I sent out an e-mail to all my car buds last night concerning how their clubs handle in transit damage. I have heard from members of the Antique Automobile Club of America, the Classic Car Club of America, Packard Automobile Club, Packard Club International, The Amelia Island Concours, and the Vintage Triumph registry. The majority of these clubs have provisions to give allowances for in transit damage. But keep in mind, and I use the AACA as an example, the cars are judged to a standard and are rewarded if they meet a particular level. I beleive the Healey Club has a similar arrangement, Gold, Silver, and Bronze. The cars are not really competing against each other, but are competing against a standard. To me, that makes all the difference in the world as whether to accept or not accept in transit damage. If we were not competing against other cars, it is not a big deal, and everyone goes home happy with a first place award, or Gold if you will. But If we are competing against other cars, than the whole senario changes. If we are to change our rules to accept in transit damage, then we are going to have to change the way we reward the cars. And I for one feel that we need to take a hard look at what AACA and the Healey club are doing. I am not proposing wholesale changes to are procedure for rewarding the cars at this time but I do beleive that this topic deserves discussion and I am anxious to hear what you loyal forum respondants are thinking.
Best Regard,
Mike Fulton
1938 SS Jaguar 1.5 Litre Saloon
More affectionately known as PEACHES

Submitted by NC43-62049 on Mon, 10/31/2005 - 10:02

Mike:

The logic of the scroing system is fine. As I understand it, every car is treated as a perfect example from the maker and where the car deviates from the perfect standard, the car is deducted. I guess it's what you do with score where clubs differ.

The JCNA ranking system is here to stay. A transit damage rule change is a non-starter as a result.

Regards,

Dan Lokun
Toronto Canada
90 XJ-S

Submitted by jreminga@devel… on Sat, 10/29/2005 - 12:08

There's a great story in a JCNA club's current newsletter about a transit related paint chip, a dead bug and a little adhesive. The judges never noticed.

Jim Reminga
57 XK-140 OTS MC

Submitted by peddlarbob@sym… on Thu, 10/27/2005 - 23:51

>

Would the question not then be, would the damaged car have scored a perfect score had it not been damaged on the way to the show? I would totally agree with you that if an enroute-damaged car was gaining an advantage out of being granted an allowance that would not be right or proper. But to grant an allowance to put the cars back on an even keel. I donÔÇÖt see as being unfair to anybody. Taking this one step further.. Are these cars not meant to be driven or are we trying to encourage the trailering of all these cars to shows. After all If you donÔÇÖt drive them, keep them garaged all the time and trailer them to shows they wont get damaged. Should a trailered car be handed an advantage over a driven car?

Bob.

92 Ser III V-12 VDP #31 Canadian Edition
87 Ser III V-12 VDP
86 Ser III AJ6/Soveriegn
85 Ser III XJ6 VDP
Mk II 3.4 Automatic.

Submitted by Mfulton412@aol.com on Thu, 10/27/2005 - 22:19

Don,
Yes, JCNA does judge the cars to a standard. And the cars are rewarded with first , second, third, and so on. So that tells me that the cars are compared. I had mentioned in my previous post that in the AACA cars are judge to a standard, but the differecnce is that there could be ten cars in a class and if all ten cars meet the standard and scored at a pre-set level of points, they would all receive a first place award. No bickering about a thousanth of a point difference between cars! What you have to understand is, that under our system, it would not be fair to offer allowances for in transit damage. Let's say that an entrant is granted an exemption for in transit damage and is awarded a 100 point score. What do you tell the guy beside him that scored a 99.99 and others across the country that were competing for North American awards that would probably not know that this car was allowed an allowance for damage?
Mike
1938 SS 1.5 Litre Saloon
More affectionately kmown as PEACHES

Submitted by NC43-62049 on Thu, 10/27/2005 - 19:59

Mike, I am glad you took the time check out the other clubs as promised.

I recall Dick (JNCA Rules Chair) made note somewhere along the way previously of other clubs that do not allow transit damage.

I always thought that the JCNA judged to the manufacturer's standard (authenticity/originalty, etc.) first and foremost and then the score was ranked to the other cars in the show.

I believe that the JCNA rules expressly discourage comparing cars. If that is the case, then a transit damage allowance is keeping the spirit of the Rules after all.

Regards,

Dan Lokun
Toronto Canada
90 XJ-S

Submitted by pharmon@jcna.com on Sat, 10/22/2005 - 08:10

Good input Mike! At this point in time our problem is two-fold: lack of comprehensive judging standards and limited personal judging knowledge. Most judges have limited knowledge about cars other than their own and, without a detailed judging standard to follow (such as the E-Types and Mark II now published) they are simply not capable of judging a car to a national standard. Having said that, I totally agree with the JCRC goal to strive for authentic cars and move away from beauty pagents. In our fairly young club here I am almost to the point where I'm going to ask my judges to start specializing in one or more marques. Also, in the future, I beleive our judges should not be allowed to evaluate a given marque until they have been certified in it. I hope this last comment doesn't raise too much of a stir but that's the only way to get it done right.

Pat Harmon
CJ NGJC