MCA judging rules

???I was looking at the judging rules for MCA and it states that the tail lights chrome bezel are black around the edges. Thats a three point deduction. How do you go about correcting it?

For the standard '68, the stock taillight bezels DO have plack paint inside the grooves.

However, for the '68 Shelby and GT/CS (HCS), ALL taillight bezels are ALL chrome. It looks like someone at MCA didn't do their research, and based this rule on the "one size fits all" '65 T-Bird service part, which does have black on it.

Both of my books state it clearly that they are ALL CHROME!

Maybe MCA needs to look at my books. They've only had 16 years to do it (since 1988).

Paul.

Paul,
As you know, I just went through MCA judging at Park City, UT, and there was never a question about the taillamp bezals. I do carry a copy of both your books, just in case there is a judging question. I think if a GT/CS is going to be entered in an MCA show, it is a good idea to take along documentation about the car, and your books fill that "bill".

Russ

To verify any documenation it's got to be from Ford. : That's with AACA and MCA. How do you go about proving it?

I was able to use Ford and Shelby Automative diagrams & blueprints, provided by Vincent Liska of the Shelby American Automobile Club--that are reproduced in my 1996 book.

These diagrams spell it out pretty clearly. They are the FORD specs for part number, color, and where they go.

I've had a long "unfortunate" history with MCA and rules for the GT/CS. How--and who do I talk to to get this fixed once and for all?

I was once told many years ago that my offer to provide rules info was not welcome because I was not personally a member of MCA. Years later, I did get a nice letter from the then Pres., Mr. Dillard (?), that they were respectful & appreciative of my work.

I'm still confused why this stuff still goes on.

Thanks to anyone who sticks up for us and our cars at shows.

Paul.

I bought my replacement taillights from NPD (National Parts Depot) they have black around the edges? are these not original because they are supposed to be all chrome?

No--

Here is the deal.

Some years ago, FORD made two different taillight frames as service parts--one with black for the '65 T-Bird and the '69 -'70 Shelby, and the second set was for the GT/CS and '68 Shelby--both that used the '65 T-Bird lights.

About 1980 Ford combined them both into ONE service part, with the black paint on it--BUT with two sets of screws to install--black AND chrome.

The '68 Shelby and GT/CS owner/restorer was supposed to "figure it out", and remove the black paint and use the chrome screws--as an ALL CHROME assembly. THis was the Ford version of this service part--I don't know how dealers package this today...but that was what happened.

I wrote all about this in a long-ago "Shelby American" magazine (SAAC), and they completely agreed. Obviously, MCA and SAAC don't compare (judging) notes..

Paul.

Paul
Thanks ,for the information. I dropped MCA a letter inquiring about this. Knowing MCA I probably won't hear a word from them.
I inquired about the judging rules several time before I received them.

I guess I've been extremely lucky, or just plain ignorant about the plight of owning/showing my GT/CS at MCA shows. The MCA judges who have checked out my car have been VERY helpful with the details that made my car what it is today.

I've never been questioned about the GT/CS options and, generally, the things the judges look for are the "typical" 1968 coupe items (ie: color and texture of items, overall condition and cleanliness of the car, and the "correctness" of items described in the judging guidelines). By the way, MCA Judging Guidelines can be downloaded free from the MCA website.

Every time I've shown the car, I asked the judges to communicate to me what they consider to be incorrect, and they have been eager to discuss any "issues" I have with their interpretation of the rules. Again, maybe I'm just lucky, but I've found every judge to be quite helpful.

The MCA Senior judge for 1967-68 Mustangs is Johnnie Garner, and he lives in Rock Hills, SC. He is super helpful and really knows 1968 Mustangs. I would send questions/comments to him. His work email address is: johnnie.garner@weyerhaeuser.com.

Hope this helps,

Russ

Thanks, Russ for all your help and input. I appreciate all your support, and for "sticking up" for the GT/CS (and congrats on your MM article!!)

I think that because the GT/CS is a regional Mustang, it has a difficult time being accepted in the South.

When MCA says that they base their rules in Ford Documentation, it makes me cringe, because the Ford paper trail is not always correct. Everything from new car brochures (i.e. 1968 427?), to dealer updates, to the "Ford Parts Book" have mistakes, and are not consistent.

Case in point: MCA at one time said that the Goodyear Polyglas tires are the ONLY tires accepted.... I spoke with a factory worker at the San Jose plant, and he was in charge of tires for the Mustang/Cougar line--and he said that they put on just as many Firestone as Polyglas tires on the Mustang (GT/CS).

For all the work that I have done, I would think that MCA would be thanking me for my work. Not to sound arrogant, but EVERY registry should provide the same detailed info on their marque to MCA--and they in kind should aknowledge that information.

Why can't MCA get it right? Good people take their GT/CS (HCS to shows and they get less respect. The same with Shelby's at Mustang shows.

Paul

Paul;
I am currently a member of MCA and coming up this January 05 I will be attending a Judges course to be certified in judging the Mustang (Street Driven Class). Once certified, trust me I will be making some waves in regards to the GT/CS. I have at several shows run into problems when it comes to judging the CS and have promptly pulled out your books to make a point. All and all when the books came out it was case closed. Overall, I do have to agree with Russ, most MCA Judges I have come into contact with were very helpful and understanding even if they did not agree. Either way, weather it be complacincy or just plan arrogance things need to change and not all things that Ford put out were carved in stone.


Don

It might be interesting to know that when I wrote the 1996 Registry book, I did the Concours Rules and Restoration info with the intent of MCA using that same info for judging.

That's why I did it.

I really do appreciate your help in discussing these rules and related topics with MCA.

Maybe "someday", I'll get to visit one of those rules meetings.

Paul N.

Paul;
I hope to someday have some input into how MCA judges our cars. I am currently working my way up the MCA ladder as a judge. As I have said earlier, arrogance or ignorance, I'm not sure but, I will voice my opionion. And trust me I have no problems doing that.
If in the future I can help any of our forum members, please don't hesitate to contact me.

Don Potter ;D

Hey Don,

While you're at it, you might "educate" MCA about San Jose-Produced cars in general. At one time, they had west coast Mustang owners painting their entire underside black, since it was done on the New Jersey factory cars--from which MCA had based their guidelines.

I don't mean to sound so cynical about MCA, it's just that I feel frustration with them when good folks with GT/CS or HCS cars get a raw deal at those shows.

You might get in touch with MCA judge Jeff Speigel out here--he's the expert on SJ production...and he owns a '66 Fiberfab-nosed Mustang which is very cool!

I can't thank you enough for your help and interest in our efforts.

Paul N.