UNDERCOATING & LOSS OF POINTS

[FireballV8]

Hi

I am working on a 55 Buick which has factory undercoating on the bottom of body pan and in the rear wheel wells, also in the inner panels of the body. That's why I think it was factory. In AACA judging does one loose points for undercoating? If so how many? When can undercoating be used? What years?

Thanks

steveclassic@earthlink.net

[DizzyDale]

Dear Fireball,Do your homework,check with the Buick club in regard to factory undercoating.If in fact it was applied at the factory you need to find out where on the chassis or underbody and go from there.AACA has NO problem with undercoating when used when and where the factory did.diz

[Shop Rat]

I forwarded this to Dave Berg and here is his answer. "Undercoating is permitted if it was done by the factory or done by the dealer but authorized by the factory as an available option. Documentation would be the key. Assuming that it was not then it would deducted for. How much of a deduction will depend largely on how much undercoating has been done. There is not set amount for the deduction. I have seen such deductions range from a couple of points to ten points in the past. A lot will depend on how strongly the chassis judge and team captain feel about it. best regards, dave"

So there you have his opinion on this.

[Jack Harlin]

HI

Most know by now I dont favor showing cars to be judged, but this ruling doesnt seem fair. The first thing Northern dealers did was undercoat them. They cant be metal worked till it is removed. What do you do with a replacement part, new or used not coated? Depending on brand undercoating, it be the wrong color.

Later on the material was changed also, so how do you match if if this is a point deductable area, like tires? Jack

[Shop Rat]

I think that this is one of those cases where if it was done as a factory authorized option, then you are not required to have it there if you don't want it. If it came from the factory that way and the documentation says it should be there, well then it should to be "right".

And as to exactly matching the undercoat, it is like tires. If you can not get the exact match then you go with the closest thing that looks right. We have a 1963 1/2 Ford Falcon "Sprint" convertible. The original size of tires on it t are no longer available as far as we can find. If we can not find a source for the correct ones we can get the next closest thing and not lose points as long as we can document that they can not be found.

I can certainly understand why people would not want to gob up parts with that goo if the car was not going to need that kind of protection from salt.

[Ron Green]

GM did undercoat parts of the undercarriage in the 50's. There is documentation showing and or stating this. It is hard to determine exactly what may have been undercoated. Typically checking out the marque clubs judging rules will give you accurate information as to what gets undercoated. It gets a little fuzzy depending on what type of GM vehicle as some manufactures show undercoating as a dealer installed option. So if you go by the AACA rule "as it left the factory" it could technically be a deduction.

My 55 Pontiac has undercoating and as far as I know has not been docked points as the POCI used to give you a copy of the scoring sheet, plus it got its AACA GN senior. I did show the AACA team captain the documentation when going for the junior, senior, etc. I also did a fair amount of research on this during my restoration. I think as long as the judges see that undercoating was available for your model year you will be fine.

If you go the undercoating route don't use that soft rubbery stuff. A body shop now has a harder type paint that looks like and functions like original undercoating. It doesn't pick up every piece of dust and dirt, plus water will roll off it rather then stain it. My 2 cents. Good luck.

[Guest]

Jack, you make an interesting point. In 1948 in Towson, Maryland, you didn't buy a new car from Hicks Chevrolet that didn't have dealer applied undercoating. It was standard. Now that was still in the early post WW II days when if you wanted a new car, you took it as the dealer supplied it. The manufacturer made the rules for the dealers and the dealership made the rules for the buyer, so "factory authorized" in those days could be a very flexible term. If the factory allowed the dealer to do it, then wasn't that authorization?

Now I'm sure GM and Chevrolet had no objection to this process, but was it officially manufacturer authorized? If the dealer got the material from GM, then I would say that it was factory authorized. If it came from local sources, then did GM recommend its application?

I offer these thoughts to further cloud the issue. Bear in mind that I have no personal interest in this issue one way or the other, as I do not have any undercoated cars to be judged nor am I any longer an active judge. But having previously judged for 34 years I DO have opinions.

hvs

[FireballV8]

Guys

Thanks for the answers, the car is a 55 Buick Super convertible and it has undercoating on it, I have it all disassembled, but I can't get the undercoating off of it. Whats weird is that the frame had no undercoating on it, only the bottom of the floor pan. Inside the trunk walls and rear wheel wells as well as the inner panel where the rear window slides in and out of.

How can I remove it or how can I reapply in some areas? The car has no floor rust anywhere so patch panels are not needed.

Thanks

[Jack Harlin]

Fireball

Unless there is a newer better way to remove it I dont know. If its the original asphalt type we heated with a tourch (carefull) & scraped it off with a putty knife. This was done for straightening & welding reasons, & would be painted, after repairing. Dont get it on bare skin, it sticks & burns. Jack

[Shop Rat]

Dealers put all kinds of stuff on cars that did not come from the factory. Case in point: We had a 2001 Chevy Tracker. We bought it with extra tint on the windows. The dealer had taken it to Ziebart and had it applied. It was listed on the window sticker. If the rule of "from the factory" or "provided by the dealer and authorized by the factory" was used, it would be points off when it would be shown years down the road if left on. But it came from the dealer with the extra tint and was listed as a dealer option. But you can bet it was not factory authorized.

[Guest]

Susan ~ I'm talking about antiques, not modern iron. What was done in the years when the cars we are now judging were built is what is under discussion.

hvs

[Guest]

Fireball ~ Interesting. I have a '55 Century hardtop which is undercoated in the same areas as your car. Mine was delivered new in Maryville, Tenn. Kinda makes me think some of this may have been on there from the factory.

The fact that there is no undercoating on the frame leads me to think that it was not dealer installed. They generally sprayed the stuff all over everything.

hvs

[Shop Rat]

Howard~I was just using that as an example of things that car dealers did/do without permission from the factory.

[Guest]

OK

[Guest Albert]

I have a 54 Packard that was parked in 1959 and it had undercaoting on the underside of the body as well as in the doors , trunk and the behind the kick panels.

[DizzyDale]

Dear Fireball,The SAFE way to remove this material is with a heat-gun and an assortment of different width putty knifes.After 99% of the crud is off you can finish the job with lacquer thinner.diz

[Ron Green]

I have documentation that the dealer bought his undercoating (50 gallon barrels) from the factory, at least for the mid 50's GM vehicles. It came with a group and part number as part of the dealers "confidential authorized accessory price list". If I have time tonight I will dig it out and post the part numbers on here tomorrow. I'm sure some dealers bought it locally at a cheaper price through?

[kuhner]

Just to muddy the waters a little more.

I understood the rules to mean "as the car was delivered from the factory to the dealer". That would mean even though it was a factory authorized procedure/accesory it was not as delivered even if the dealer applied it.

[Shop Rat]

If the accessory was supplied or authorized by the factory there is no deduction even if it was put on at the dealership. But there is for "dealer options" that were not supplied by or authorized by the factory. Some dealers would put anything on a car that the owner wanted even if it was what we now call "after market" items. Protective seat covers is one thing I can think of that they did not usually put on in the factory, but they were supplied/authorized by the factory for the dealers to install. But if a dealer went out to a store and just bought them and put them on then there would be a deduction for those.

[Ron Green]

Here is the 55 Pontiac undercoating ordering information from the dealer?s confidential price list. I have to believe the other GM brands offered the same. It?s also hard to believe that each GM make would have a separate warehouse for undercoating.

Undercoating

Group # Part # Description Code

8.800 986359 GM Undercoating 1- 54 Gal Drum (AM) $46.44

8.800 986635 GM Undercoating 1- 54 Gal Drum (SPA) $46.44

8.800 986653 GM Undercoating 44 Gal Drum Truck Load (AFS) $1782

8.800 986654 GM Undercoating 44 Gal Drum Truck Load (AFS) $1782

8.800 986548 GM Undercoating 80 Gal Drum Carload (AFS) $3110

8.800 986638 GM Undercoating 80 Gal Drum Carload (AFS) $3110

Water Base Undercoating

8.800 986800 GM Undercoating 54 Gal Drum (SPA) $37.80

8.800 986801 GM Undercoating 44 Gal Drum Truck Load (AFS) $1592

8.800 986802 GM Undercoating 80 Gal Drum Carload (AFS) $2764

Code Explanation

AM Order from master warehouse

AFS Order from accessory sales department

SPA West coast warehouse only

#986635 Stocked at Salt Lake City, Great Falls, LA, Oakl;and, Portland

#986654 West of Rockies

#986638 West of Rockies

#986800 Stocked only at Long Island City & Bloomfield

[Guest]

Sure looks factory authorized to me.

hvs

[Dynaflash8]

There are pictures of the undercoating being applied to a 56 Buick in my Salesman's Facts Book. My 56 Buick is being undercoated. The documentation is there. That says it all.