Unrestored Model A's and National Meets

Arcieri

Arcieri

Senior Member
I have two unrestored Model A cars that have been shown at National Meets. One at Dallas in 2008 by me and the other by the previous owner in 2004.

I am wondering, in light of the newly announced Roger Kauffman award for unrestored cars, if my cars could again be entered into fine point judging with the intent of competing for that award?

Both cars scored above 400 points and I don't believe any higher award is available since unestored is unrestored - no restoration allowed, just preservation. It would be nice to try for the Roger Kauffman award though.

Couldn't find the answer in the new Standards so I thought I would try here.

Thanks,
Ray
 
Ray, I am not on the JSC therefore I won't begin to answer in an official capacity however I was in attendance at the JSC meeting in Toledo when this was discussed (and I was a Judge at the Dallas meet) and I would encourage you to enter just for that purpose however as I understand it, it is/was not Dee Kaufman's &/or the JSC's intent for this to be the highest scoring unrestored car, but more noteably it is to be awarded to the unrestored vehicle in attendance that Roger would have liked the most. I will also tell you that I saw the prototype trophy there. It was truly gorgeous and would surely be a great keepsake.
 
Thanks Brent for your informative reply.

I kind of figured from reading the page on the MARC website that the award was as you described. I just didn't know if an unrestored car could be shown again. Perhaps at future meets unrestored cars that have already participated in fine point judging could be in the judging area and only evaluated by the group that determines who gets the Roger Kauffman award if they are not eligible to be in fine point judging again.

This award most certainly will be an incentive for those who own unrestored cars to get them out of hibernation and show themselves to the Model A community. I know this has really motivated me.

Roger helped me a lot at Dallas when my car failed to start at the Start and Idle parking lot. He was extremely patient with me and gave me an extra 30 minutes to figure out what was wrong. Finally got it to start and it performed great the rest of the meet.

Ray
 
It's nice to see a growing interest in unrestored cars, I can think of a few ( not Model A's) that never should have been restored. Are there Model A's that some people now regret restoring?
 
Where this gets to be a "slippery-slope" is when is it an unrestored Model-A? Lets just suppose someone finds a 15,000 mile Tudor Sedan and decides they want to "detail" it a bit. When is it crossing the line from being "unmolested" or "unrestored"?

For the sake of an analogy, suppose I take the original lacquer paint that has a few runs, a little orange peel, and a few imperfections and I carefully colorsand it and buff it to return the shine and to make it "more presentable" for the judges. Or suppose the pockets on the doors are sagging like they all do making them look unsightly. Surely there is no harm in removing the panel and carefully re-sewing the elastic to make them look "as good as new" is there? While we are doing the interior, maybe it would be acceptable to re-sew a seam or two, and re-position the seat cover on the cushion to allow the pleats to align more closely. Maybe we should also take the time to align screw heads throughout the interior? How about let's clean-up the engine bay a tad too by removing the grease and re-detailing all of the fasteners one-by-one to make them look new, -yet with patina. Now remember, we are not going to 'restore', ...we're just going to 'detail' the car. What about the running board trim, or the radiator paint? Can we make that look better? Oh, and what if I have a near-NOS set of front bumper bars that I found many years ago at a swap meet to switch out with the ones on the car that are showing their age? BTW, the odometer actually was showing 45 thousand miles when we found it but 15,000 has more appeal so.... --well you know what to do!

My point in all of this is that it is easy to alter history when someone has a desire and some skills. I think the MARC Judging Standards Committee took this view where they did not want the "prize" to become bigger than the 'prize' (-the unrestored, unmolested Model-A) which if it did, could perceivably encourage someone to create a "low mileage unrestored Model-A" just for the sake of the accolades and prestige.

.
.
 
Brent: What you're describing certainly dis-qualifies it from being "unmolested" in my opinion. But when left in the 'as found" state" they are certainly nice to look at. Attended a show last week and the "drivers" did more for me tan the few that were highly "restored" and much more practical. JMO
Paul in CT
 
I think unrestored and patina have been the most abused terms and ideas this activity has ever seen. Dirt and rust are just that. There's nothing "kool" about a tattered and rotted old clunker. As a restorer one can see past that mess an mentally record what was there. I wouldn't think repairing upholstery and cleaning things up removes anything from the car/truck in question. I think it shows the respect a surviving car deserves. Anything can be taken too far. I recall talking to a guy at show once with his dads old truck (non-Model A) and how he wanted it just like when it was dad's work truck. He even "painted over the original dents". Perspective wasn't that guy's strong suit, and just 1 of hundreds of too far examples.
 
1931 flamingo said:
Brent: What you're describing certainly dis-qualifies it from being "unmolested" in my opinion. But when left in the 'as found" state" they are certainly nice to look at. Attended a show last week and the "drivers" did more for me tan the few that were highly "restored" and much more practical. JMO
Paul in CT
Click to expand...


Yes Paul, I agree with your opinion about disqualification, however, most people are unknowing on what is "unmolested" ...and what is 'tampered with'. Jeff mentioned above he likes looking at them because it appears time stops and most share those same feelings, ...but people tend to believe what is believable in their own mind. So how would you know which is what? If you recall, there was a post here a few months ago where someone had just purchased a 'survivor' all original Model-A Coupe and they were innocently showing it off here. As soon as I saw it, I PM-ed a few knowledgable friends and we shared thoughts. They all concurred with me that it wasn't however none of us wanted to say anything that would hurt this person's feelings. The problem was that during this time, others here were all praising the car and the owner because it seemed believable.

I feel comfortable in saying I personally could assemble a Model-A that could fool 95% into believing it is an all original, unmolested Model-A. If I can do it, I feel confident in saying there are others who are way more capable than I of doing the same. Now factor in a prestigeous goal (trophy, accolades, $$) and the stakes make what some would consider unethical more appealing. So how do you "police it" to keep such a thing from happening? I don't know that you can but I it would appear that if the rewards are not there, then the unethical desires are less appealing.



Ray, I meant to address your last comments in Post #3. You experienced the true 'Roger' during Start & Idle, ...and if I were in your shoes, for me that alone would be a huge motivating factor to be considered as a recipient of his memorial award. Roger's legacy was built on unselfishly helping others, -just like you experienced. A Roger Kaufman trophy on the mantle would serve as a great memento on how neat your car is, ...AND as a great reminder to yourself of your experiences with Roger at Dallas. BTW, unrestored vehicles are always welcome and encouraged to be displayed.
 
"When is it crossing the line from being "unmolested" or "unrestored"?"

To me these are two different things and if you add the word original I believe they are three different things;

Unmolested is as found; dirt, grease and just mininmum to make it safe to drive.
Unrestored is cleaned up; the old grease, grime, dirt removed, the only thing added maybe, would be to keep things from getting worse.

So in the anology, except for the color sanding, that would be an original car.

This is just my opinion and nothing else. Yours may very.
 
Here is one of my unrestored model A's. I'm afraid the yellow wqheels would be considered molestation. Oh well, I guess there is no need to do any color sanding . Its still six volt!!!!!
2040079-T600450.jpg
 
BRENT in 10-uh-C said:
Where this gets to be a "slippery-slope" is when is it an unrestored Model-A? Lets just suppose someone finds a 15,000 mile Tudor Sedan and decides they want to "detail" it a bit. When is it crossing the line from being "unmolested" or "unrestored"?

.
Click to expand...

I don't see any "slippery slope" here. Yes, some folks will make decisions that are less than ideal but that happens in all aspects of life. Some folks seem to think it must be "as found" which is not the intent from a judging standpoint. Take your 15k mile car as an example. If I acquired that car and found the coil had been replaced with a 1960-ish off the shelf coil, should I leave it on the car because that's how I found it? I'll tell you right now I WOULD CHANGE IT! I certainly would not put a restored one on the car. I would install one that was unrestored and correct for the date of the car. How can that possibly be worse than what I found on the car. This does not mean I'm attempting to "trick" anyone.

I've never seen paint runs or sags in original lacquer. If I by some chance found that oddity on the 15k mile car I would personally prefer to leave it alone as I don't see it as a negative. Now lets assume this type of paint flaw did originally occur on occasion. What makes you think it would ever make it to a buyer as such. Dealers certainly detailed and prepped the cars just like they do today and would deal with anything considered "unsightly".

Now, how about routine maintenance? Folks seem to think these cars were never polished or repaired. Do you think if seam split open on a seat cushion the owner would let it go unrepaired indefinitely? I think that is silly and see no difference between a repair done in 1934 or 2012 if it is simply a repair.

The idea of "Original Unrestored" is just what it sounds like. Not repainted, not reupholstered, etc. If someone had a 60k mile car with a large hole in the cushion where the driver sits I'd much rather see some kind of patch carefully hand sewn over that hole than a new LB seat cover which would receive zero points and to me would be preferable regardless if one had intentions of entering the car for judging or just driving it every day. However if it were mine I would locate a similar original seat which I could use sections of to repair my original.

I would also argue what can be done as far as undetectable "restoration" on an unrestored car. In my opinion there isn't much. That doesn't mean you can't fool a number of folks as those that haven't studied original cars tend to base their opinions on patina.

 
"....however none of us wanted to say anything that would hurt this person's feelings."
Brent- A real example of the stellar characters that inhabit this board. As the owner of said coupe, I appreciate your kindness, however I have plenty thick skin, and can take the lickin'. I have learned a lot (mostly on this board) since I bought that coupe, and you guys were spot on. The car is obviously an early '70's refresh with a later in life period of neglect, where things went downhill a bit. It is now a smooth running, pretty good looking driver, and that's exactly what I'm going to do with it.
Thanks for all the knowledge you and others share here! Mike
 
I'm not surprised by Marco's reply. You nailed it. I've seen it posted on the HAMB, "barn find is the new flat black", and that about sums it up too. I rather dislike the "as found" mentality that surrounds a survivor. By that rigid and all or nothing ideal, you screwed your barn find by removing the rat nest behind the seat or in the trunk. I've heard over the years, the lack of understanding and ignorance of this very topic. I'd have a few choice words for someone who'd proclaim how I screwed up a gennie survivor.

Years ago I bought a 22K mile 32 Packard. It was sheltered in a Denver barn and hadn't seen daylight in decades. The hood paint was worn through, bumper chrome was almost gone, a hole in the driver's seat, dry rotted tires, and most all of the pinsripe was gone. In spite of all that, anyone could easily see that it was the real deal and deserved to be put back in service. I re-chromed the bumpers, blended in the hood paint and a bit on the fender tops, took the seat cover off and restitched the seam, cleaned all the years of dirt and neglect, added a new set of tires and refinished the wheels. Once all done I had the best striper in my area duplicate the pinstriping and avoid where it was still plenty visible. Some would say I screwed that car up. I guess I don't subscribe to the idea that the smell of rat piss, mildew, dirt and rust are kool things and essential elements to what Packard offered in 1932. I often applied the appropriate finger to the haters. The next owner did indeed remove the car's unique flavor of authenticity. I was eventually given a new interior, woodgrain, and paint. There's that perspective thing again...
 
I am of the opinion that we have lost the perspective in this thread. When we go back and look at the first post, we see this topic was about competing for an award, --not for who screwed up what. Cleaning is one thing and is not to be overlooked. Sewing up damaged seams and such likely follows in that same mindset. The perceived issue was when a vehicle is altered to score more points on a judging sheet so an award can be garnered, then is that crossing the line and outside of the spirit of the award? Again, it would have been the highest scoring vehicle in the building on that day which means the vehicles were now competing against one another instead of the judging sheet. If you feel that is wrong, take it up with the JSC as they are the ones that voiced their opinions and voted on how they felt it should be handled.
 
BRENT in 10-uh-C said:
Where this gets to be a "slippery-slope" is when is it an unrestored Model-A? Lets just suppose someone finds a 15,000 mile Tudor Sedan and decides they want to "detail" it a bit. When is it crossing the line from being "unmolested" or "unrestored"?

For the sake of an analogy, suppose I take the original lacquer paint that has a few runs, a little orange peel, and a few imperfections and I carefully colorsand it and buff it to return the shine and to make it "more presentable" for the judges. Or suppose the pockets on the doors are sagging like they all do making them look unsightly. Surely there is no harm in removing the panel and carefully re-sewing the elastic to make them look "as good as new" is there? While we are doing the interior, maybe it would be acceptable to re-sew a seam or two, and re-position the seat cover on the cushion to allow the pleats to align more closely. Maybe we should also take the time to align screw heads throughout the interior? How about let's clean-up the engine bay a tad too by removing the grease and re-detailing all of the fasteners one-by-one to make them look new, -yet with patina. Now remember, we are not going to 'restore', ...we're just going to 'detail' the car. What about the running board trim, or the radiator paint? Can we make that look better? Oh, and what if I have a near-NOS set of front bumper bars that I found many years ago at a swap meet to switch out with the ones on the car that are showing their age? BTW, the odometer actually was showing 45 thousand miles when we found it but 15,000 has more appeal so.... --well you know what to do!

My point in all of this is that it is easy to alter history when someone has a desire and some skills. I think the MARC Judging Standards Committee took this view where they did not want the "prize" to become bigger than the 'prize' (-the unrestored, unmolested Model-A) which if it did, could perceivably encourage someone to create a "low mileage unrestored Model-A" just for the sake of the accolades and prestige.

.
.
Click to expand...
I believe this is where it digressed. Not that I have a problem with that. Intelligent and inquisitive people will always expand a subject. Many times it is said "How did we get on this topic?"
 
BRENT in 10-uh-C said:
I am of the opinion that we have lost the perspective in this thread. When we go back and look at the first post, we see this topic was about competing for an award, --not for who screwed up what. Cleaning is one thing and is not to be overlooked. Sewing up damaged seams and such likely follows in that same mindset. The perceived issue was when a vehicle is altered to score more points on a judging sheet so an award can be garnered, then is that crossing the line and outside of the spirit of the award? Again, it would have been the highest scoring vehicle in the building on that day which means the vehicles were now competing against one another instead of the judging sheet. If you feel that is wrong, take it up with the JSC as they are the ones that voiced their opinions and voted on how they felt it should be handled.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. The OP was indeed considering competition for, what sounds like, a new award. Not surprised at the inception of such an award, and again the "barn find" thinking creeping into yet another venue of folks sharing their cars with one another. Naturally it should work into a discussion as to what would qualify for such and our own unique perspectives. If not, maybe start another thread?

I think "as found" is best shared on a few milk crates with your best buds and some coffee. Maybe in a few 'net pix on your favorite haunts too. No?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top