No problem with having a differing opinion Verne...that's the beauty of the hobby - each of us chooses how to play the game
My comments were made with respect to the motor only - which is the topic of this thread. I don't think any judging body has re-written history in that regard. I do agree that many judging manuals and judges have made mistakes and I would only follow them if I wanted my car judged in that venue. I will never have a car judged as that is not where my interests lie today. I did a 6 year stint in the NCRS and had a blast and learned a lot - so no disrespect to anyone in that organization. So what I was saying is to me there is only one original engine for a car. ANY other engine is just part of a restoration in my view...so, just like I would use NOS quarter panels whenever available to replicate the originals, I have no problem with a correctly dated, broached and restamped motor or tranny etc. The price differential of 30 plus percent less for a non-orignal motor car that many go by is silly to me - but that's just my opinion! Yes, I believe there should be a differential, but the fact remains that cars that lost their motors etc. during "battle" are still great cars! What peeves me is the fact that so many look down their noses at these cars and have relegated them to second class status and I think it creates more ill-will than necessary. There is no doubt in my mind that this is what is fueling the trend towards less-correct restos and non-numbers fun cars. It's a shame really because this is just causing more "history" to be lost to the mini-tubbed pro-touring set. Again, just my opinions boys, so no need to throw flames
