[SCG] [Corsabod] Factory Stock Corvair Entries and StockPreservation Awardhistory in CORSA Concours 1997-2009

Thu Sep 3 18:59:03 EDT 2009

Thank Bill for assisting.  I know how important this issue is to you.

Everyone, Please note that board just approved at the Annual board meeting 
changes to the Concours rules that include a REDUCTION (empahasis) in the 
number of classes.  Not to the level described in these emails,  but a 
reduction none-the-less.

This included the elimination of Speciality class which my beloved Fitch 
Sprints were classified.  (i'm ok with that,  a Fitch Sprint is neither 
Factory nor street stock nor should it be)

Factory Stock  (sub divided to Original and Restored)
Street Stock
Improved (includes Sprints and Yenkos
and
Engineering (Cords, V8s, dune buggies and Ultravans

So some effort HAS already been made to place more emphasis on STOCK 
classifications.

I do think Bill's thought on Street stock recognition has merit.  It does 
not need to be a separate award. It could be a Best Street Stock  decal 
applied to the trophy the participant is receiving.  Bob Dunahugh is 
proposing something similar for autocross.

tim mahler

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bill Hubbell" <whubbell at umich.edu>
To: "Larry Claypool" <vairshop at sbcglobal.net>; "Mark Corbin" 
<airvair at earthlink.net>; "William J Hubbell" <whubbell at umich.edu>; "Duanne 
Luckow" <daluckow at aol.com>; "CORSA/CPF BoD" <corsabod at corvair.org>; "Stock 
Corvair Group" <scg-list at tiger.skiblack.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 11:30 AM
Subject: Re: [Corsabod] [SCG] Factory Stock Corvair Entries and 
StockPreservation Awardhistory in CORSA Concours 1997-2009

>I do note that in any given year there are always a lot more cars in the 
>Street Stock classes than in Factory Stock, so there is apparently a larger 
>pool of people at least somewhat interested in Stock and I would like to 
>offer them some encouragement to continue.  One thought I have had is that 
>we might offer some sort of recognition or consideration to those folks who 
>get into the "Street Stock" class to encourage them to continue to pursue 
>restoration into the Factory Stock" classes. I am not certain what form 
>such consideration might take, but I think it is an idea worth exploring.
>
> Bill Hubbell
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "The Vair Shop" <vairshop at sbcglobal.net>
>
> Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 10:17:56
> To: <airvair at earthlink.net>; <whubbell at umich.edu>; Duanne 
> Luckow<daluckow at aol.com>; CORSA/CPF BoD<corsabod at corvair.org>; Stock 
> Corvair Group<scg-list at tiger.skiblack.com>
> Subject: Re: [SCG] Factory Stock Corvair Entries and Stock Preservation 
> Awardhistory in CORSA Concours 1997-2009
>
>
> hi all
> comments in text below
>
>
>
>
>> All,
>>
>> My first point that I'd like to make it this. I've been concerned for 
>> some
>> time about this situation, and of a larger associated issue of
>> classification. Part of the reason, I believe, for a low turnout in stock
>> cars in concours is the fact that classes have been made rather
>> meaningless, with the now-current awards system of "gold/silver/bronze"
>> rather than "first/second/third" as was the original system. There is now
>> little incentive to pursue a "stock" classification, other than for the
>> somewhat obscure "Preservation" award. I say "obscure" because there is
>> not
>> enough prestige attached to this award to highlight it sufficiently.
>
> there is also a number of people who want to restore a car to stock,
> regardless of where it places or scores- they just want it 'stock'
>
>>
>> As I see it, our choices are to either return to the original awards
>> system, or modify the "classification" process to reflect the current
>> system. Since the majority seem to prefer the current system, the latter
>> should be pursued.
>
> i agree we should not go backwards to a X in class system
>
> It's also possible that eliminating most classes would
>> re-emphasize the remaining "stock" classes.
>
> agreed
>
>>
>> I have previously sent to Duanne Luckow a detailed proposal to eliminate
>> all classes except the one(s) that would be affected by the Preservation
>> Award. After all, classification other than for these elegible classes 
>> for
>> that award is really a study in futility, and a waste of time and effort.
>> It's a usless effort that we could just as well do without, as long as we
>> have the present awards system. We could then begin a program to 
>> emphasize
>> stock cars.
>
> the thought of 2 classes-stock and then all others (plus engineering 
> class,
> because those vehicles can't be readily equated to full corvair bodied and
> powered cars) has been brought up before, and has some merit.
>
>
>>
>> A second point I would like to make is that while I would be the last to
>> want modified cars to be allowed into stock classes, I also feel that we
>> are possibly being a bit too strict with potential stock class cars.
>
> really? in comparison to NCRS,porsche, and some other clubs, we are really
> loose.
> in classification, we don't do numbers matching checks other than obvious
> stuff like engine code and *some* fisher body accessory codes. we don't 
> look
> at glass dates,  diff or trans numbers. we allow radial tires and
> replacement batteries. we have been allowing hardware that looks generally
> right but is reproduction stuff without the little factory markings. we 
> have
> not been very strick about powder coating. i could go on.
> The
>> original rules that I wrote were intended to disqualify cars that didn't
>> "appear just as they could have left the factory" due to intentional and
>> noticable modifications, but I never intended for the rules to be so
>> strict
>> as to all but eliminate the stock classes due to lack of "perfect"
>> participants.
>
> see above. if we had "perfect" standards, the list would be considerbly
> shorter.
>
> If you note the word "appear" in my quote above - the intent
>> was to only comply with a cosmetic appearance, rather than a "perfect"
>> representation of "pure stock".
>
> right. that's why we have been allowing powder coat and clear coat/base 
> coat
> finishes, and coating of parts normally left bare as long as it *looks*
> stock. if the end product does not look stock, it doesn't make the cut.
>
>
> While the latter is a great ideal to shoot
>> for, the original intent was to allow the points system to penalize
>> infractions to the "perfect" state on a stock class car that was less 
>> than
>> "perfectly" factory stock.
>>
>> The question we should be asking ourselves is whether we are being too
>> critical, and should we "cut some slack" with those who are not "letter
>> perfect"?
>
> whether or not we are too critical depends on whose standard you are 
> judging
> corsa by. are we too critical for some other single marque clubs? my 
> opinion
> is definitly not. too crital for aaca? i think we're on the money for 
> them.
> too crital for a local town car show? yes.
> so the qustion then goes to what standard do you want be? the best? middle
> of the road? or entry level ?
>
> I think that we could find some way to preserve our high
>> standards, yet encourage entrants rather than frustrate them. Perhaps a
>> points penalization system, rather than an outright disqualification?
>
> it's not a disqualification from factory stock, they weren't in it to 
> begin
> with.  people who do not make factory stock did not do enough homework.
> it is not easy to restore a car a car to factory stock. it costs way more
> money, and takes much more time to do so, which is a big factor. and it
> takes alot of reasearch, not just opening up clark's catalogue.
> and it's much harder on a 'common' car like a corvair where many of the
> these cars were simply transportation back when they new, and many
> modifications were made in the course of regular service and repairs.  and
> *especially*on a corvair because most service facilities did not like or
> undestand these cars.
>
>> Something to think about...
>
> i agree
>
>
>>
>> -Mark Corbin
>>
> lc
>
>>
>>> [Original Message]
>>> From: Bill Hubbell <whubbell at cox.net>
>>> To: Larry Claypool <vairshop at sbcglobal.net>; Duanne Luckow
>> <daluckow at aol.com>; CORSA/CPF BoD <corsabod at corvair.org>; Stock Corvair
>> Group <scg-list at tiger.skiblack.com>
>>> Date: 9/3/2009 12:05:53 AM
>>> Subject: [SCG] Factory Stock Corvair Entries and Stock Preservation
>> Awardhistory in CORSA Concours 1997-2009
>>>
>>> To:
>>>
>>> Larry Claypool, CORSA Concours Classification Chairman
>>>
>>> Duanne Luckow, CORSA Concours Chair
>>>
>>> CORSA Board of Directors
>>>
>>> Stock Corvair Group
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Gentleman,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Attached is a summary of all cars entered into the two CORSA Concours
>>> Factory Stock classes since the development of the Stock Preservation
>> Award
>>> in 1997.  Although we have had some great success with recent Factory
>> Stock
>>> Restored entries also winning the Mitchell Award, the fact remains that
>>> participation in the Factory Stock Classes remains very low.  Please
>> review
>>> this information with an eye towards answering the question of what, if
>>> anything, we can do to encourage and improve Factory Stock participation
>> at
>>> the Concours level.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bill Hubbell
>>>
>>> President, Stock Corvair Group
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Corsabod mailing list
> Corsabod at tiger.skiblack.com
> http://www.vv.corvair.org/mailman/listinfo/corsabod

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.76/2344 - Release Date: 09/03/09 
18:05:00