SAAC Forum

Deals and Appeals => Up For Auction => Topic started by: 5s386 on September 08, 2026, 07:42:49 PM

Title: 8T02J180373-03109 on BAT
Post by: 5s386 on September 08, 2026, 07:42:49 PM
https://bringatrailer.com/listing/1968-shelby-mustang-gt500-26/
Title: Re: 8T02J180373-03109 on BAT
Post by: rhjanes on September 08, 2026, 08:30:46 PM
I wonder how they have a Link with "GT500" in it, yet it is a J code and a very nice looking (one glance) GT350?
Title: Re: 8T02J180373-03109 on BAT
Post by: Coralsnake on September 09, 2026, 08:22:39 AM
Its amazing to me how many BaT cars have reproduction tags. Apparently that doesnt bother bidders
Title: Re: 8T02J180373-03109 on BAT
Post by: rhjanes on September 09, 2026, 09:50:52 AM
Quote from: Coralsnake on September 09, 2026, 08:22:39 AMIts amazing to me how many BaT cars have reproduction tags. Apparently that doesnt bother bidders
They offset that by including a road test of a 1965 GT350. 
Title: Re: 8T02J180373-03109 on BAT
Post by: Bob Gaines on September 09, 2026, 11:12:06 AM
Quote from: Coralsnake on September 09, 2026, 08:22:39 AMIts amazing to me how many BaT cars have reproduction tags. Apparently that doesnt bother bidders
I think it typically goes back to the practice of a new looking reproduction tag to match the new restored rest of the car. Of course there are other incentives to install a new tag.
Title: Re: 8T02J180373-03109 on BAT
Post by: Coralsnake on September 09, 2026, 11:23:46 AM
A good point. But, I still suspect due diligence is a foreign concept to many
Title: Re: 8T02J180373-03109 on BAT
Post by: Mikelj5S230 on September 11, 2026, 03:51:18 PM
Yes, I remember losing points at SAAC 40 for my less than new tags.
Title: Re: 8T02J180373-03109 on BAT
Post by: Coralsnake on September 11, 2026, 04:49:10 PM
You lost points for original tags? That would be very atypical. To the best of my knowledge the policy is no deductions for original tags regardless of condition
Title: Re: 8T02J180373-03109 on BAT
Post by: Bob Gaines on September 11, 2026, 09:48:52 PM
Quote from: Coralsnake on September 11, 2026, 04:49:10 PMYou lost points for original tags? That would be very atypical. To the best of my knowledge the policy is no deductions for original tags regardless of condition
Deducting points for a beat up tag is a foreign concept to me. ???  None of the judges I XXXX(am aware of) deduct for a worn tag.
Title: Re: 8T02J180373-03109 on BAT
Post by: 68blk500c on September 12, 2026, 12:24:09 AM
Quote from: Bob Gaines on September 11, 2026, 09:48:52 PM
Quote from: Coralsnake on September 11, 2026, 04:49:10 PMYou lost points for original tags? That would be very atypical. To the best of my knowledge the policy is no deductions for original tags regardless of condition
Deducting points for a beat up tag is a foreign concept to me. ???  None of the judges I know deduct for a worn tag.
Really
Title: Re: 8T02J180373-03109 on BAT
Post by: Mikelj5S230 on September 12, 2026, 12:42:43 PM
Tim Lea and I objected, but the deductions stood. Talk to the head judge that day about his rulings.  I think his name was Mike.
Title: Re: 8T02J180373-03109 on BAT
Post by: TLea on September 12, 2026, 06:18:30 PM
Quote from: Bob Gaines on September 11, 2026, 09:48:52 PM
Quote from: Coralsnake on September 11, 2026, 04:49:10 PMYou lost points for original tags? That would be very atypical. To the best of my knowledge the policy is no deductions for original tags regardless of condition
Deducting points for a beat up tag is a foreign concept to me. ???  None of the judges I XXXX(am aware of) deduct for a worn tag.
Unfortunately you do know them. 😞
Title: Re: 8T02J180373-03109 on BAT
Post by: Coralsnake on September 12, 2026, 08:53:37 PM
Having been a participant and a judge, I found out that deductions are not always fair, bit they do have a way of balancing out in the long run. Judges can miss obvious things and they never get deducted. They are also human and learn new things each time they judge cars.