Judging System Question?

[Tommo]

I've kept out of this discussion as I felt it didn't concern me but as things stand I might be bringing my 65 pan to the USA to ride and participate in some AMCA events.
If I get it judged do I have to bring both the solo and the buddy seats with me because that is the way it left the factory.
I have attached the factory invoice that substantiates this fact and in doing so ask how does anyone know exactly how a particular bike left the factory unless they can produce this sort of evidence.
All sorts of special order bikes were sent out of factories all over the world, especially when they were in financial trouble. Douglas is a good example following the First World War and Triumph was in the same boat during the Sit-In by the unions, I just think it is almost impossible for any individual to say that is how a particular bike should look because it would only be his opinion as to how it left the factory.
Without the factory invoice I would have been ridiculed if I stated that a 1965 Harley left the factory with two seats but the evidence is there for all to see.
I'm with Cotton on this,too much history is destroyed by over zealous but well meaning bike owners who think that shiney is best. If shiney is best why do genuine un-restored machines command the prices they do in the auction rooms

[Sargehere]

A little harder understanding what is correct and finding it for a '65. I don't see the need to have everything brought back to new necessarily as long as it is judged as an original.

But Ray, it's not an original. Not close to it. Someone looking at it isn't learning from it exactly how the factory painted the '65 Panheads. It's a reassembly of parts, from your description, modified to your liking and displays the results of your judgements, from your study, of what a '65 originally looked like. The closest thing to that is "restoration:" replacing missing parts and simulating the original paint. You liked the original patina of the speedo. There's no connection to the former owners for restored bikes. Every post-factory detail has been wiped out and it's taken back. You want connection to its past? Fine, but that's not restoration. It's either original, restored (a virtually unrideable "artwork," usually) or it's a rider.
In between is just that, an unjudgeable in-betweener. There are thousands like it. Don't get angry. You built what you wanted. You didn't set out to build a showpiece (not if you specifically didn't have the speedo face replaced, etc.) so don't expect national recognition for building what you liked.
There's no class for "I built what I like," except your own satisfaction and that of fellow riders who also notice and admire what you made. You made a series of decisions, and you gained a wealth knowlege about that watershed transition year in Harley history, 1965. Enjoy it and ride it. But no bike can be all things.

[rbenash]

Ray, I can see your situation but I think a class like you describe would just muddy the judging waters. I'll cite my example and leave it at that. I have a 1948FL that I have been building for fun. I started this project to reconnect with the fun of building a bike and of course, panheads are easy to do and easy to find parts for. This bike started as a pair of gas tanks hanging from the rafters in my shop and that was the jumping off point that committed me to the project. My goal, from the get go was to have fun and not get mired in the obscession to find perfect, genuine parts. I do that with my early bikes but this bike is suppose to be fun. I have been very fortunate to find lots of great condition, genuine parts for the '48 but I have had no qualms about using a repro dash base, wiring, muffler, headlight, and fender light, and lots of little things are just easier to get out of a catalog. This bike has also been a great place to use nice old parts that have been collecting dust but fall into that catagory of too nice to restore; hence the tail-light has light pitting in the chrome, the footboard mats show slight wear, and the speedo is nice but worn. Getting back to the point of this letter is; not every bike needs to be judged, or should be judged to AMCA standards. Some bikes should just be enjoyed; which gets back to the question of what do you want to do with your bike? If you're serious about getting it judged, then be prepared for an expensive, long ordeal that turns the bike into a static piece of art. You will be stunned by the scrutiny of the AMCA judges of 30s and post war H-Ds and Indians. Very little gets by them, and again; at the end of the day, you have a little trophy and a piece of art that your wife won't let you keep in the living room. My thinking now is; if someone has an interest in AMCA judging, they should get involved with the process, and go through the ordeal of putting a bike through. I also believe that the standards must be high so that AMCA recognition means something. Bikes like my '48 should be welcomed and maybe displayed, but I don't think it has a place in AMCA judging. In reality, this has been the case for as long as I have been in the AMCA. At every meet I have been to, there have been fantastic bikes on display throughout the grounds and parking lots. Some bikes are in the process of being built, some are funky old riders, and some are Frankenstein's love children. Regardless, I've taken more pictures of bikes like the aforementioned than I have of bikes on the judging floor. There is a huge interest in such bikes and I don't think that AMCA judging has to be the fate of every antique motorcycle.

Appreciate your points, but in my case not exactly what I'm talking about. I would say as an example take the speedo. It's the original that was rebuilt several years ago so that it would work correctly. Told the rebuidler (Palo Alto speedo) That I didn't want the original face, needle or number wheels replaced. None of it was cracked or affected other than shows some age/character. All of the original owners looked at that face, etc. I get a connected feel with them when I ride it (one was my father). If I have the bike judged as "restored" I get dinged because the whole speedo should be restored or "new". Fair enough, that's the rules as they stand. Just saying another class would realize this speedo is fine the way it is, it's original. And beause the bike has been repainted (see below) shouldn't mean I have to be that intrusive on the original parts.

The bike was 90-95% original, which is great for a '65 I think we can agree. One of the owners practiced his new found pinstriping on it (on the original paint). I found it unsightly. I reserached and found a set of original but repainted set of metal from another '65 that I had restored and repainted with original colors and pattern for use on my bike. You can't tell the difference now between them as far as paint (Paul from American Cycle Fab). That decision, which I would still make pushes me into "restored" AFA judging. And now EVERYTHING on the bike must be restored (if I want to have it judged). Correct?

Another example - same bike, it really was at the point it needed a tear down and rebuild of all major components. Bike is down - should I repaint the frame? If I do - would that also mean, if I want to participate in the judging program that now the WHOLE BIKE must be restored?

Anyway, all I am saying is that I think there should be a class that judges the bike with the same level of scrutiny in terms of being original and not reproduction, etc but not to the point that the whole bike has to look like it came off the dealer or factory floor. There is a level between, starting to like preservation. That I think accommodates this.

Not really complaining as much as recognizing a need for another class between as found or original and fully restored to factory or dealer floor condition. I'll have it judged anyway, since it gives me the opportunity to get feedback from folks I am hoping are familiar with the margue and year and the challenges a 65 presents. Everything on the bike that had to be replaced is NOS. I studied 1965 and collected '65 correct for 10 years before having the bike rebuilt. A little harder understanding what is correct and finding it for a '65. I don't see the need to have everything brought back to new necessarily as long as it is judged as an original. The additional class resolves this IMHO.

[exeric]

Chris!

"Preserved" sounds like its embalmed.
That's why I use the word "conserved", because they really aught to remain a living machine.

And Robin!

I take that the coming changes in the system aren't likely to make it any simpler, accessible, or relevant than it was, huh.

(For some reason, the system as I read it in the Handbook never equated to what folks told me about their experiences.)

How does a largely apathetic membership deal with an autocracy?

....Cotten

And just who is this autocrat?

[Sargehere]

Cotten, after carefully tracking your ramblings, I have concluded that you don't know anything. I mean that it's all over the map, a little of this, a little of that, because you're casting about for something that doesn't exist: a way to satisfy everyone. But the mindless drivel is sometimes attenuated by interesting hypotheses.
We preserve old motorcycles all the time. So there has to be a formal judging class for them? For what? Pretty much all of this discussion is mush. Little will change, and club will go on. Those who can afford to will attend most of the meets, and make the rules. Those who can't, won't. It's all driven by the dollar, so that's capitalism; the American Way.

[T. Cotten]

What about the teens or pre teens bike that got repainted when it was 10 years old? Say everything else on the bike is original what happens to it? There should be a catagory for "Preserved" motorcycles.

Chris!

"Preserved" sounds like its embalmed.
That's why I use the word "conserved", because they really aught to remain a living machine.

And Robin!

I take that the coming changes in the system aren't likely to make it any simpler, accessible, or relevant than it was, huh.

(For some reason, the system as I read it in the Handbook never equated to what folks told me about their experiences.)

How does a largely apathetic membership deal with an autocracy?

....Cotten

[Chris Haynes]

What about the teens or pre teens bike that got repainted when it was 10 years old? Say everything else on the bike is original what happens to it? There should be a catagory for "Preserved" motorcycles.

[T. Cotten]

Wow what logic.
Does anybody want this guy judging their machine?

Meanwhile,
Speedracer reported:
"at Rhinebeck they refused to judge a competition bike that is already a Senior, told the owner to bring it to Davenport, after he had already hauled the bike from a great distance."

Somehow I got the notion years ago that judging was a service.
Is it now only a privilege for those who can afford to bounce around the continent, and cozy up to the new good ol' boys club.

How much do awards go for now?

....Cotten

[Sargehere]

Just what symptom led you to the conclusion that I was suffering from this delusion?

Maybe:

"I'm just a peevy little outsider-troublemaker stirring the pot."

(YOU'RE about as "outsider" as I yam, Tom, making your living having parts on almost every bike in the club), and:

"So why not combine un-restored, competition, and honestly ridden-and-maintained machines into one preservation perspective. All have aspects that must NOT be changed for no other reason than to fit 'restored' criteria.
If I were not an out-sider, I would propose this inclusive catagory to be called "Conservation" class, to compliment the "Restoration" class."'

That could be almost every bike that could be hauled in to a meet!

I like it the way it is. Restoration means as it went down the assembly line the first time. It's not for everyone, or every bike, but an ideal to be pursued (the fun part) and possibly, but not assuredly, achieved, by a few. "C'est la vie!"
It's also not the whole reason for being for the whole club. Most of us have more fun enjoying the camaraderie and riding our old bikes, and looking at the progress of those pursuing the closest thing to perfection that we can conjure up. The enjoyment is obviously in the pursuit, for many; the achievement for the few.
Once achieved, completed bikes are often sold to highest bidders, who apparently get their satisfaction from owning and looking at their own and others' handiwork, and dreaming their own dreams, and the builders proceed to their next project.
It is a system that works fine, but a few feel the need to try to bend opinions of the many to their tiny way of thinking, and just end up making a lot of static. Not you, personally, Tom, just a few.

[T. Cotten]

You're still suffering from the delusion that (almost) every bike can somehow aspire to a national award, Tom.

I didn't know you were a psychologist!

Just what symptom led you to the conclusion that I was suffering from this delusion?
Where did I assert that every machine must be judgeable by National standards?
I pointed out that I personally shall probably never own a judgeable machine!

So don't put words in my mouth. It ain't hygenic.

Its your silly system that is sick.
Just who is too deluded by pride to realize it?

....Cotten

[Sargehere]

how do you "correct" an original machine? Would it not be an alteration?

You're still suffering from the delusion that (almost) every bike can somehow aspire to a national award, Tom. Original paint bikes are those rare birds that haven't been modified in their long lives. They can wear new tires, rubbers, things listed in the rules that normally wear out, but they lose points for repainted and replaced parts. C'est la vie!
There is a class with rules for "unrestored, original paint." If the bike no longer qualifies for that, the owner can go for the chapter awards, which should take that area into consideration, or restore it correctly, if there's enough left for that. I think you've found the tipping point.
It's just that not every old bike that can be brought to a national is going to qualify to take home some prize, Tom, or we might as well hand out trophies at the registration desk when you sign in. Now, that wouldn't cheapen the prestige of AMCA national awards, would it?
You've hit on the fact that the sponsoring chapters need to pick up a lot of the slack with the "funny prizes:" the "most rust," and all of that, if the objective is to increase interest and participation to keep the AMCA going through the coming Japanese invasion. But "No one promised you a rose garden," eh?

[speedracer]

Bikerdds!

Which brings up the question:
How do you "correct" an original un-restored machine?
Or a competition machine? (If it was Granpa's wildcat hillclimber, why even try?)

Cotton
don't worry about Grandpa's wildcat hillclimber!!
they still do not have a way to judge them. at Oley they "made an exception" and judged a competition bike the old way, and at Rhinebeck they refused to judge a competition bike that is already a Senior, told the owner to bring it to Davenport, after he had already hauled the bike from a great distance.

[T. Cotten]

Folks,

If I may return to just the judging quandry for a minute,

If the purpose of judging is to "correct" machines,
how do you "correct" an original machine? Would it not be an alteration?
How do you "correct" a competition machine?
If it was Granpa's wildcat hillclimber, would you even want to?

Simpler is better than more complicated.
So why not combine un-restored, competition, and honestly ridden-and-maintained machines into one preservation perspective. All have aspects that must NOT be changed for no other reason than to fit 'restored' criteria.

If I were not an out-sider,
I would propose this inclusive catagory to be called "Conservation" class, to compliment the "Restoration" class.

Instead of "by-the-book correct" concours conformity, they would be judged for authenticity. Its either historical, or it ain't.

...Cotten

[Robin-M]

To all,

Most of the comments that I'm reading are because you all have limited knowledge on the judging system and the way it used to run before this year. We judged bikes as unrestored originals AND restored originals. The judges must and have used common sense in the judging. Like I said earlier, most of our better judges and marque experts are not judging right now. There's always room for improvement, which we were constantly making small changes. As I'm sure you're aware, and I hate to keep repeating, but I've dedicated 35 plus years of my life and motorcycle knowledge and experience to the AMCA membership through the judging system. But then to be thrown out by the president of the AMCA, who has ALWAYS hated the judging system, why he threw Kevin and I out, I'm still trying to figure out. The biggest problems I see with our AMCA and the judging system is to allow or have in charge the new AMCA chief judge that I handed him his judging card at the awards ceremony in Davenport 2009. And to have a new judging committee formed in October of last year by a national senior judge and board member, without the knowledge of the then Chief Judge Kevin. This board member, which I heard is a retired board member from BP, had personal compplaints about our judging system, so instead of coming to Kevin and myself, he decided to run the judging himself. Which he is now doing with his new judging taskforce. He's taking it upon himself to start this new judging committee, to rewrite the judging handbook and to rewrite the judging rules. In case you didn't know, he's also rewriting our club bylaws and policies-and-procedures. I guess he's being allowed to do this because no one else on the board wants to volunteer to do it or to stop him from doing it. I feel that the AMCA is in trouble and our judging system, if not attended to soon, will be disgraced in the judging world. We had the best motorcycle judging in the world, now under the new regime, we can't even judge competition bikes (because I was told they don't know how, after I gave them a written indepth explaination on how we judge them).

You're right if you feel I'm taking this personal. There are very few people alive today that have dedicated as much time and knowledge for the benefit of our membership and our club. But I'm not only concerned about the personal aspect, I'm concerned about the whole institution of the AMCA judging system, being degraded by those in charge lacking people skills, knowledge, experience and common sense.

Like I said earlier, this comes from my years of dedication to the club and is my opinion. Hopefully if we can bring the judging system back to what it should be, I sure hope that I can involve those on this forum that are speaking your mind so you can see how things should be done and have been done in the past.

Robin

[exeric]

Ray, I can see your situation but I think a class like you describe would just muddy the judging waters. I'll cite my example and leave it at that. I have a 1948FL that I have been building for fun. I started this project to reconnect with the fun of building a bike and of course, panheads are easy to do and easy to find parts for. This bike started as a pair of gas tanks hanging from the rafters in my shop and that was the jumping off point that committed me to the project. My goal, from the get go was to have fun and not get mired in the obscession to find perfect, genuine parts. I do that with my early bikes but this bike is suppose to be fun. I have been very fortunate to find lots of great condition, genuine parts for the '48 but I have had no qualms about using a repro dash base, wiring, muffler, headlight, and fender light, and lots of little things are just easier to get out of a catalog. This bike has also been a great place to use nice old parts that have been collecting dust but fall into that catagory of too nice to restore; hence the tail-light has light pitting in the chrome, the footboard mats show slight wear, and the speedo is nice but worn. Getting back to the point of this letter is; not every bike needs to be judged, or should be judged to AMCA standards. Some bikes should just be enjoyed; which gets back to the question of what do you want to do with your bike? If you're serious about getting it judged, then be prepared for an expensive, long ordeal that turns the bike into a static piece of art. You will be stunned by the scrutiny of the AMCA judges of 30s and post war H-Ds and Indians. Very little gets by them, and again; at the end of the day, you have a little trophy and a piece of art that your wife won't let you keep in the living room. My thinking now is; if someone has an interest in AMCA judging, they should get involved with the process, and go through the ordeal of putting a bike through. I also believe that the standards must be high so that AMCA recognition means something. Bikes like my '48 should be welcomed and maybe displayed, but I don't think it has a place in AMCA judging. In reality, this has been the case for as long as I have been in the AMCA. At every meet I have been to, there have been fantastic bikes on display throughout the grounds and parking lots. Some bikes are in the process of being built, some are funky old riders, and some are Frankenstein's love children. Regardless, I've taken more pictures of bikes like the aforementioned than I have of bikes on the judging floor. There is a huge interest in such bikes and I don't think that AMCA judging has to be the fate of every antique motorcycle.