. This one, as bad as it was, was a stretch that was only possible because I inherited a little money when my father died so the choice I had was to fix the problems in a manner I felt was better (even if the factory didn't do it that way) or give up. I might add that replicating poorly made parts is often harder than remaking them out of suitable materials. Given a choice, I'd have preferred to buy a much better machine.

 

Fortunately, the entire "judging" thing leaves me cold so whether or not the AACA approves of my methods is inconsequential. I do think that it would be realistic to admit that certain things aren't possible and make a list of acceptable modifications. Engine parts like pistons come to mind as well as replacing pot metal with aluminum or stainless.

 

I've a pretty good idea where Ed is on this though I'd still be interested to hear his thoughts. For my part, even with a poorly made car I don't think the design is inherently bad. It's pedestrian but the problems were in the execution rather than the design.

IMO, most of what you write above applies to more than 99.99% of production cars ever made, not to mention, majority or perhaps all of the past PB BoS winning cars originally were likely far cry from the detail, fit & finish than they appeared decades later on the lawn. 

 

Also, I don't support your presumption of 30-50 (or so) year old cars being "a lot easier" to (authentically) restore than majority of pre-war or brass-era cars.

For example, vast majority of post-war cars are made of over 100.000 individual bits and pieces, all of which require reconditioning, repairing or replacement during "restoration".

How many pieces are most brass-era cars made of ?

 

Bottom line is that just about anything can be made "just as it came from the factory", but it often requires more time, thought and $$'s than most can fathom or afford, not to mention, wouldn't bring home the top trophies/trinkets at PB, et. al.

[JV Puleo]

It isn't a question of how many pieces there are but whether any even survive. I'm sure there are a lot more pieces to a modern car but they made a lot more of them and more recently too. In any case, I fully admit that I know very little about that aspect of the hobby. I have no interest at all in 98 percent of cars made after about 1930 and  none at all in post war cars. This is why I won't wast my time with any of the local shows...there simply isn't anything there I'd cross the street to look at.

 

In any case, I did not say it was easier...I said that the practical application of the "just as it came from the factory" goal "may be easier" or at least more attainable.

Edited July 29 by JV Puleo (see edit history)

[Sparkydave]

For what it's worth, I haven't made too many modifications to my MG.  The original electronic ignition gave up the ghost long ago, and by all accounts, it was pretty much doomed to fail.  I replaced it with an aftermarket Pertronix module, but kept the original wiring harness so if I ever come across a functional OE distributor, it would drop right in.  The quirky electro-mechanical instrument voltage stabilizer also gave up the ghost, so I had no fuel gauge.  I built a 10 volt voltage regulator to replace it, though I see Moss Motors now carries a solid state replacement for it.  It's out of sight behind the dash, and I just mounted it next to the dead voltage stabilizer.

 

The Lincoln is new to me, and dad kept it pretty original for the most part.  I've already had folks suggest I should change it to a 12 volt, negative ground system, and my answer is usually "Why?".  If it ain't broke, don't fix it.  I can still get 6 volt batteries and lights for it, and the 6 volt system has been working for 77 years.  Dad did make some discreet changes to keep up with modern standards though, like he coated the rims so it can run tubeless tires, he changed the turn signal and taillight system so instead of a single brake light in the center of the trunk, the taillights function as brake lights too.  Ironically, when third brake lights became standard in the late 1980s, his old Lincoln already had one.  He also added reverse lights and tucked them just inside the rear bumper.  Unless you were an expert, you would not know they aren't original since they blend in nicely.  He rigged a brake light switch from a Corvair on the firewall, so it gets activated by the shift lever when it goes in reverse.  Again, unless you were an expert, it doesn't look out of place.  He also changed the original vacuum-powered windshield wipers to use an electric motor from a 1950s Chrysler, and used the Chrysler wiper switch.  Blends in perfectly with the dashboard though, and I found he saved the old parts so it could be restored to original.  I don't think the car is ever going to be a Pebble Beach show winner though, so I think his changes were very reasonable and neatly done, even if a Lincoln expert might spot those changes.

[CHuDWah]

On 7/25/2024 at 7:37 PM, BobinVirginia said:

I’d install a flux capacitor on my Haynes to travel back to 1921 for parts but, it won’t achieve the 88 mph needed. 
https://www.oreillyauto.com/flux-capacitor

 

Do you have a source for the plutonium required to run that flux capacitor?  Wait, don't answer that unless you want visits from the FBI, CIA and/or Men In Black. 🤣

[JACK M]

16 minutes ago, CHuDWah said:

 

Do you have a source for the plutonium required to run that flux capacitor?  Wait, don't answer that unless you want visits from the FBI, CIA and/or Men In Black. 🤣

I think they run on banana peels and old beer cans these days.

[CHuDWah]

4 hours ago, JACK M said:

I think they run on banana peels and old beer cans these days.

.

Quote

 

Plutonium is required to properly operate the flux capacitor.

Plutonium is used by the onboard nuclear reactor which then powers the flux capacitor to provide the needed 1.21 gigawatts of electrical power.

Plutonium not available at O'Reilly Auto Parts. Please contact your local plutonium supplier.

 

 

Flux Capacitor 😉

[ron hausmann]

All,

     I posted a similar question in the Judging Forum and surprisingly got no answers!

     For 1920’s cars, there is a tendency recently to “rebody” sedans, (which would be worth tens of thousands of dollars restored), into roadsters and Tourings (worth six figures). Especially high end orphan marques. And then trying to get those rebodied cars eligible for Zenith Awards.

     
    To me, that seems BS. I thought the Zenith was supposed to be authentic.

     I’ve been told that this is ok under AACA rules. 
     Can some of you experts please weigh in ????
     Ron Hausmann P.E.
  

[J.H.Boland]

Many of you have seen this little truck on the forums before. I knew when I bought this '21 Chevy that it was a converted touring. During the early years of the restoration process, I acquired all the missing touring car components. About half way in, I decided to leave it as a pickup. It was converted within a few years from new, as a means of still being able to use it after a fire charred the rear of the body. It was carefully done with attention to detail, including fitting a roadster top and hand built box. Adding the John Deere decals has increased its' appeal to a whole different crowd. Is it eligible for judging ? Not likely, but I don't really care !

[Ben Bruce aka First Born]

50 minutes ago, J.H.Boland said:

 

 

   Is it eligible for judging ? Not likely, but I don't really care !

 Good for you!!    Judging is OVERRATED!

 

  I like that.

 

  Ben