MVPA Judging Standards

Create a thread to track the progress of you MB/GPW restoration progress. Previously a General Discussion board.
User avatar
Mark Tombleson
MZ Radio Operator
Posts: 9836
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 7:58 pm
Location: Selah, Washington

Re: MVPA Judging Standards

Post by Mark Tombleson » Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:38 pm

Well, Tom does not know why and it hurts the G503 forum to not have someone so involved in MVPA judging not being able to respond to questions as posed here. rondo, don't know who gave out that misinformation but it is not true.

Tom told me earlier today that a vehicle judged at the last convention got 100%... and he said in prior conventions there have been others at 100%.

I feel like I am between a rock and a hard place here and do not like it. :| :|
MB-NAVY-MZ-1 352625 - 07/20/44 (DOD est.)
U.S.N. 133818
2nd place Restored Class 2008 Portland Convention
MVPA Hall of Fame - 2013


Ian Fawbert
G-Lieutenant General
G-Lieutenant General
Posts: 3598
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 2:54 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia.
Contact:

Re: MVPA Judging Standards

Post by Ian Fawbert » Fri Nov 09, 2018 4:15 pm

Chuck Lutz wrote:
Fri Nov 09, 2018 9:00 am
I know of another long-standing gee member who is also fed up with the Tom Affair and is thinking of no longer contributing his extensive GPW knowledge any longer as well. First it was Luc, now Tom.
Chuck, this is the feeling I am getting and also hearing from alot of people I`ve spoken to recently.

It is a shame.

Ron (well, him... but really we ALL did it) has made such a great site, it would be a shame to see it go backwards or the benefit this site can continue to bring to the hobby just stall.

Ben, I believe the standard is coming along nicely and i`m sure that it is in its very final review stages. But given its been 73 years in the making since the last GPW... what is a few weeks or months or so more to wait!

Ian.
Australian Jeep Investigator
MB: 131175
GPW: 11730.
GPW: 225290.
Aust trailer: GMH 3- #211
http://www.vintageengines.net

User avatar
Chuck Lutz
Gee Addict
Posts: 26829
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 7:00 am
Location: Jeep Heaven

Re: MVPA Judging Standards

Post by Chuck Lutz » Sat Nov 10, 2018 8:45 am

Ian, Mark, others.....

I think it is like other situations where many people feel someone has been wronged unless the reasons for a "conviction" are explained. We have something in our Constitution that guarantees "Due Process" wherein one is allowed to face the accusers/accusations against them. ( The Fifth Amendment and later in the Fourteenth Amendment) I believe most civilized countries have something similar in their Rule of Law.

OK...this is just some website where things aren't run like that...but it was BUILT around that kind of camaraderie and has always been the kind of place you could send money/parts back and forth between people you have never met in your life because if they shared your MV passion then they were probably OK guys/gals. Now...its a business.

I suspect that the next thing that will happen is not that Tom & Luc will magically be reinstated on the Gee and Gee/FB, but others of us who are not happy with what has happened and how it has gone down will likely join them in being banned.

There does come a time in one's life, especially as we get older and closer to dying that I think we tend to not tolerate stuff like this, we don't suffer fools lightly and we don't like seeing a really great hobby website go to hell in a handbasket. I'm not trying to be critical of the gee management, but the gee is like all other websites I visit; there is always some disagreement, always some differing opinions. Allowing them to degenerate into nastiness is a problem here but punishment need be doled out to BOTH parties involved in these kind of disagreements.

I'm pretty sure we can lay Luc's getting kicked off at the feet of artificer & company so we do understand in that situation WHO was involved but in Tom's case, the WHO and the WHY and the WHAT FOR remain unanswered to more than a couple who have asked about that.

Circling back to Tom...are we REALLY going to be cut off from God-knows-how-many-years of reference at the Ford/Benson archives for something nobody even knows about? Like I said...and others have said, this is a sad day for the G503 and if it is a portent of what is to come, I figure anyone who comes to the defense of these two guys will be the next to get the axe. Perhaps to save another half-dozen or so of those who are questioning what the hell happened to Luc & Tom from following them into oblivion....some simple explanations would be nice.

If you have been watching this part of the thread, you may have also noticed the Terms of Service were rewritten shortly after Tom was banned. That makes me suspect a "law" was enacted so to speak, to convict someone for doing something that wasn't illegal when it was committed if you get my drift here.

Is anyone listening and is secrecy about this something so terrible it can't be explained IN DETAIL to those on the gee who give a dammn about Tom and his GPW info and about Luc and his mechanical expertise with the jeep?????

This sucks in the worst way fellas and the next wave of restorers will not have the benefit of their knowledge....

Sad, ain't it.....
Chuck Lutz

GPW 17963 4/24/42 Chester, PA. USA 20113473 (USA est./Tom W.)
Bantam T3-C 1947

conrod6
G-Captain
G-Captain
Posts: 749
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2016 9:30 pm
Location: teignmouth Devon UK

Re: MVPA Judging Standards

Post by conrod6 » Sat Nov 10, 2018 9:32 am

Look out Chuck it could be you next !

Barrie
GPW 101005 DOD 3-2-43 20207773 (actual) Louisville

1942GPW
G-Sergeant Major
G-Sergeant Major
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2017 2:19 pm
Location: West Linn, Oregon

Re: MVPA Judging Standards

Post by 1942GPW » Sat Nov 10, 2018 9:44 am

I too had found Tom to be helpful with detailed info on my GPW, it’s a shame he isn’t able to contribute anymore. It’s important to retain as much of this information for the younger restorers as possible to keep the hobby going!
10/7/42 Ford GPW (SN 70778)
11/42 Willys MBT (SN 13021)

Joe Gopan
Jeep Heaven
Posts: 49841
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2008 12:37 pm
Location: Proving Ground

Re: MVPA Judging Standards

Post by Joe Gopan » Tue Jan 01, 2019 4:12 am

There is something "Positive" to think about, the new MVPA Judging Standard is just around the corner. :wink:
2011 MVPA PIONEER AWARD - MVPA #1064
HONOR GRAD-WHEELED VEHICLE MECHANIC SCHOOL 1960 - US ARMY ORDNANCE SCHOOL(MACHINIST) ABERDEEN PG 1962 - O-1 BIRD DOG CREWCHIEF - 300,000+TROUBLE FREE M-38A1 MILES
LIFE MEMBER AM LEGION-40/8-DAV
7 MIL SPEC MAINTAINED MV'S
COL. BRUNO BROOKS (ARMY MOTORS) IS MY HERO

User avatar
17thAirborne
G-Lieutenant General
G-Lieutenant General
Posts: 5847
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 5:42 am
Location: Central TN

Re: MVPA Judging Standards

Post by 17thAirborne » Tue Jan 01, 2019 6:17 am

Good to hear the lively discussion not only about judging standard, but also forum rules. I have communicated,with Tom in the past and have seen many of his fact based posts. To lose his input from this forum is very detrimental. I think his contributions push the overall quality of the forum toward 100% effectiveness. I realize that no one member seems indispensable, but without his input, we could never get close to the 100% again, unless someone has a few thousand hours of free time for the research he's done and the dozens or more trips to various archives.

I don't see anyone else filling that void, so in this case, he is indispensable. I don't personally care about the who and why. It makes no difference. I fully support his return. While this simmers or continues to boil, we should all continue to soldier on, but I have a few questions.

1. Would he even entertain coming back if invited?
2. How detrimental to the entire hobby would it be if many other old heads all quit also? (I hope that is not the case)
Oz

Feb 43 GPW 98532 USA 20206257
Oct 70 Land Rover Series 2a 25334079G NZ16GF36
http://gpw.castraponere.com/ (My Restoration Page)

User avatar
Michael O.
G-Lieutenant General
G-Lieutenant General
Posts: 6131
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2003 12:29 am
Location: The Great State of Nebraska

Re: MVPA Judging Standards

Post by Michael O. » Wed Jan 02, 2019 11:35 am

Having Tom’s and Luc’s contributions to this site and the hobby is always welcomed. There absence is detrimental to this site and this hobby!
Michael O’Connell

Too many jeeps…and a Dodge.

MVPA 13861

User avatar
Michael O.
G-Lieutenant General
G-Lieutenant General
Posts: 6131
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2003 12:29 am
Location: The Great State of Nebraska

Re: MVPA Judging Standards

Post by Michael O. » Wed Jan 02, 2019 11:58 am

Ben Dover wrote:
Tue Jan 01, 2019 4:12 am
There is something "Positive" to think about, the new MVPA Judging Standard is just around the corner. :wink:
Joel, it’s actually a GPW Restoration Guide, not a “new” Judging Standard Guide. To my knowledge, the MVPA is not releasing a new Judging Standards Guide. It’s also worth mentioning that Tom is a major contributor to this project.
Michael O’Connell

Too many jeeps…and a Dodge.

MVPA 13861

User avatar
17thAirborne
G-Lieutenant General
G-Lieutenant General
Posts: 5847
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 5:42 am
Location: Central TN

Re: MVPA Judging Standards

Post by 17thAirborne » Wed Jan 02, 2019 1:26 pm

I can't wait to see the guide.
Oz

Feb 43 GPW 98532 USA 20206257
Oct 70 Land Rover Series 2a 25334079G NZ16GF36
http://gpw.castraponere.com/ (My Restoration Page)

Joe Gopan
Jeep Heaven
Posts: 49841
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2008 12:37 pm
Location: Proving Ground

Re: MVPA Judging Standards

Post by Joe Gopan » Wed Jan 02, 2019 2:28 pm

It is still something to think positive about.
2011 MVPA PIONEER AWARD - MVPA #1064
HONOR GRAD-WHEELED VEHICLE MECHANIC SCHOOL 1960 - US ARMY ORDNANCE SCHOOL(MACHINIST) ABERDEEN PG 1962 - O-1 BIRD DOG CREWCHIEF - 300,000+TROUBLE FREE M-38A1 MILES
LIFE MEMBER AM LEGION-40/8-DAV
7 MIL SPEC MAINTAINED MV'S
COL. BRUNO BROOKS (ARMY MOTORS) IS MY HERO

User avatar
Michael O.
G-Lieutenant General
G-Lieutenant General
Posts: 6131
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2003 12:29 am
Location: The Great State of Nebraska

Re: MVPA Judging Standards

Post by Michael O. » Wed Jan 02, 2019 2:37 pm

Ben Dover wrote:
Wed Jan 02, 2019 2:28 pm
It is still something to think positive about.
To that I absolutely agree!
Michael O’Connell

Too many jeeps…and a Dodge.

MVPA 13861

User avatar
rondo
LTC, U.S. Army
LTC, U.S. Army
Posts: 782
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 8:07 am
Location: Boise, Idaho

Re: MVPA Judging Standards

Post by rondo » Fri Jan 04, 2019 1:13 pm

The friend who had his vehicle judged: was told it was perfect but given 99% :lol: ...well it was a M37. So no offense meant to the expert MB GPW judges here who are committed to accuracy and doing right. My thing is they told him its so good they wanted him to be a judge. and the vehicle is the best they ever saw. But no one gets 100% lol
that is a ridiculous mentality. If its restored to like new factory condition, then its 100%. When I bought my new Nissan Titan it was 100% not 99% :lol: It wasn't 110% but it was in factory new condition lol
that was a couple years ago, so maybe things are changed for the better.
I do miss Tom W as he was really helpful and I read his posts for the details. I really don't miss certain 'others' who have their glasses half empty, are rude, and unpleasant to others.
42 GPW; 41WC6
"moral courage is the most valuable and usually the most absent characteristic in men"

User avatar
Chuck Lutz
Gee Addict
Posts: 26829
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 7:00 am
Location: Jeep Heaven

Re: MVPA Judging Standards

Post by Chuck Lutz » Fri Jan 04, 2019 5:41 pm

Hmmm....ran across my original GPW TM 10-1349 March 30, 1942 Ford Maintenance Manual and while looking at the Electrical section I read the following:
Generator
Autolite
GEG-5002D


I see that conflicts with the page that called for the GEG-5001 in the January 30, 1942 version of the TM 10-1349 Maintenance Manual.

So it would appear the change is more likely to have occured to the 5002D during the 1st Contract or at the beginning of the 2nd Contract.
Chuck Lutz

GPW 17963 4/24/42 Chester, PA. USA 20113473 (USA est./Tom W.)
Bantam T3-C 1947

User avatar
Michael O.
G-Lieutenant General
G-Lieutenant General
Posts: 6131
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2003 12:29 am
Location: The Great State of Nebraska

Re: MVPA Judging Standards

Post by Michael O. » Fri Jan 04, 2019 8:41 pm

rondo wrote:
Fri Jan 04, 2019 1:13 pm
The friend who had his vehicle judged: was told it was perfect but given 99% :lol: ...well it was a M37. So no offense meant to the expert MB GPW judges here who are committed to accuracy and doing right. My thing is they told him its so good they wanted him to be a judge. and the vehicle is the best they ever saw. But no one gets 100% lol
that is a ridiculous mentality. If its restored to like new factory condition, then its 100%.
I don’t share the mentality of those judges. If a vehicle warrants full points in every category, then it will get 100%. Remember, vehicles are judged against a standard, not each other. I’m always very impressed with the quality, workmanship and attention to detail of the vehicles I judge. The best part about judging is speaking with the vehicle owner and learning how much blood, sweat and tears went into their restorations. There are quite a few vehicle owners whom I keep in contact with and I consider them friends in this hobby. Tom has been an invaluable asset to the MVPA Judging Program. His expertise is greatly missed in these forums.
Michael O’Connell

Too many jeeps…and a Dodge.

MVPA 13861


Post Reply

Return to “MB GPW Restoration Projects”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 50 guests