Completely ORIGINAL 69 XLCH

[exeric]

It's obvious to me that these changes are because of early H-D fakes. Early H-Ds are huge money bikes and good counterfeiting was only a matter of time. Now you have to ask yourself (as a member of the AMCA), should the AMCA have involved itself in recognizing this trend ? If you say YES; then you have to adjust the judging rules. If you say NO, then you condone allowing fakes. Of course there is a lot of variation in the amount and quality of reproduction parts in a restoration, and that is what restoration is all about. That's why the rules have to be carefully scutinized. Steve Dawdy is a great listener and I'm sure he would welcome constructive ideas.

[Northwoods_Maine]

Too subjective???

Sargehere - "A Taiwan Tedd frame with NO hallmarks ain't gonna cut it. A pretty-accurate Race Frame Engineering frame will. That's the the fire we're holding the feet of all the makers of the junque parts to.
Use common sense. (I know, "what a concept!") We don't judge from ten feet away, we get up close and personal with the bikes. We know there are going to be repro frames, and what to look for. A reasonable repro, like a year-and-model-specific one from Australia, right now, is a far cry from a "Generic Panhead" frame of five years ago. It can be done: erasure of the "obviousness;" not to "fool the judges into thinking it's original," but to become a "Passed" repro frame, not an "obvious," repro, meaning incorrect in easily detectable details. A higher standard, if someone expects their bike to make the Winners' Circle of Excellence.
The rules adopted don't say ALL repro frames are a six-point deduction. They say "obvious reproductions," meaning generic frames with glaring inaccuracies, like toolbox mounts in the wrong place, or of the wrong type, or any of a hunded other errors. What's there has to be correct for the year and model of the bike."


Never had a bike judged and may, or may not, ever in the future (nothing to do with the politics and controversy here), just not my 'thing'. But I would make the observation that it would seem from the above that we're opening a whole can of worms with each individual judge having his/her interpretation of what's an "obvious reproduction" from a not-quite-so-obvious reproduction. Food for thought. Seems to me that the judging criteria should be based on a concrete, known set of standards, not one's interpretation of the word "obvious".

[Chris Haynes]

When you take one model machine and turn it into different model that is not a restoration. That is counterfeiting. A reproduction head on a 1940 UL is still a 1940 UL. A set of 8 valve reproductions road racing heads on a JDH and it is no longer a JDH. It is a counterfiet 8 Valve.

[murph]

I really am sorry about the judging problems. I don't comment because I don't no anything about it, but does every catagory have to turn into the subject of the judging problems?

[Paquette]

MURPH--You SIR have given us one of the most brilliant posts I have read here in a looooooooog time--Thanks--Michael--6671

[moon wolf]

Well said, Murph and Michael. The original poster had a legitimate question that was mostly ignored while others went off on a tirade. I do appreciate Kevin's remarks, though, and his saying that this was not the place.

It sounds like a great bike and you certainly don't have to apologize for getting a good deal. I'm on the other side of that debate. I'm glad you rescued the bike and gave it a good home, and if you would have offered the guy a couple hundred less for it and he accepted, more power to you.

For years I tried to buy a Chrysler Airstream from an old fellow who refused to sell. It was sitting in a shed at the edge of a field on the bank of river. Over the years, trees grew up that would have made it very difficult to remove the car and finally one year the river rose, the bank collapsed, and the car fell into the river, but by then it wasn't worth much anyway.

Even if the guy had sold it to me for just a hundred bucks, he would be well ahead and a rare automobile would still exist.

[DanM]

Get it judged

hey Cool AC

Bring 'er out to a meet and have it judged. If it is all original, then others restoring a similar bike will appreciate being able to take notes from it.

You might learn about a few things about the bike while at it.

Basically the judging sheet breaks the bike up into around 20 sections, and each section is judged. you start with 100 points. any deviations have points deductions- 1/4 point, all the way to 6 points. The deductions are totaled, subtracted from the 100, and you have a score.

There are levels you go through- Junior, Senior, winners Circle. You need to reach minimum points levels in each, to move up. Even if it is 100 points,, you start with a junior ...

It is an enlightening process, and many enjoy the excitement of the score sheet.

[T. Cotten]

A Taiwan Tedd frame with NO hallmarks ain't gonna cut it. A pretty-accurate Race Frame Engineering frame will. That's the the fire we're holding the feet of all the makers of the junque parts to.

Wow!

The AMCA is going to start dictating whose reproductions are gold, and whose are garbage!
Brilliant!

There can't possibly ever be a conflict of interest, huh.

Thanks Sarge,
It's all so clear to me now!

....Cotten

[Sargehere]

I have never, ever experienced Judging, despite your preconceived notions, to be driven by your imagined brand prejudices, Tom, in almost forty years. Even my lumping of bad reproduction frames together by calling them "Taiwan Tedd's" doesn't exclude someone starting with one of his generic frames and perhaps making it right, but out-of-the-box, just bolted together, there's way too much wrong with what you buy out of his catalog. That's what makes it interesting.
I see you looking through the wrong end of the telescope, again. We're not, "dictating whose reproductions are gold, and whose are garbage," at all. We're judging where the restorer ends up, regardless of what he started out with, but talking to you is tiring. You know you're right, and facts will not dissuade you from your imaginary nightmare.
Yes, a V-Twin generic frame, unmodified, is an "obvious reproduction." Given a lot of work, like filing down electric welds to look like brazing, perhaps,and relocating many of the details, and replacing things like flat-plate rear axle hangers with correct cast ones, and on, and on, you could probably make a silk purse from a sow's ear. But the effort is probably not worth the effort, nor cost-effective, when better starting material is available.
It's unbelieveable to you, I understand, but the judges don't care what you started out with, only what you end up with and bring to the judging field, AND IS IT FAITHFUL TO THE ORIGINAL YEAR AND MODEL IT PURPORTS TO BE?