<VV> CONCOURS PHILOSOPHY 101

J R Read_HML hmlinc@sbcglobal.net
Wed, 9 Jun 2004 16:46:56 -0500


Too many rules for me...  One of the reasons I don't enter.  I've not had to
bicker about it.  I'm in this club for fun, and I don't get much fun out of
an argument.  Sounds like street stock to me, but then, I don't really care.
I'm sure it is a beautiful car no matter how it is classed.

Attachments are scanned with anti-virus software.

Later, JR
'61 Rampside Standard 4/110
'65 Monza Convertible 4/140
'66 beater Coupe - icemobile 4/140

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "airvair" <airvair@richnet.net>
To: "Virtual Vairs" <virtualvairs@corvair.org>
Cc: "Bob Norwalk" <RJNJR1@aol.com>; "Sarah Jones" <sarahvair@juno.com>;
"Bill Hubbell" <whubbell@umich.edu>; "Rich Thompson" <RThompson@mirro.com>;
"Tony Vizyak" <glt@cros.net>; "Seth Emerson" <sethracer@aol.com>; "Kent
Sullivan" <kentsu@corvairkid.com>; <smorehead@mailcity.com>;
<bigsky1@ftc-i.net>; <mdvair@aol.com>; <larry@forman.net>;
<jamesandloricorvair@telus.net>; <ddpleau@earthlink.net>
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 3:57 PM
Subject: <VV> CONCOURS PHILOSOPHY 101


> During a recent discussion I had with Bob Norwalk about my "infamous '69
> Corsa," he stated that he'd like to make an addition to the existing
> concours rules to automatically designate "model change" cars as
> modified cars. He (and the previous chairman) and I have butted heads
> about this for years, and I think it's time I took the issue to the
> court of public opinion. I'd write the Communiqui, but I don't believe
> I'd be allowed a fair discussion of the issue. For those who don't know
> my car, I built it years ago using only late model stock Corvair parts,
> thus creating a complete and exact rendition of a stock, air-conditioned
> '69 Corsa. Yet to date, I cannot show it in a judged concours because he
> will not allow it to compete in what should be the APPROPRIATE class for
> it.
>
> My position has always been that there is a philosophy to concours that
> must be consistently followed. There is a reason why we separate stock
> cars from modified cars, that being that it's inherently unfair to pit
> stock parts (which are often reconditioned used parts) against modified
> (and thus often new) parts. We also have an "update-backdate" rule that
> allows stock parts from within their respective year groups to be used
> in any "Street" Stock class car. Further, each car in the concours
> should always be placed in an APPROPRIATE class that allows it to
> compete against like cars. So for these reasons there has been nothing
> in writing to date that automatically classifies model-change cars as
> modified. From all this it can be fairly concluded that a
> complete-and-exact model-change car, if built to Street Stock class
> standards, should NOT be arbitrarily placed in a modified class. To do
> so is patently unfair! Worse, Bob admits that it's totally arbitrary.
>
> Bob said that they made that ruling because "they didn't make a '69
> Corsa." So what's the problem? In concours, cars are judged only on
> cleanliness and condition, and classification is supposed to place every
> car in an APPROPRIATE class according to its competitive attributes with
> one another, not according to some puritanical ideology. The factory
> produced ONLY pure stock cars, not modified cars, nor even street stock
> cars. Read the class definitions! The existing definitions were designed
> to separate cars by competitive attributes only, while reserving only
> the PURE STOCK class from being combined with anything else. Street
> Stock class cars are only slightly removed from pure stock, and are NOT
> changed enough from stock to really be called modified. Such is the case
> with my '69 Corsa.
>
> Even though he denies it, I suspect the only reason for this verbal (to
> date), arbitrary, capricious, and totally unfounded ruling is because
> they simply hate the idea of a '69 Corsa. Regardless of the reason, he
> has never offered a rational explanation for this verbal ruling.
> Certainly any explanation he has offered to date has had no foundation
> in logic whatsoever. All I get are flimsy, prejudiced, opinionated,
> "because they didn't make it" and "because I say so" excuses. Concours
> is about judging and comparing QUALITY, not soothing someone's insulted
> purist ideology. This ruling is heresy and I am justly outraged.
>
> Thus I am requesting everyone who agrees with me to email Bob and the
> CORSA board and object to this blatant trashing of the foundation of
> sound concours principles, and also to demand a retraction of such
> verbal and arbitrary rulings. Concours rules should be based on logical,
> rational, and sound principles. And the Concours Committee should follow
> the WRITTEN letter of its own rules. To do otherwise, as does this
> verbal and arbitrary ruling, is to disgrace the whole purpose of
> concours and of written rules.
>
> -Mark Corbin
> _______________________________________________
> This message was sent by the VirtualVairs mailing list, all copyrights are
the property
> of the writer, please attribute properly. For help,
mailto:vv-help@corvair.org
> This list sponsored by the Corvair Society of America,
http://www.corvair.org/
> Post messages to: VirtualVairs@corvair.org
> List info: http://www.vv.corvair.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualvairs
> _______________________________________________