Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 13 of 13

Thread: AMCA Judging

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hummelstown, PA
    Posts
    901

    Talking

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveSwanson View Post
    The restored class is a challenging class, but that is what makes it fun.
    You hit the nail on the head, if this was easy everyone would be doin it.
    Brian Howard AMCA#5866

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    North Hills, CA and Pine Grove, CA
    Posts
    5,455

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 44Knuck View Post
    Greg
    Thanks for the reply. Let me ask you...why should I travel to Davenport, Wauseon, Hanford, etc. looking for original pieces for my restorations when i can walk down to my local dealer and purchase an aftermarket part right off the shelf? Is an air cleaner cover without the logo acceptable? Can I run S&S cases and call it a Knucklehead? Is it acceptable to run a smooth derby cover when an original can be found and used after a little elbow grease and finesse?
    It just seems to me that the line drawn is very faint and up to the discretion of the judge.
    Also, something that was said to me years ago and I am sure everyone has heard it is..."If it was easy, everyone would be doing it".
    Jerry
    A few years ago when the almost totally reproduction Henderson's started appearing it was discussed and the thought was this. If the heart of the motorcycle (the Engine) is original the rest can be reproduction.
    The club Judging Handbook Of judging states, "that Accurately reproduced parts count the same as original while judging a restored category.
    However, in judging an original condition category the part must be original."
    So in reading that one would assume that a machine with reproduction parts is not eligable for an award in the RESTORED class. Unless it is an accurately rerstored part. Do S&S cases, air cleaners without the bar and shield, or smooth derby covers look accurate?
    Be sure to visit;
    http://www.vintageamericanmotorcycles.com/main.php
    Be sure to register at the site so you can see large images.
    Also be sure to visit http://www.caimag.com/forum/

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    North Hills, CA and Pine Grove, CA
    Posts
    5,455

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by giza View Post
    While we're on the subject of NOS versus reproduction I have a question. What is the rule on judging NOS parts that may or may _not_ reflect what rolled off of the production line? For example: I happen to have a 1955 FLH that has 12 bolt pans and "D" rings on it. I also have NOS "D" rings with -54 part numbers that are also 12 bolt. What is the AMCA judging on this? I also have a 1955 head that has 6 holes which is what the book says it should be. I realize that HD and other manufacturers made changes/improvements to parts and kept the same part number. So what is a restorer to do in this case, weld 6 holes shut or keep them?
    Don't complicate things. Sure they started off with six bolts, but soon after went to twelve. Look page 183 of Palmers. It shows a late 1954 with the six screw covers. Before the announced 1955 models. Harley is well known to have started adding next years announced upgrades to the late production bikes.
    Be sure to visit;
    http://www.vintageamericanmotorcycles.com/main.php
    Be sure to register at the site so you can see large images.
    Also be sure to visit http://www.caimag.com/forum/

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •