clones in the AACA

[1937hd45]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I cast my vote with those who feel that AACA should continue to judge as to the vehicle being correct to the year and not the build sheet, build plate, or whatever. In addition to all of the reasons already stated it would also be inconsistent to do otherwise because for many cars there are no build sheets, original records, or build plates, or the build plates are vague or contain minimal data. The owners of those vehicles could therefore do whatever they wanted as long as their vehicle was correct to the year, where-as owners of vehicles with documentation available would be held to a more rigorous standard. </div></div>

Just as they did when there was a 1940 cut off date for cars that were allowed on the AACA National Meet show fields. This is a Late Model Problem let the fans of those vehicled deal with it.

[59chevyguy]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

This is a Late Model Problem let the fans of those vehicled deal with it. </div></div>

So what does that mean? Are we now seperating the AACA into those who want to resolve problems before 1940 and those after 1940?

I thought we were all one group dedicated to the same cause, The preservation of antique and classic cars.

I doubt that the majority in AACA think that way and I do not you think that way either, you just worded it incorrectly.

[1937hd45]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

This is a Late Model Problem let the fans of those vehicled deal with it. </div></div>

So what does that mean? Are we now seperating the AACA into those who want to resolve problems before 1940 and those after 1940?

I thought we were all one group dedicated to the same cause, The preservation of antique and classic cars.

I doubt that the majority in AACA think that way and I do not you think that way either, you just worded it incorrectly. </div></div>

NO, I proof read it, and picked the words quite carefully.The problems were started with the Late Model vehicles & owners, I happen to like Pre WWII vehicles and have no interest in the problems with Late Model iron.

[SolidAxle]

"All Indians walk in a single file line.... especially the one that I saw".

[61-63]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"All Indians walk in a single file line.... especialy the one that I saw". </div></div>

Good post!

[nearchoclatetown]

Seems to me several of you don't understand what a clone is but it didn't stop the opinions. What about the brand new '57 Chevy convertibles that are now for sale. Are they OK to show in AACA or are they a kit car? I know they come attached to an old cowl so you have an original part to hang your serial number tag, but they still sound like a kit car to me. And '37gotHD, 1957 was before Viet Nam so that IS considered pre-war.

[Ron Green]

I too read the article in OCW regarding the reproduction 57 Chevy's and in my opinion they should be labeled a kit car. Using an authentic cowl and data tag they will eventually be considered real after a decade or so. As they start passing through owners the history of their true origin will surely be lost or forgotten.

[ronbarn]

Good points are made by many of these posts, especially as related to winning an AACA award as "certification" of authenticity. What about certification from the government. Just the other day I saw an ad for a '34 Mercedes. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to immediately identify this as a replicar, especially when the ad says it has a Chevy 350 drive train. But some state DMV did allow it to be registered and titled as a 1934 Mercedes! Would be a very interesting discussion if the owner of this vehicle showed up at an AACA meet with his title and used that to justify showing it in the classic class.

[nearchoclatetown]

The OCW article states they bought a bunch of '57 Chevys for the cowls. My guess, it didn't suggest anything, is you get a title for a '57. If it were a '06 it would have to pass all the safety/emissions stuff. Maybe you only get a bill of sale, like the V860 motorcycles.

[stock_steve]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"...1957 was before Viet Nam so that IS considered pre-war..." </div></div>

Your insolent remark has been duly noted, Doug.

[Guest dongle]

Makes the comments in this discussion seem all that more interesting.

Restored vs Original discussion

I still contend there should be more recognition for originals / survivors.

Dongle.

[hotzorro]

Hello. Could not help but to read this thread and post a comment. I have been reading about AACA and am considering joining the club. Mainly because I want my 1970 muscle car judged by an experienced person that knows the car and the options that were available in 1970. The car is a recreation as I would call it (or clone as you may put it), and I have no problem indicating the car as such. However, the car was restored to exact factory specifications as though the car were manufactured in 1970. It has all correct original parts and is a truely exact replica concorse restoration.

Why did i do this and not simply buy the real deal? because the car has been owned by me since 1988 when I was 17. It is the first car that I ever purchased. The car has sentimental value beyond simply knowing that I have the real thing or not.

Would I ever re-vin the car? never. The VIN on this car clearly indicates it is a replica.

Should I be disallowed as a club member and denyed the privledge of having the car judged?? I'm interested in your opinion.

BTW - The car would put 90+% of the real deal to shame in quality of restoration and craftsman ship.

[DizzyDale]

NOW this is a VERY INTERESTING question.This is NOT the same car you owned since you were seventeen,THIS is a recreation of a HIGH dollar piece.As for having the car judged,i guess it's not the first fraudulent unit to be shown but you could keep your mouth shut and roll the dice. I Say WELCOME to the club and did i mention WE love pics.diz

[hotzorro]

The question is, can the car be entered and judged in an AACA event. I am not here to mislead anyone, but would like the car judged as if it were authentic.

[MCHinson]

Without knowing all of the details on what particular car and/or options you are discussing, some may certainly disagree with my take on this issue but here it goes....

AACA Judging is based on essentially "How a car could have come from the factory." It is not necessary to restore a car to exactly how that particular car came from the factory. So, if it has correctly restored or recreated equipment and/or options that were available from the factory, it should do OK in AACA Judging.

This does not in any way indicate that the car's value is the same as the value of a car that originally came with whatever particular options or package you are talking about from the factory. AACA is not about "numbers matching" cars.

Join the club, get to know some local AACA members in your area, bring the car to some shows and have fun. That is what it is all about!

[Guest windjamer]

With some of the coments it sounds like a duel is in order.I volenteer to be a second. Wepons shall be snow balls at forty paces, location new orlenes La. 2nd thursday of first week of july. One outher coment, seems I read some place that deliberate misrep. of a vech. is grounds for revokeing any awards and dismisal from club.

[Shop Rat]

Am I understanding correctly that this was not a Boss Mustang when it came from the factory? That you turned it into one with orginal/authentic parts?

If so, then in my opinion, you have created a car that did not exist as far as the factory is concerned.

We have a 1963-1/2 Ford Falcon "Sprint" convertible. It has always been one straight from the factory. We have seen Falcon Futuras that were turned into Sprints by owners. Something about that just doesn't seem quite right. I am sure that it happens with other vehicles also.

I think the judging committee would have to decide if, and how, your car would be judged. The new class for clones is for vehicles that came from factories that have made duplicates of antique vehicles. Not vehicles that owners modified to be something that they didn't start out as.

You car is VERY NICE by the way.

[hotzorro]

Well, I joind AACA anyway...i'm not here to defraud anyone or claim I have something that I don't. Just looking to make friends that enjoy the hobby as much as I do - and hope that I can have the car judged for it's quality and the fact that everything, 100% of the car, is original for the model year.

80+% of the chrome is replated original or NOS. The motor is all date code correct and part# matching - right down to the last pully and braket on the motor.

Yes, I spent more on this car then an original is worth, but hey, what the heck, like I said, it was the first car I purchased. How many people can say they have the first car they purchased and in the condition that I have mine? : )

[Olds 442]

Your car looks GREAT !!!! Go ahead and have it judged.You will do well with AACA judging. The only place that I feel you would have a problem is at a Mustang club show.They would check the vin. number and know its not what it appears to be.Enjoy your car and welcome to AACA.

[DizzyDale]

Dear HZ,Thanks for the pics.Almost 30 years ago i had the real deal,same colors without the shaker hood.The last couple of years there has been a PERFECT 70 Boss 302 at Hershey and it too is the ONLY correct color.IMHO.diz

[1937hd45]

Forget AACA, how would the clone do head to head with a REAL Boss at Barrett Jackson?

[nearchoclatetown]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hotzorro</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well, I joind AACA anyway... </div></div>Good for you, welcome. Buy a judgeing manual from Nat'l headquarters and you will find that you are allowed to add any factory option available for the year of your car. By your description, that's all you did. That was the point of the original thread. My only question for a REAL judgeing expert would be which class would the car be placed, production or HiPo? Real Bosses belong in 36D, my favorite size, btw.

[hotzorro]

1935hd45 - the car is clearly barrett jackson quality..hands down.

[TG57Roadmaster]

Zorro,

"1935hd45 - the car is clearly barrett jackson quality..hands down."

Hey, is that a <span style="font-style: italic">crack</span>? 'Cause if it isn't, it should be; I wasn't aware that "B-J and quality" were compatible in the same sentence. You know, like that double-negative Miss Dribblepuss always said you couldn't use.

IMHO, AACA judges don't have the time (or the reference material) on hand to dig into the option codes on the field, as they're assigned their class(es) for judging the morning of the show. Leave all that ridiculous "minutiae" to the marque club geeks. <span style="font-style: italic">One large club gigs points if your wipers don't wipe the requisite number of times</span>. Enough, already!

Thank heavens for the HPOF & DPC classes, though I'm sure as they were being proposed, it was prophesied that, "the world will stop spinning if you let 'em in!" I mean, c'mon, it's a <span style="font-style: italic">car</span> club, not Augusta National. All hand-wringing aside, take a cursory glance at the number of HPOF's & DPC's appearing at our national shows. As for the Second-Generation cars, I guess if I had a plastic ersatz Model A built in the '70's with Pinto running gear, I'd want a seat at the table, too. Speaking of early-'70's Fords, in what class would you shoe-horn a Pinto Pangra?

I don't recall seeing a "Modified Anteater" class in the '08 Judging Manual.

Modern, pre- or postwar, there have <span style="font-style: italic">always</span> been rebodied cars. I don't like the term "clone" or "rat rod," either, but sadly they're here to stay. The difference is in the <span style="font-style: italic">misrepresentation</span> of cars for sale. The onus should be on buyer to ferret out the BS in the "shiny red Whizmobile" for which he's about to assume the position.

Unless one is comfy with buying a pig in a poke, do your bloody homework!

On a lighter note, while working at AutoFair this month, a couple of shady characters came up and asked me if I knew where the guy who buys titles was set up. That was a new one, so I looked it up and sure enough, there he was in the program in black and white.

I'm no neophyte by any stretch of the imagination, but could someone please explain <span style="font-style: italic">that</span> scenario?

For what purpose do people buy titles? I'll be anxiously awaiting a reply with...

...my head buried in the sand,

Tommy ("The Ostrich") G.

[DizzyDale]

Dear Bob,The only NUMBERS some of those bidders at BJ care about are how many minutes of facetime they get on the Speed channel? diz

[nearchoclatetown]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: nearchoclatetown</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> My only question for a REAL judgeing expert would be which class would the car be placed, production or HiPo? Real Bosses belong in 36D, my favorite size, btw. </div></div>Mr. Moskowitz??

[Dynaflash8]

I don't see a problem with judging this car, but that's only my personal opinion. I've been actively reading about and in the hobby since before I could drive -- about 1951 in fact. I began by reading and devouring Robert Gottlieb's articles called "Classic Comments" in MOTOR TREND magazine. From Day 1, as Hillary says, I read about owners of Classic Cars moving a very rough bodied convertible coupe, convertible sedan or speedster/roadster/phaeton over to a sedan chassis and that has ALWAYS been an acceptable practice in all of the major hobby clubs not devoted to single makes. In addition, it has always been acceptable to get a set of side mounted front fenders and put them on a car that did not come with side mounted fenders. There are two differences I need to mention, those being that the convertible onto a good, low mileage sedan chassis/engine combination did not create an extra car that was not produced on the production line. The same is true of accessories like side mounts, since they came from a sidemounted car that was produced on the line and went to "old car heaven". But, if you took a wrecked GTO Judge and transferred the parts to your car, you have done the same thing. It's just that you're tied to your original VIN number. AACA, unlike say the Mustang Club, has never been in the business of comparing VIN numbers and so the first thing you could do is zipper your lip I suspect. Regardless, if you identified a junk money car that your car reaplaced, it is absolutely no different than what those Classic car owners of yesteryear did when they destroyed a sedan to restore a convertible, and now 50-60 years later nobody is probably still alive to know that they did that in lets say 1954.

[1937hd45]

I agree, AACA Judges only want to see the decals stuck on correctly, problem comes when the car goes up for sale and the AACA First Junior tag gives it an assumed seal of authenticity. PostWar can of worms that doesn't effect my era of interest.

[nearchoclatetown]

'37, I'll even go farther with the credits. How about an AACA Grand National that's a clone? I personally have no problem with clones as long as they are what they are. But for a fake to be given the highest award is differant. I feel the cars going for GN should have to be what the factory built them to be, not clones. Jrs Ok , maybe even SRs, but not GN. The award should be earned by being AS BUILT.

[1937hd45]

I've always had a problem with the cars that get that far with BOTH front doors missing. To make it look even dumber that year Ford introduced the Fordoor, but that is a PreWar story.

[ex98thdrill]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm not caring whether clones should be built or not, but by current rules this car or others could be shown in AACA. Race cars are documented, why not regular cars? Most cars have trim tags, most giving engine info, color, major options,etc. To put it in perspective for '37gothd. Suppose Model T's body style could be told by the serial number and you changed a homely sedan into a bitchen roadster. Should it be shown in AACA? </div></div>What can be said?? There are more '57 Chevies out there with fuel injection than what was ever built. If a person really wants a certain vehicle bad enough, they're either going to already know if it's a clone, or they won't care and buy it anyways. As long as you don't try to sell it as the real thing, it shouldn't be an issue. As long as you have the factory literature to show that the car came in that color with those factory options, based on the AACA rulebook it shouldn't be an issue.

[Guest aussie610]

The joys of living in the colonies. We dont care what bady the the factory said they fitted, wasnt the one fitted in this country. Prove that isnt the body this car was fitted with when it was first registered...

[Matt Harwood]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dynaflash8</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> But, if you took a wrecked GTO Judge and transferred the parts to your car, you have done the same thing. It's just that you're tied to your original VIN number. </div></div>

This is an interesting point. I have a friend with a very, very tired '65 Shelby Mustang. It has been raced and abused and is tortured and twisted in every way imagineable. There's a lot of rust from sitting outside for the better part of a decade. But he's going to fix all of that on the original body.

I asked him why not get another Mustang and transfer the Shelby parts to it--much easier, no?

His reply? "It wouldn't be a Shelby Mustang anymore, would it?" It's the old farmer's axe story: He's had that axe for 30 years. He replaced the handle 3 times and the head twice, but by gosh, it's still the same old axe.

He has a point there and I have to agree. It wouldn't exactly be a replica or a clone per se, but it would certainly be a different car. Of course, the value of the car makes restoring the original shell feasible, but it wasn't 15 years ago when he bought the car, and he was going to do it anyway.

This Boss is a slightly different situation, though. I think it would be up to the club to decide whether the Boss was just an option on a standard Mustang or a completely separate model. Could a 1934 Packard Super 8 with a transplanted 1934 V12 be regarded as an authentic V12? That's a question only the judges can answer.

Beautiful car, by the way. Personally, I'd just enjoy it and not get too worried about trophies, despite the A-1 restoration.

[hotzorro]

I do enjoy the car...love taking her out for a nice cruise....go to weekend shows, cruise nights etc....

I just want a serious judge to judge the car - that's all....nearly everything on the car is original or NOS. every detail from the factory assembly line is there - right down to very specific markings on the under carriage that were present in 1970 from bolting the unibody to the assembly line.

Again, i don;t view the car as a clone but a recreation that matches the original in every way except for the vin.

[ex98thdrill]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Could a 1934 Packard Super 8 with a transplanted 1934 V12 be regarded as an authentic V12? That's a question only the judges can answer</div></div>AACA doesn't disect the VIN's. If they did, it would take a week to get everything judged at Hershey.

[Guest windjamer]

Every thing I have read about chevelle tells me it is impossable to tell if a 7o-72 left the fac.as a SS from the vin. My 72 left the fac. as a Malibu. In restoring it I added the SS stripe option,I also replaced the steel wheels with the rally wheels.I have fac. documentation that both where an option for the 72. Dos this make it a SS?? No it is still a malibu..If I swap the eng. with a big block,add buckets a concell and SS badges is it now a SS.?? I say no, it is still a Malibu yet I sure see a lot of SS s.. Funny, when I look at the fith didget it tells me the car came with a 307,sometimes evan a six cyl on a lot of them. Enter the car and enjoy the club.

[ex98thdrill]

Dick I don't know Chevy VIN's, so I can't answer that. With the aftermarket parts out there for Chevelles, there are probably more Chevelles out there that were originally Malibus, than there are actual Chevelles.

If I wasn't going to have the car judged, I'd rather have a '70 Chevelle with a '71-'72 back bumper on it. I always liked the dual headlights, I always liked the round tail lights, but Chevy never built the car with both.

[Dynaflash8]

QUOTE Could a 1934 Packard Super 8 with a transplanted 1934 V12 be regarded as an authentic V12? That's a question only the judges can answer. UNQUOTE

As I said before, that's been done ever since I read my first MOTOR TREND in 1951, and before that too. And, today nobody would even know it's been done. That 5th Digit on a Chevrolet? Those cars are in junkyards somewhere with their VIN numbers still on them.

How many Model T sedans have ended up with roadster bodies? Anybody know? No, they don't. How many Packard, Lincoln or Ruxton sedans have a desert roadster body today. Anybody know? No, they don't. Time heals all wounds.

As somebody has said here, what really comes into play is when deceit and money become involved.

The question really comes into play when you consider if a car being built makes one more then was ever produced. If the factory built 9 of them, you probably better really work to find out if all 9 still exist, but if they made 550 of them you can rest assured a couple of hundred made it to the junkyard.

[Guest windjamer]

Chev. started usingthe 5th digit of the vin to desagnate eng. size in 72, I may be wrong but I think all manufactures did. 72 and newer cars all in the junk yard??? I bet you get a arguement from lots of folks out there. Dinaflash, I would guess that refers to a Buick dynoflow. Owned a couple of them, nice tanks but there sure as heck was nothing about them that could be called a flash. Cruse all day at 90,only problem by the time they hit 90 you where there.To each his own, have a wonderful day.

[Dynaflash8]

Windjammer: Nope, "Dynaflash 8" was introduced as an engine name in 1938 and used for three years. In 1941 the engine name was changed to "Fireball 8". I'm a '39er. As for the Dynaflow, introduced in '48, it began to get some speed to it after "sprags" were put into it in the mid-fifties, but you're right they weren't speed burners. But, I remember how proud my dad was to say "you can't even feel it shift". Different strokes for different folks.

Now, I didn't say all '72's were in junkyards, just plenty of them; enough anyway to be able to find a correct VIN tag with the needed 5th number, if in fact that identified the type of engine as you say.