[SCG] inspection marks and other things

[Kent Sullivan]

As Dave and Mark have said, we in the SCG are doing this because we love the
challenge and yes, it's fun to have an obsession. But we specifically stated
in our "formation papers" that we were not doing this to make concours more
strict. There might come a time were some of the things we learn in the SCG
make sense to add to concours, but only after much consideration and
deliberation, and only if we are very confident about the broad
applicability.

--Kent
-----Original Message-----
From: scg-list-bounces at tiger.skiblack.com
[mailto:scg-list-bounces at tiger.skiblack.com] On Behalf Of Mark Corbin
Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 9:04 PM
To: Dave Newell; jtreinhart at omnitelcom.com
Cc: corsabod at corvair.org; scg-list at tiger.skiblack.com
Subject: Re: [SCG] Fw: Re: [Corsabod] inspection marks and other things
(FixingTy pos)

All,

I'm with Dave on this 100%. And I'm glad to see the discussion take the
right path so far. But after talking to my friend, I just had to start the
thread to get it all off my chest. Dave is absolutely correct about our
possibility of obtaining "Bloomington Gold" levels of documentation. I don't
see it ever happening, and for reasons he cited, in addition to the lapse of
time. Nor should we expect or even want such levels. A middle of the road
approach is best for us and our chosen hobby car. 

But we SHOULD make every attempt to document what we can, and as soon as we
can, as we will never have more stock cars than we do right this minute.
Their numbers are always decreasing, and if we're not careful, such "living
documents" will fade away out of existance and be lost forever. That is why
the SCG and SCGE are so important. It's why CORSA should emphasise the SCG's
efforts even more than it does now.

Above this though, a warning. Concours should not try to incorporate such
documentation into any strict standards for classification, or even try to
drive further towards a "Bloomington Gold" type of class for Corvairs. Of
course, the SCG efforts weren't meant to do that. They are meant to be
purely historical, for the fun and self-satisfaction of it all.  But IF
someone takes their car to that level, more power to them. If anything,
Corvair owners are mostly guilty of "over-restoring" their cars, so maybe
the SCG documentation efforts will eventually temper the concours people
into more realistic restorations. But let it take place naturally, not by
changing concours standards.

My big warning in all this is to the board. Be careful, be VERY careful, in
anything concerning concours. We have in the past made changes in the
concours rules, changes which I am not particularly happy with, and changes
that have taken us in directions I don't like. But most participants seem
happy with the changes, unaware of what I see happening. Concours is deadly
serious business, and its effects ripple far beyond what most people see.
It affects the value of cars, it affects the restoration of cars, it affects
us all, and in ways many don't realize. So changes should not be taken
lightly, nor hastily. And certainly they should NOT be made or left in the
hands of those who are not thoroughly qualified and experienced in all
aspects of concours. THAT is what worried me back when I wrote the original
rules, and it STILL worries me today. I personally feel that the board
should divest themselves of ALL concours rules-making duties and decisions,
and leave them solely in the hands of a select COMMITTEE of well-qualified
concours experts to hash out. I could name a whole list of such people, and,
sad to say, with ONE possible exception, none are on the current board, nor
have precious few ever been. THAT to me is scary.

-Mark Corbin

> [Original Message]
> From: Dave Newell <chevrobilia at juno.com>
> Subject: [SCG] Fw: Re: [Corsabod] inspection marks and other things
(FixingTy	pos)
>
> Spell check still doesn't catch the dumb mistakes...fixed below :o)
>
> ---------- Forwarded Message ----------
> From: "Dave Newell" <chevrobilia at juno.com>
> Subject: Re: [SCG] [Corsabod]  inspection marks and other things
>
> Thanks Jamie...
> I definitely think the research and documentation is necessary from a
historical standpoint. That is, we should preserve what a stock Corvair was,
to the best of our knowledge, for posterity. Whether we should apply those
definitions to judging is another issue. If we do, I personally don't think
our standards should be nearly as rigid as the Corvette folks. The more you
study how our cars were built, the more you realize that Chevrolet had no
definition of stock...just specs and standards. In practice there were
deviations from plant to plant, many running changes, substitutions based on
a part's availability and many variations in materials application. Willow
Run had a parts runner that was known to haunt local hardware stores and
wholesalers if a suitable fastener could be found rather than stop the line.
Also, Corvairs were more variable than Vettes because of their greater
volume, build time and lower expectations of their owners.
>  
> For example, at Oakland the Fisher Plant manager had the rocker panel
pinchweld flange painted black for a while, absorbing the cost because he
thought the job looked better that way than with the normal body color
flange. Should we try to document the affected range of cars? Absolutely, if
it's possible. But should we penalize cars that don't conform? I think not.
Documenting from a historical viewpoint is fun. Getting too stressed out in
concours over details that Chevrolet felt were inconsequential is not.
>
> Dave
>   
> ---------- Original Message ----------
> From: "Jamie & Tanya Reinhart" <jtreinhart at omnitelcom.com>
> Subject: Re: [Corsabod] [SCG] inspection marks and other things
>
> All, I for one appreciate bone stock classic cars, but here is what I
question. At this late date, 41 years after the last corvair was produced,
will starting this difficult process of detailed inspection and
documentation have the same effects on the values or notoriety of corvairs
as say a Z-16 Chevelle, or a ZL-1 Camaro, or a X-11 427 Impala, or a Black
Widow 57 and so on? I just don&#65533;t see it. I&#65533;m not saying it
wouldn&#65533;t be interesting to research, just wondering if the outcome
is worth the effort. Jamie ReinhartCORSA President   From: Dave NewellSent:
Wednesday, June 08, 2011 4:51 PMTo: modquad at juno.comCc:
airvair at earthlink.net ; corsabod at corvair.org ;
scg-list at tiger.skiblack.comSubject: Re: [Corsabod] [SCG] inspection marks
and other things Hi,
> I think you guys aren't giving the Corvair hobby enough credit in the
stock department. Larry Claypool, you (Mark Corbin), myself and others were
stock-conscious even in the 1970s and I think CORSA certainly pioneered
stock judging classes among all of the Chevy car line clubs with the
exception of Corvette. Vette stock interest pretty much paralleled our own,
and Corvette folks were lucky to have the similarly stock-brained,
Claypool-class expert Noland Adams and his books to begin their process of
focusing on originality details. 
>
> The dubious Corvette "Bloomington Gold" concours status that developed 
> in
the '80s was a mixed bag though. Cars that achieve the Bloomington Gold
status are anally adherent to what they define as "stock"
> and cars that make the grade increase substantially in value. True, 
> more
"stock" Corvettes result from the process but it's largely a money thing.
For example, if a Vette owner has the correct edition warranty booklet in
the glovebox, properly filled out for his car (which usually requires owners
to search out NOS booklets for up to $1K apiece), they get more points and
thus their car increases in value, justifying the investment. I know,
because in my business I sell to this market. Do we really want to get that
uptight? I deal with owners of other Chevy car lines and sell them original
literature, documents and memorabilia. The Nova folks in general are in the
stone age and don't think much about stock at all. The Chevelle folks are
better, especially concerning Z-16s, but have no organized effort or pool of
knowledge. I know a few Impala guys that are just as intense about numbers
VINS, assembly plant details, invoices etc. as I am but again have no
"Stock" group or any hi
> story of cooperative research. The "stock" knowledge among those 
> owners
mainly rests among a few individual experts. The Camaro Research Group
stands alone as a group effort and I highly recommend their website. Kent
Sullivan and I have shared body tag options codes with them and they are as
serious as we are. As to the BoD and concours, exactly the same scenario has
existed with the CPF from the beginning. Thanks for getting the discussion
started....
>
> Dave Newell
> ---------- Original Message ----------
> From: "Mike" <modquad at juno.com>
> Subject: Re: [SCG] inspection marks and other things
>
> Seems like cars that were built in the same year on the same assembly
lines might have a lot of common build processes - at least in the Fisher
body area.  Perhaps one could start building a database for Corvairs based
on information already in existance around Novas for example that came down
the Willow Run line.  Of course we would want to verify somehow that the
Corvair operation was done the same way. Undercoating, overspray, inspection
marks, fastener types, suspension finishes, etc might be partially
documented this way. Mike
>
> ---------- Original Message ----------
> Subject: [SCG] inspection marks and other things
>
> All,
>
> I got into a discussion today with a friend who's quite the history buff.
He asked about such things as inspection marks, paint overspray, and so
forth, things that are well documented in other clubs from the Corvette club
to a lot of the muscle and pony car clubs.  My response was that those folks
are high rollers, and got into that degree of documentation early on.
We are just now getting into just the documentation of what exactly
constitutes stock, and any variations that may have occurred during the
model years.
>
> With the coming convention and our annual Stock Corvair Event coming 
> up
in mind, maybe we should add such items to our list of things to look for.
Of course, I'd expect that it's going to be difficult, if not impossible, to
reach the degree of documentation that certain other clubs have achieved. We
are 40 years late to the game.
>
> But as I told my friend, one of the reasons their cars have 
> appreciated
to the degree that is well beyond what their contemporary, the Corvair, has
is because of such documentation efforts. High rollers LIVE for such things,
and one of the reasons they will and probably do shun the Corvair is just
for that reason.
>
> I always knew that concours was the first, biggest step in promoting 
> the
preservation of a marque. It's why, early on, I plunged into the job of
writing CORSA's first set of concours rules (which are in modified form,
still being used today). BUT I also had to fight off a large and vocal
contingent of the board that desperately wanted a watered-down definition of
"stock". They wanted to call "stock" is what we today call "Street Stock",
with such things as mud flaps and aftermarket radios allowed in the class.
It was a battle royal, but I succeeded in preserving the sanctity of stock.
>
> A side note here. One of the CORSA board's historic failures has been 
> the
insistence for micromanaging everything. In this case, they have always
insisted on having the final say on, first, what form the Concours rules
took, and then insisting on having the final say on any modifications to
those rules. And since few qualified concours people are ever elected onto
the board, I feel that it's like having blind men pilot the ship. Concours
is SERIOUS business, and only the truly qualified should EVER be allowed to
hold sway on any judgements pertaining to it. No disrespect meant, but most
board members historically simply are not so qualified, and should remove
themselves from making such decisions.
>
> I just wish that we as a club had been smart enough to take historical
documentation, early on, to the level that other clubs have. What we are
just now finding out is that the value of our cars is tied directly in such
efforts, and that we as a club have shot ourselves in the foot for being so
negligent of our history for so long.
>
> -Mark Corbin
>

This message was sent by the SCG-list mailing list, all copyrights are the
property of the writer, please attribute properly. For help,
mailto:scg-list-help at corvair.org This list sponsored by the Corvair Society
of America, http://www.corvair.org/ Post messages to:
SCG-list at tiger.skiblack.com Change your options:
http://www.vv.corvair.org/mailman/options/scg-list