AMCA Judging

[44Knuck]

I am new to the judging of restored motorcycles. I have been putting knuckleheads together for a few years for my own pleasure of riding them and enjoying them. I entered a bike to be judged for the first time. I didn't do too badly but only scored 84.5. I had minor defects in some of the parts I had used but all of my pieces were original HD parts (I lost 8 points for dents most people couldn't see). A friend also entered his bike for judging and scored a junior first. I was glad to see him place high enough for an award. The only trouble I had is that his bike was put together with mostly aftermarket parts. I am now having trouble seeing the point in chasing original parts if brand new aftermarket parts are going to score higher.
With all due respect, I will continue to enjoy my projects and use original pieces even if they are not up to the standard of the AMCA.
Thanks for the forum

[AMCAGREG]

As someone who has been intimately involved in the judging process maybe I can shed some light on the process. The AMCA rules allow the use of reproduction parts. This has been done to promote the restoration, riding, showing etc of old motorcycles. Lets face it the ever dwindling supply of NOS parts doesn't allow for this. I remember some 20 years ago how original tombstone Harley taillights were gold! They were hoarded, they were taken off basket cases before the bike was sold. The reproduction tail lights could easily be told from the oriinals. What you found at swap meets were junk. Eventually it became profitable for someone to make a HIGH QUALITY reproduction. So the originals are now half the price, the repops are half that price again and everyone has a "correct" tail light. If you feel that having a repop taillight in some way diminishes the value of your bike for resale than go ahead spend the extra money. The market will determine the value of your bike not the AMCA judging criteria. On the other hand we feel that encouraging manufacturers to make good quality reproduction parts benefits the hobby. The emphasis being good quality because if a judge can determine that the part is reproduction then you can deduct for it.
Greg

[44Knuck]

aftermarket parts

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

[T. Cotten]

Valid questions!
The same ones that a "commercial" restorer like myself would ask, even though I rarely aim at a pointable result.
The increasing popularity of this interest, as well as a growing saviness of the participants, has raised the bar of expectations for any producer of repops.

From the narrow American marque viewpoint, there is already a gap between H-D repops with obvious cosmetic differences, yet Indian repops are stunningly accurate.

I feel the acceptance of reproduction parts is imperative, but the inclusion of flawed pieces must be docked, or the manufacturers will never be induced to produce the quality we need to keep these machines in real service.

...Cotten

[val]

Cotton
you are correct, GOOD reproduction parts are acceptable without a point deduction. however if the reproduction is of poor quality then points will be taken off. sorry for you Harley guys, but H-D will not allow just anyone to put their logo on repop parts and that makes it harder to find quality H-D repop parts. but it has forced a lot of people to up the mark on the product they produce which has helped most of us bring the bikes back.
Kevin

[giza]

NOS parts and judging

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?

[Chris Haynes]

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?

Early 1955 models had six holes. But later in production the number was returned to twelve.

[felthamw]

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?

What did you finally do about the 12 bolt 1955 heads? I am in the same position. Late numbers (5199). They zinged me 1 1/4 points in Eustis! Heads are stamped as '55's underneath. My understanding was that it was a factory approved, dealer fix for leakers but was also implemented in latter '55 (per Chris H.).
I sure wish I could have some documentation on when they went to 12 bolt, so I can wave that under the judges nose(s)!
Wayne Feltham

[Rooster]

....... I am now having trouble seeing the point in chasing original parts if brand new aftermarket parts are going to score higher.....

44, I am new to this whole arena myself; not motorcycles, but 'correct vintage' motorcycles. I'm working on a '52 FL, and I have taken great pains (let's not talk about expense) to find original parts in the best possible shape I can find. As you know, a lot of times that means banged up stuff that needs a little help being brought back to life. My goal is not so much for the points, but when I stand beside that motorcycle and someone asks about it, I will feel good in saying 'Yes, it's a 1952 Harley". There's no way I could have a lot of pride in a 'repop' bike--- (no offense to those who use a lot of aftermarket parts). Nevertheless, there are some very high-quality aftermarket items out there, and -- as has been said-- why not take advantage of it? I have learned how to sort out the junk from the quality, and I can say that takes awhile.

[DaveSwanson]

I had minor defects in some of the parts I had used but all of my pieces were original HD parts (I lost 8 points for dents most people couldn't see). A friend also entered his bike for judging and scored a junior first. The only trouble I had is that his bike was put together with mostly aftermarket parts. I am now having trouble seeing the point in chasing original parts if brand new aftermarket parts are going to score higher.
Thanks for the forum

Since your bike is being judged as a restored bike rather than original, you have the daunting task of restoring it to look new. Any evidence of road wear, and road rash will be a deduction on a bike that is supposed to look like it rolled off the assembly line. The restored class is a challenging class, but that is what makes it fun.

[bmh]

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.

[Chris Haynes]

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?

[Chris Haynes]

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.