VCCA Home Forums GENERAL DISCUSSION VCCA Judging Questions 1931 Chevrolet - Honeycomb radiator

Hey question for the judges:

I have a 1931 Chevrolet Chevrolet is undergoing a thorough frame off restoration. I have read the judging manual, and this question was not addressed so I am posing it to you. Question: I believe that the original radiator in the 31 Chevrolet was a honeycomb design radiator. Is the Correctness of the fin design of the radiator included in the judging? If so, how many points are deducted for having an incorrect fin design If the balance of the radiator (paintwork, bolts, chrome covers, and radiator cap are correct. My purpose in asking, Is that the current radiator and the car is perfectly functional, and to replace it with one of a honeycomb design would cost over $1200 just for the parts and shipping.

Thank you for your assistance.

Perry A Seaton

There is not enough time allotted to each vehicle in VCCA Judging to permit measuring anything. If it looks close to the original dimensions it will not be penalized. I interpret your question as understanding that the actual size of the honeycomb cells is not exactly as an original passenger car radiator. If so very perceptive as most people don't know that the truck and car radiators had different cell size much less the repop size does not exactly match.

Sounds like he might have a modern type of replacement radiator rather than an original honeycomb radiator.

That is correct. I have a modern radiator that is operating quite well, so I was wondering if the fact that a honeycomb radiator was not Included in the restoration, what the effect would be on judging points.
Regards,
Perry A Seaton

It is my understanding that modern radiator cores are allowed with no point deduction. I could be wrong on that however. At any rate, I think that ruling was made decades ago when reproduction honeycomb radiators were not available. Now that honeycomb radiators are available the modern core rule should be rescinded.....if it hasn't been already.

I have been an advocate for point deductions for any noticeable reproduction parts. By noticeable I mean easily determined difference from the originals. My reasoning is that it is the only fair way to not penalize those who search out and refurbish original parts in the restoration of their old Chevrolets. Tires is an example. A few of us have original tires that can be installed and displayed on the Judging field. That way people can see an old Chevy with the type tires installed at the factory. It is the ultimate in "preservation and restoration". Today there is no incentive to do so as some modern replacement tires are accepted without deduction. The rationale behind the policy is that authentic reproduction tires are not available so it hinders people bringing their old Chevys to VCCA judged events if point deductions are made for the obvious replacement tires. There are a multitude of other reproduction parts that are not currently subject to point deduction. Since I was thrown off the Judging Committee, I am not privy to the latest in rule interpretation. Last I knew was that modern radiator cores for the honeycomb types were still accepted without deduction. The cost of the honeycomb reproduction was given as the reason.

I would caution anyone that is restoring an old Chevy to consider that the judging policy could change in the future so decisions today may not be the best in the coming years. The other is the pride in knowing that the vehicle represents the best effort in "preservation and restoration" available today.

I agree. I have often been amazed that with something large and extremely visible to the eye like a modern radiator on a 1932 or earlier Chevrolet, that points are not deducted. However, on other small items that are not so noticable, such as an incorrect valve stem, or a nut on a tail light bracket inside of the fender well, points are deducted. In cases like a modern radiator being acceptable, there is no advantage for a car owner to install the correct honeycomb radiator during restoration.

The 2011 Judging Manual states (in the section listed as: Radiator/Fan Shroud/Condenser/Radiator Cap/Overflow) the following:

"Make sure the radiators are GM. Dated on radiator, if present, should be same year as the vehicle. Make sure the core is of correct design. Most radiators are gloss black. Make sure any aftermarket radiator cap receives point deductions. Follow the radiator overflow system to be sure it is correct. Check for corrosion on te cap or radiator"

The last Judging sheet I have is from the 50th Anniversary Meet, in the COOLING SYSTEM SECTION, "Radiator/fan shroud/condenser/cap/overflow", the maximum point deduction is 15 for everything in those areas. Anything greater that 15 points should be handled by the team captain or one of the Deputy Judges before the Judging Sheet finds its way to the tabulators.

You be the Judge, but I'm thinking something around a 5 point deduction for an iuncorrect radiator core providing everything else in that catagory is correct.

Cool! (pun intended) Thanks for the update Oldie! That is good information to know for future reference.

Oldie,
That may be what the judging manual says but for the honeycomb radiators it has been common for no deduction on replacement cores. Just maybe the standard has changed since more people are aware of the availability of honeycomb cores (even if they don't have the correct size cells).

For '33 and up a modern cellular or V-cell core is the same as the factory core. That is until they went to fin & tube cores which are also still available.

It is the '32 and back radiator cores that have received the waiver. Wonder what they do for the real early cores before honeycomb?

Chipper,

The initial question was, "How many point deduction for having an incorrect radiator core". My answer was based on direct information from the latest Judging Manual and a two your old Judging Form. Seems to me that doing something other than following the Judging committees instructions is counter productive to the process. Kind of like one area of the country where it's written in the hand out instructions that it's okay to have a modern coil and electric fuel pump and no point deduction will occur on early 4 cylinder vehicles that are so equipped. That to me penalizes the individuals that go the extra mile to make their vehicles correct.

Oldie,
I agree completely about the penalization of those that go the extra mile.

On the initial question: I have seen point deductions exceeding 1/2 the total in the category if a major component is deemed incorrect. Depends on the judge, team captain and deputy or chief Judge.

I must point out that only the anniversary meets are likely to have more than one top knotch vehicle in a class and category. That is Junior vs. Junior or Senior vs. Senior.

Oldie, You are correct. I haven't seen a handout but I have heard the Chief Judges make statements about what is or is not allowed. I know of cases where point deductions are taken for a non authentic part. The big money is spent to get the original part. At the next meet the Chief Judge says that part will not receive a deduction if it is not the authentic part.

Tires:I have seen many many 30 and 31 cars with 4.75/5.00 X 19 tires. Goodyear Diamond Tread tires are available in 4.75 X 19.

Another thing: One time we can use our parts book as proof of authenticity and the next time I am told I can't use my parts book for the year of manufacture because they are replacement parts and not original equipment. I don't understand.

Oldie's response here is the one that we should take. A modern core reproduction that is not honeycomb would have deductions. It is not fair to the member who takes the time, effort and expense to have the correct radiator. This honeycomb issue has not come up as much as people talk about it in a theoretical sense. If there are no GM marks and numbers and codes on the tank and the core is wrong then it's a deduction. How much of a deduction depends on the form. The size of the comb would be a more delicate deduction that might not be noticed by a novice volunteer judge.