AMCA Judging Program

[jurassic]

i am in no way saying that all repo top ends are undetectable.but some are.so if i bring an 8 valve to be judged,and make sure that it is undetectable,and you ,knowing that i build only repo bikes,and you, also knowing that there are only 2 original examples of said 8 valve left in the world. would my bike still be recognized ,and awarded by the AMCA? the components are undetectable . it has met the criteria, yet you know it is not original.

[VPH-D]

My Handbook of Judging states on pg 13 " A motorcycle having an incorrect combination of major components, i.e., engine and/ or frame will be disqualified."

So now instead of a DQ a wrong frame is a six point hit?
A fake frame is a six point hit instead of a DQ?
Isn't a 48 FL with a 50 frame closer to real than a 48 FL with a fake frame?
If a machine has fake top end or frame, is it an antique motorcycle, or a representation of an antique motorcycle?
If these type of machines aren't DQd, they should be gigged at least 11 points in order to keep them at a junior level.
Just a couple thoughts...
VPH-D

[portagepan]

This is over my head. My only question is just why would someone want a reproduction judged as original in the first place? I mean, a person who goes out of their way, and spends years getting together a bike with original parts shouldn't be in the same class as a bike made of reproduction parts. There seems to be a money thing here. A reproduction bike is worth exactly the amount of the parts purchased separately. But if it is "close to original" the value skyrockets. This is something that bothers me lately. It just seems there are ulterior motives behind some of this. Believe me, I absolutetly feel everyone should be entitled to any value they place on their own bike. But to drive the club with this as a major factor is detracting from my personal interest in it. Cripe, we're not all rich in this club. I usually get to one meet a year, that is close to where I live. I could go to more if I just wanted to sell parts and make money to pay for my travels, but the bikes come first to me. And I am usually broke after the winter projects, and the usual spring fling of wanting to buy every bike I see. It just comes down to what the priorities of the club are. If you have read my rants on early meet sales, you know where I stand.
Mike

[scd]

Lonnie I: Your excellent quetion takes us to the gray borderland where preservation meets replication. Recognizing that cylinders are a wear item, the top end rule implies that cylinders/heads need not be original. They must, however, be extremely accurate representations of original to avoid the 6-point deduction. The judges should rely on direct examination for this determination. The appraisal becomes stricter with the crankcases, where original is required. If a judging team cannot detect a difference in the cases from original, it is conceivable that it could slip through. But the intent is to protect the rights and privileges of original machines, which are the true representatives of the brand. Thus, the full range of knowledge could be utilized, ranging from serial # analysis to logical deduction relative to production numbers, known examples in existence etc.

In regard to the 6-point deduction for reproduction frames, it applies only to frames that accurately represent the year, but are nevertheless determined to be reproduction. If the engine/frame combination is incorrect, it remains a dq whether reproduction or original.

Good questions. If I had been in the shop this winter as many hours as I've spent thinking about these changes, I'd have something more concrete to show off.

Steve

[joestuff]

My issue with the rule changes echos Lonnie concerns, but is a bit different. I'm a sportster guy, and nobody makes repop cases or frames for them, so it' not an issue there. My concern is that the 6 point deduction for repo frames, top ends and the like, deters the mission of the club to promote the antique bikes. If someone is putting a swap meet special or basket case together, they used to be able to build it into a 99 point bike. Now they cannot, unless they have the money and connections to find the ever rarer and more expensive parts. So my issue is primary with the "as it left the factory the first time" change. This means a restoration bike now can only be an original bike that was too far gone, a restoration bike can no longer be an assembled bike.

So, for example, say I find a nice set of knuckle head cases. Previously, I would have tried to assemble, the best I could, an original knuckle head. Now, with the changes, why would I not call up JP cycles and build a chopper instead. To take the argument a step further, if someone wants to build a 1910 harley from scratch, all reproduction, why should we not judge it as what it is. After all, judging is about helping members build/create/restore accurate machines via the knowledge transfer that only happens on the judging field.

Now, I do fully agree that a original bike, or a restored original bike deserves more respect then a reproduction or recreation. I think the situation would be best handled in one of two ways...

1) Ban repop bikes from the winners circle, but still let them get the points. Have check boxes on the form for repop frame, top end, cases, etc. If any of those are checked, then the bike is not eligible for the winners circle, but could still be judged under the existing best available repop rule. Even go a step further and say winner circle bikes must have a majority of original parts.

2) Create a new judging class for reconstructed bikes. Judge them the same as any other, but ban them from the winners circle.

I feel that these rules I suggest will encourage people to try and build accurate/correct bikes, and will benefit the club by not only assuring that winner circle bikes are the best of the breed, but also by letting builders/restorers still go for top points, even if they cannot get to the winners circle.

I will again state that I think the rule changes as is, will deter people from trying to build nice antiques out of oil stains. If this holds true, then they will stop coming to meets, stop being members, and the mission of the club is not served thru judging.

Joe

[Red Fred]

Hey Joe,
Don't sell yourself short on the repro bikes here. As long as it's old enough, there is a place for it amongst us all. Yes, one of the main functions of the AMCA judging is to preserve an example of machine for future reference. After all, we must have an acurate speciman to look back on! In this catagory, we are dealing with thoroughbreds.
Thankfully Kevin Valentine, an old East Coast guy, saw to it that period modifieds are recognized amongst our ranks. Period Modifieds are some of the heart & soul of what we do. So are original Paint artifacts, and so are Knucklehead engines in brand new frames.
Newbie BOD member Matt Olsen is all over the later version. Look forward to these refreshing, hot rod, versions of our machinery to gain some form of official recognition via the club soon. I'm not speaking for the BOD ( the lawyers won't let me ) here, but I feel ya, and these exciting new specimans of our culture will/ are being acknowledged as we speak.
Dunno about the Sportys though, have you ever considered a Sport Scout? Just had to throw that one in for Chris Haynes!
Good point Joe, and I feel ya on this one. I'm kinda thinking of installing a Chief engine in a V-Strome frame myself. One must have a bike for every mood.
Good on ya, RF.

[Tommo]

Red Fred
Are you saying that the Board has been silenced by legal advice and lawyers have instructed board members not to inform the general membership of the issues that affect the running of this club.

[Steve Slocombe]

Dear Tommo, I believe Red Fred was joking, which often does not work well in Emails.

On other items mentioned, we used to allow repro frames under the 'best available repro' rule, but now consider them a key part of the bike so they take a points hit if not original.

We're also seeing an arms race between the fakers and the restorers/collectors, with repro crankcases and number stamps now becoming widely available. Remember these bikes are not 35 years old, so not eligible for judging, but we have categories for display, period modified, most unique, or even longest distance driven which should satisfy you trophy hounds. There is a big incentive to doctor up a $9,000 Timeless and put it in for judging as a $90,000 1910 Harley, but please try and contain yourself as our marque specialists will know the difference. Remember our Club mission is about preserving motorcycling history and not authenticating replicas. Having said that, we all enjoy seeing the workmanship of our members, and some historic bikes exist only as replicas. Please bring them along so we can all enjoy them, just don't put them in for judging.

On parts bikes, we still allow bikes built from parts to be judged, but only in the restored category as far as I know, and of course the parts have to be correct for the year.

[Lonnie]

A bike built from parts, so to speak, is what many of the bikes competing at the higher ranks in the Restored Class are comprised of. After all, every bike started off as parts, correct. So, please, guys, do not look down on bikes built from parts.

On a personal level, I picked up a mixed-up knucklehead, broke it down, bought parts, paid dearly and now have two knuckleheads, one a restored '41EL and the other a restoration-quality '47EL. The '41 is fully capable of being a Restored WC bike, of that I have no doubt, Larry Gee did a fine job. However, I will not submit it to the judging process based on my past experiences with supposedly knowledgeable judges who were not.

My '48 was DQ'ed at a meet for wrong frame, which I only found out at the awards ceremony (that was prior to us owners being allowed on field). A bit irate, I collared Kevin and the Chief Chapter judge and instructed them on the error. I was right, knew I was right and they agreed. I got my award.

I cannot count the number of times that I and other owners have had an item noted as incorrect at a meet, correct the issue for the next meet only to be told that the correction is incorrect and being informed that the way it was at the first meet is correct!

I have personally witnessed judges going back and forth between basically identical bikes trying to make a determination of what is correct. "This is correct!" "No, this one is correct!" What a fiasco!

I have personally witnessed judges spending an inordinate amount of time on one bike, in one case over half an hour, and only a brief amount of time on another very similar bike because "I know this bike".

None of these issues were Kevin's or Robin's fault, they are just factors of human nature and are (were) beyond their control. Changing the Chief and Assistant Chief will not fix it.

Now, we have to deal with some person or persons who think they know it all not only visually checking the authenticity of the engine and frame but now being tasked with verifying the correct font and appearance of the VIN! And checking that the casting hallmarks are correct, knowing as we do that there are variances in these hallmarks in otherwise identical frames as the design carried over from year to year! Crikey!

On top of this unprecedented attention to the bikes being judged, we have yet another scenario being ignored, which is the virtually undetectable fabrication of "Original" (Unrestored) bikes, built from parts (told you they are all parts) and being passed of as "original paint bikes". I've seen it done, all you need is an original paint sheetmetal set (or a good painter who know his stuff), stir in a few (or a lot of) parts out of the back room or auto jumble (swapmeet to us US dudes) and viola! Instant original unrestored bike!

There is no amount of information out there for all the makes now being judged nor are there enough qualified judges at any one meet, with Davenport being the possible exception for some of the makes, to adequately determine the authenticity of all the components on all bikes on the field. Period.

[Sportster Jerry]

I can understand not allowing a repop frame as the "best available reproduction" due to it being an integral part of the bike, but what about cylinders? How are they considered an integral part of the bike? They are a wear item, and a 6 point deductions seems excessive. In my opinion, engine cases and frame are the only "essential" parts of the bike.

I've said it in another post and I'll say it again....I feel like the new changes are going to frustrate and intimidate new members or members who have never had a bike judged. Restoring old bikes is a hobby and judging should be fun. But this is the first year in 5 years that my Dad and I have decided not to have our bikes on the judging field at Oley and that is a bummer.

Winners' Circle should stay Winners' Cirlce, and if the AMCA wants to elevate their standards they should add a new national award above W.C.