275GTB’s Original Headlights and 1 Point Deduction Across the Board?

Greg: I can make is even worse for the history researcher. New cars destined for the US were mandated to have sealed beam headlights and all red rear taillight lenses. I believe "most" were so equipped this way from the factory. However, if you look at the "new" 275 GTS in the Car and Driver test in 1965, it has clearly has Marchal headlights, and it is NOT an early car. So my position is that all versions are acceptable as documentation exists to confirm both Carello and Marchal in Euro cars, as well as Sealed Beams in "some" US spec cars.

 

Greg,

I believe that when applicable to a Euro car, the proper Carello headlight number for the 275GTB is 07.585.700, not the 07.485. Note however, that the 07.480 and 07.485 have near identical lens patterns on the glass to the 07.585; you need to stare at them side-by-side to find the subtle differences. You also have to check the mounts on the back if buying them, as mounts often varied for the same lens number depending on application - perhaps there was yet another behind the scenes catalog sub-number or reflector number for the mount. Reproductions of the 480 and 485 are advertised, but not yet the 585 that I am aware of. 06449 at the Paris Salon in 1964 had Marchal headlights, another example of Marchal. I would think that the 07.480, 07.485, 07.585 should be accepted by the judges, as original headlights become more scarce, if viewed as maintenance replacement items if lost or damaged. US sealed beam regulation is interesting, I was not aware of that. To complicate further, I think later 4-cams MAY have had CARELLO in block lettering (not script) on the headlight; I do not know the light number. I have seen this a few times, but do not know if original. As for the Pininfarina side badge discussion, totally reasonable that either configuration should be accepted in judging, absent clear individual case proof to the contrary. It unsettles judging confidence if judges generalize that "all" or "most" 275GTB only had one side badge, as this is easily demonstrated inaccurate all day long with period photos. In an arena full of multiplicity of detail, no wonder owners get upended at the concours by rigid declarations.

 

Who were the 3 judges?

 

Greg, with your experience in restorations and judging, including as a judge yourself, along with presumably easy access to individuals accredited to creating guidelines for Ferrari judging, I'm little surprised of your reaction to this and the PF badge issue.

While I probably don't have your experience, I have studied those guidelines, both in FCA organized seminars and judges meetings on the day of shows I've been invited to judge, even have had a pleasure sharing a field with you (both of us as judges) on few occasion, as far as I know there are, at least in FCA organized judged events, ways* to counter or defend against any and all point deductions one believes or feels unjustified, but I wouldn't think airing grievances about them here is best.

Also, while I admittedly have never attended, displayed, presented or judged at Cavallino, my understanding, although based only on second hand information, is that recent ownership change to the event has lead to a new class(?) or type of judges, many whom supposedly may not have much, if any, experience about cars, i.e. Ferraris, they're judging or judging in general.
If this is true, I personally wouldn't put much stock on point scores or results from that event in the first place.

* Does Cavallino offer any recourse to counter judges decisions ?

 

EDIT:

 

Dwight, was that GTS a car owned and loaned to the mag or was it a factory provided car? The reason I ask is manufacturers, Ferrari included often have a base version model brought over specifically for press use and wondering if that is the case here.
I mentioned to some of the "Experts" that any US version car or any car operated on US roads has been required to have sealed beam lights since 1934. There were many surprised people. It seems many of those experts think US regulations started in the late 60's with smog control.

 

Greg, was this a US version car or an EU version?

 

1 brand new, 1 pretty new and one quite qualified but not really a vintage car guy.

Fall out from the general shortage of judges and pressing people into service.

FCA and Cavallino have nothing to do with each other. Chris is no longer Chief Judge FCA. You have been told that many times and many of your claims have been shown to be incorrect but you never listened then either.

 

Brian: Magazines are usually pretty good about thanking owners who lend cars for testing (usually to stroke their egos) and nothing is stated in the article, which has always led me to believe the car came directly from Chinetti since the testing and photography was done in New York. I also did wonder if Chinetti removed the sealed beams and installed the Marchal's as a "prior to delivery" add-on. However, if that was the case, then the whole can of worms just gets worse. Do you judge a car as it was built, as it was delivered to the dealer or as it was sold to the first customer??

My Daytona has 100% original paint as it was sold new (I am the third owner and have confirmed with the two previous owners that no paint work has ever been done to the car). Yet, the driver's door has obviously had paint work done. We all know the factory or Chinetti/Garthwaite repaired some manufacturing or shipping damage before the car was sold. How would the expert judges deal with this??

 

Greg: I fully understand your frustration and am truly sorry it took you so long to get where I ended up thirty years ago. I have a much calmer life now and learned I don't need a bunch of dickheads to tell me I work with and own cool cars.

 

That is part of the issue Ed G was trying to address when he developed the system in use now. One of our issues is there are still many zealots involved. The headlights are a classic example. In my opinion and by my interpretation of the intent of the system a matched set of the correctly sized period lights of any manufacturer should be fine. We still have some zealots that want to deduct for anything but a Fram oil filter.

It is supposed to be as built but too much of that especially in the early days was a moving target and absolute certainty is just not possible.
Paint is a great topic. I am old enough to remember pretty well the original paint quality of the early 70's. Some are shocked when I tell them we can strip the car to metal and it is max 3 point deduction. Its still a platinum car. I tell them if you are deducting 1 1/2 points for paint it better be a blue car with red doors and hood. Also we are trying very hard to putting a higher value on imperfect originality than perfection. Perfection was never Ferraris goal so it sure shouldn't be ours.
The fact of the matter is too little training has taken place, too little recruitment has taken place and there are too many zealot judges or product knowledge deficient judges who need to be weeded out.
There is a new Chief Judge for FCA and since that happened I have done more training and she has done more recruitment to fix that than has been done in the prior 10 years. And then there is the IAC/PFA board. Too many have been put on it that have no business being there. It has also been under dictatorial control for a while. It was a complete waste of time and why I quit.

Cavallino is a lost cause for those and other reasons. FCA is getting better and pretty quickly.

 

Its not the same. It has a lot of overlap but rules have some differences and John tailored Cavallino to his needs. They are run by different people and many FCA judges don't go to Cavallino and why some of the judging issues there. Many of the Cavallino judges are not used at FCA.
In my opinion one is a cluster f##k and the other is being made better every year.
There were judges used at Cavallino that should not have been on the field and certainly not Chief Class Judges.


Was the car with a headlight deduction a US version?

 

We know and understand that a federal mandate relative to headlamps in the United States existed. This legislation predates Ferrari's founding as a constructor. The core concept being any car on U.S. roadways was required to run sealed beam type headlamps. What I am personally ignorant to is if these conversions actually took place. If they did, who performed the work? Secondly, and hell maybe more importantly, who paid for the parts and labor?! I've spoken with Dick Fritz about the practice of replacing headlamps at the dealer level. He informed me that this work did not occur at Chinetti Motors. Can we conclude the same for Modern Classic Motors on the west coast? It's reasonable to conclude that the dealers are out of the equation.

With respect to vehicles originally sold to the U.S. market; would Boano, Drogo, Ellena, Pinin Farina (Pininfarina), Scaglietti, Touring, Vignale, Zagato, Et. al. have paid for two distinct parts allotments plus labor for the swaps? This would have been done in order to satisfy what percentage of total sales at the time? To me, without evidence, the idea that headlamps were purchased and shipped to various parts of Italy (or, I suppose just Maranello) for replacement on a small number of units per year is difficult to believe.

I've examined as many photos from the factory as I have at my disposal. I'm only seeing Marchal and Carello lamps. The product of this examination has bolstered my lack of belief that any lamp conversions were carried out in Italy by the constructor.

Legal or not, this leaves the end user responsible for the conversion.

So far, I have images depicting seven examples of Ferrari cars (250, 330 GT, 275 GTB & S as well as 246) wearing U.S. plates and running Marchal or Carello lamps. Super impressive, I know .

My long term goal is to establish a range of chassis numbers where the change from Marchal to Carello took place. A "VIN split" is an absurd goal for Ferrari cars this early. The spread-sheet I'm building is being organized by approximate date of production as opposed to chassis numbers in sequence.

The Scaglietti parts book for the GTB series has helped. I've entered a line into the chart, "Ferrari/ Scaglietti Parts Catalog - Issue Date of June, 1965 "Foglio" 18/1 - Listing an "asymeteric headlamp" from Carello. For better or worse, it's an objective data point. I suspect that as I fill in examples above and below this line, I'll start to see a fuzzy theme. Ultimately, in period images of the example in question should be the determining factor.

I think I can narrow the list of "acceptable" non-sealed lamps down to two, maybe three different types: 1) Marchal 109 & 2) Carello 07.585.700. The Carello 03.490.700 would be a late alternative which could ultimately be acceptable since it seems to have been available around 1968. Please understand, this is the part number of the lens, not the entire lamp as an assembly.

For concours judging, our baseline rule has been, "as the car left the factory". What's to be determined as we move forward, is the inclusion of sealed beams.

I'd like to believe we want to avoid a scene where we see cars with lamps manufactured by companies which have no verifiable affiliation with Ferrari. Just imagine for a second; a comp. car with KCs on a light bar.

 

Seriously? Does that mean the different tail light lenses, brake and turn signal operation and all the different instruments were end user responsibilities too? Ferrari did none of that prior to shipping to the USA? Sorry to say but that would have been a violation of federal law and it wasn't allowed then anymore than it is now.

Federal requirements for motor vehicles did not start with smog control.

 

Dustin: Please continue your research. Numerous factory Body Parts Catalogs specifically list "Tipo America" headlights as well as the "normal" European headlights. The factory certainly knew they had to install them in cars bound for the US.

 

Thanks for expanding, but with all due respect, none of the above really addresses my curiosity about whether judgments at Cavallino are refutable or not.

OTOH, while I recently accepted an invitation to judge at an upcoming local event, all this confirms my decision to stop judging few years ago was a right one.
Just way too much unnecessary drama.

 

it will be interesting to see how the classiche dept will restore and resolve these issues as more and more of the factory restored cars hit the circuit. will they be setting the standard?

 

Brian,

I completely understand your questions and to an extent, agree with you. Logically speaking, it makes precious little sense why the headlamps would be skipped over while the remaining compliance parts were installed. Could the region these parts would be coming from have anything to do with this dynamic? Marchal, Carello, Altissimo, Veglia-Borletti; all European based companies if I'm not mistaken. Shipping departments at Westinghouse or G.E. on the other hand are a little further away and the cost of overseas freight would have to be just as big a contributor to income then as they are today.

Be that as it may, logic doesn't always win out in the end. This is a weak justification, but; just because there's a law on the books, doesn't necessarily mean it was obeyed without exception.

Maybe it was technically the dealer's responsibility to exchange the headlamps with sealed beams and hell, maybe it happened from time to time. Is it possible that these dealers simply didn't spend much time worrying about what type of headlights the car had and focused on getting the cars sold?

In any case, I'll keep digging.

 

… or enforced.