Emblems -- All Years

[Bossbill]

My interest in this topic started here:
http://www.saacforum.com/index.php?topic=4627.0

From a concours point of view the reproduction emblems, to my eye now that I've seen the difference, are different enough to warrant some attention come judging time.

Are these "different enough compared to the real McCoy" to merit a 'Deduction' or 'Attention' mark during judging?

[Bob Gaines]

My interest in this topic started here:
http://www.saacforum.com/index.php?topic=4627.0

From a concours point of view the reproduction emblems, to my eye now that I've seen the difference, are different enough to warrant some attention come judging time.

Are these "different enough compared to the real McCoy" to merit a 'Deduction' or 'Attention' mark during judging?

It depends on the class and venue. Typically in the class that allows reproductions the use of a type that is close like the typical mustard colored 67 SD made repro then there may be a mention. It is typically done on a case by case basis . Since your heading covers "ALL YEARS" that gives the possibility of many different ones to contend with. In the case of 67 which is your main interest ,this only pertains to the typical Drake made repros . This does not preclude another type that would be less acceptable garnering a deduction. Just covering other "what if" bases.

[polyglas]

 Bill, reproduction parts are typically no deduction in SAAC  concours Div.II or MCA trailered concours. Definitely a deduction in SAAC premiere (DIV. I) or MCA Thoroughbred.

[Bossbill]

The judging community has decided that reproductions are allowed, so even though some are not as good as original, if they are close, they pass.
If one wants "credit" for original then one needs to move to Thoroughbred.

I thought it might be a bit like repop dashboards which bear no similarity to original (which is why I have 5 now) or the repop firewall pads which in no way look original.
I thought those two did take a "hit". And that other items, like the emblems which are too mustard, might take a slight hit too.

[Bob Gaines]

The judging community has decided that reproductions are allowed, so even though some are not as good as original, if they are close, they pass.
If one wants "credit" for original then one needs to move to Thoroughbred.

I thought it might be a bit like repop dashboards which bear no similarity to original (which is why I have 5 now) or the repop firewall pads which in no way look original.
I thought those two did take a "hit". And that other items, like the emblems which are too mustard, might take a slight hit too.

Bill ,I feel compelled to mention that the judging community decided that reproductions would be allowed in certain classes several decades ago. You apparently are unfamiliar with MCA ,SAAC or Mid America concours judging because it reads like allowing the reproduction parts is a new revelation to you. The class that allows reproductions has been around for over 30 years. The same for the class that doesn't allow reproduction. FYI there are good reproductions and also less genuine terrible looking reproductions which can result in deductions if used.It is up to the owner to do the research just like it is for other aspects of restoration. 

[Bossbill]

[This discussion might have to be split off the emblem thread]

I do understand allowing reproductions into the hobby.
Without them, there would be few Mustangs to show.

Since you've helped me a lot with determining correct parts and finishes you understand some of the choices I've made with my restoration and that wherever possible I restore Ford parts to original Ford assembly line condition. As time goes on I'm tending more towards Div I than Div II. It doesn't mean I'll compete in Div I. It's just that I've made choices that tend almost always towards original rather than reproduction.
But, there are some places I have to chose reproduction due to lack of parts availability.

What I'm getting at, and probably failing to get across, is in your last two sentences.
What is the threshold for accurate reproductions?
Does MCA and SAAC allow "any" reproductions? You state there are "also less genuine terrible looking reproductions which can result in deductions if used." That statement implies there is a threshold of acceptability but no one has defined that threshold.
Since there is no "MCA Approved" or "SAAC Approved" stamp on parts the owner is left to ponder where this threshold might be. However, by deducting points on "terrible reproductions" there is an implicit MCA or SAAC approval to better reproductions.
In other words, it's subjective, not objective.

In the case of the 67 dashpad, it's the only reproduction out there. It's not even close. So, the owner then must buy a Ford original or suffer loss of points.
Same with the firewall pad and so on.
I could argue that the mustard color and incorrect lettering of the fender and gas cap emblem are also unsatisfactory. And should have the same effect on points as the dashpad.

I understand the threshold of acceptability is a difficult question.
But reproduction parts cannot remain subjective.

[Coralsnake]

Concours fight! Yes, that will help....

...although I am no longer a SAAC judge I do take exception with the statement...that if the reproductions are "close enough" they are good.  I have never judged to that standard in any venue.

Eventually,  I did get frustrated to the point, it was just better to walk away....whats acceptable is so easy to explain...if it looks like the original part its acceptable. If it doesnt look like the original part there may (will) be a deduction.

People want to make this so hard and its not....

[Bob Gaines]

[This discussion might have to be split off the emblem thread]

I do understand allowing reproductions into the hobby.
Without them, there would be few Mustangs to show.

Since you've helped me a lot with determining correct parts and finishes you understand some of the choices I've made with my restoration and that wherever possible I restore Ford parts to original Ford assembly line condition. As time goes on I'm tending more towards Div I than Div II. It doesn't mean I'll compete in Div I. It's just that I've made choices that tend almost always towards original rather than reproduction.
But, there are some places I have to chose reproduction due to lack of parts availability.

What I'm getting at, and probably failing to get across, is in your last two sentences.
What is the threshold for accurate reproductions?
Does MCA and SAAC allow "any" reproductions? You state there are "also less genuine terrible looking reproductions which can result in deductions if used." That statement implies there is a threshold of acceptability but no one has defined that threshold.
Since there is no "MCA Approved" or "SAAC Approved" stamp on parts the owner is left to ponder where this threshold might be. However, by deducting points on "terrible reproductions" there is an implicit MCA or SAAC approval to better reproductions.
In other words, it's subjective, not objective.

In the case of the 67 dashpad, it's the only reproduction out there. It's not even close. So, the owner then must buy a Ford original or suffer loss of points.
Same with the firewall pad and so on.
I could argue that the mustard color and incorrect lettering of the fender and gas cap emblem are also unsatisfactory. And should have the same effect on points as the dashpad.

I understand the threshold of acceptability is a difficult question.
But reproduction parts cannot remain subjective.

Bill, I have watched your progression from afar and you have to be careful you don't cross over to being a concours snob. There is room for both schools of thought. At least I and many others think so. The two classes help each other in the end . It is hard to see one surviving without the other IMO. The end purpose is to preserve the Marque as much as is practical. There are too many shades of grey to have definitive threshold on reproduction parts IMO. Allowing any reproduction part leaves too much latitude and dilutes the finish product/goal IMO . For example a auto parts store battery cable designed to fit a 67 Mustang/Shelby is technically a reproduction part even though the terminal ends ,wire ,color etc. only vaguely resembles the assemblyline part.  By the same token defining exactly what is acceptable on each and every single part is a unreasonable expectation. Given the thousands of parts that make up a car and the many variables involved it makes it difficult to put it mildly to classify everyone in a definitive way. Currently the discretion is left up to the concours judge.  Given the set of parameters they are expected to make reasonable and responsible decisions in those cases. The community is always striving to fine tune the process. If you think you can do better or even just help then get involved with the venues and assist with the fine tuning process.

[J_Speegle]

Another angle or thought is that we're looking to reward those owners and car when there is a difference rather than companies that make less than great reproductions. This does not mean that the deduction is a large percentage of the possible points in a section but is often little more than a "hand slap" and should be proportional to the number of items and details in that section. No small handful of these sorts of deduction will typically make a difference in where a car places but at the same time will, in points, differentiate one car from another.

As Pete stated it's not that difficult.  Especially for those who judge and apply their experiences on a regular basis and with other experienced judges.

Reproduction, same as original no deduction. Different from original, figure it out based on percentage of what is off and how well it does match.  This weighted value practice has served us well for decades. You run across the same reproductions time and time again so with those items you it can often become fairly standardized.

[Bossbill]

I'm self-described as exceedingly detail oriented.
To the point that others either laugh at the amount of time I spend on things or roll their eyes.
Having come from a large aerospace company in my prior life I like my porridge to come from a definitive cookbook.
I'm not trying to stir the pot, I just need to know how it works when dealing with the various qualities of merchandise (including not so good NOS or NORS) and how the judges deal with the qualities of those parts.
If I appear rough on certain parts, that's my detail nature not being happy with a part "that will do" when the same amount of effort would have given us a proper part.

As long there is a good deal amount of thought or "weighted value practice", I'm ok with that.

[67350#1242]

Would the judges comment on how they would view the current repro 67 dash pad and if the repro would deserve  a comment or points deduction.  (In light of the fact that used dash pads are findable)?

[CharlesTurner]

The current repro 67-8 dash pad should get at least a 1 point deduction in the concours/Div 2. class.  It's so far off, it's just not acceptable.  We have to give credit for at least having a dash pad and in the correct color, so it shouldn't be all points lost for the category.

[Bossbill]

Would the judges comment on how they would view the current repro 67 dash pad and if the repro would deserve  a comment or points deduction.  (In light of the fact that used dash pads are findable)?

You mean unfindable?
I've bought a few in the last year and they range from "not in my car" to pretty damn good. If they look somewhat ok in the pics you just have to take the chance and see what you get.

I do wonder if there is a deduct or mention for a somewhat wavy but still intact speaker grill area? Maybe it's time for another thread on that topic?