CRG Discussion Forum
Camaro Research Group Discussion => Decoding/Numbers => Topic started by: 68 Ragtop on February 28, 2019, 02:29:18 PM
-
This car has sold a couple of times recently and been discussed on all the sites, but I have never seen a real explanation for the discrepancies.
Everyone seems distracted by the cool factor and patina. Several have questioned the discrepancies, but no one has addressed the elephant in the room.
The engine date on the POP is completely different from the engine pad stamp
The transmission stamp has 1 letter mistake compared to the POP and the VIN is double stamped with 1 and 2 characters faint or missing on each.
Is this a case of multiple factory errors, an early misguided attempt at forgery, or just a clever fake?
124379L522031
(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/L60AAOSw9GdcbWi4/s-l500.jpg)
(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/ByoAAOSwXCVcbWkO/s-l500.jpg)
(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/EV8AAOSwm79cbWkX/s-l500.png)
(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/VFoAAOSw3fZaKWJe/s-l500.jpg)
https://www.ebay.com/itm/1969-Chevrolet-Camaro-RS-SS-/223409382608?_trksid=p2047675.m43663.l44720&nordt=true&rt=nc&orig_cvip=true (https://www.ebay.com/itm/1969-Chevrolet-Camaro-RS-SS-/223409382608?_trksid=p2047675.m43663.l44720&nordt=true&rt=nc&orig_cvip=true)
https://www.ebay.com/itm/1969-Chevrolet-Camaro-RS-SS-396-4-SPEED-/232589518569?_trksid=p2047675.m43663.l44720&nordt=true&rt=nc&orig_cvip=true (https://www.ebay.com/itm/1969-Chevrolet-Camaro-RS-SS-396-4-SPEED-/232589518569?_trksid=p2047675.m43663.l44720&nordt=true&rt=nc&orig_cvip=true)
-
https://www.yenko.net/forum/showthread.php?t=153422 (https://www.yenko.net/forum/showthread.php?t=153422)
-
Good questions James.
Last Sold for $39,290.00.
-
https://www.yenko.net/forum/showthread.php?t=153422 (https://www.yenko.net/forum/showthread.php?t=153422)
Yes I read that thread and others before posting. It's a real Gentleman's Club over there at Yenko. They tend to respect each others cars publicly, so not surprised no one picked it apart. I also can't comment in that section without being a paid member, which I am not.
You guys know this, but let me state for others who are casual readers:
The casting date should be shortly before the assembly date and the assembly date shortly before the car build date. Some people are using this information and thinking it is OK to have the engine stamp date shortly before the POP engine date. This is false. The POP engine date and code is read directly from the engine and imprinted on the POP and should match exactly. That said, this engine is not matching numbers, but that does not mean a mistake could not have happened and this could be the original engine in some extra ordinary exception to the rule that I have never seen before.
In order to prove that, the partial VIN stamp would be needed, but it is not shown. It's also not shown where it would be, on the pad near the assembly code or near the oil filter in the rough cast. That makes me wonder if there is a different VIN there making this a period correct instead of original engine.
-
Did the person ever state the engine was "born with"? I may have missed it. Not defending as I do not care but just curious.
-
maybe someone should PM the owner and ask him if a vin is stamped by the oil filter
-
maybe someone should PM the owner and ask him if a vin is stamped by the oil filter
Good idea. LA car or not, if the VIN is not stamped on the pad by this date in January, it should have be above the filter. Pad looks original, stamping looks good. It will be difficult to see with the engine in the car, but worth the effort to squash the debate.
I thought the build date might be the possible reason for th error, but January 27 was a Monday, 31st a Friday, so it wasn't a weekend break that could have preceded the POP "error".
JMO-
Steve
-
Since the factory put the drivetrain details on the PoP, I would think it would not have gone unnoticed with several errors on it; perhaps one digit incorrect, or two transposed, but ....... who knows?
-
Did the person ever state the engine was "born with"? I may have missed it. Not defending as I do not care but just curious.
No, never used the "born with" designation anywhere I looked. To me, matching numbers implies born with. Maybe I am naive.
-
maybe someone should PM the owner and ask him if a vin is stamped by the oil filter
It just sold, so point is probably moot.
-
Since the factory put the drivetrain details on the PoP, I would think it would not have gone unnoticed with several errors on it; perhaps one digit incorrect, or two transposed, but ....... who knows?
You would think it would get noticed if any warranty claim was ever made. Theoretically warranty would be denied due to proof of not original engine installed by the factory. That's the whole point of putting the component numbers on the POP.
-
I'd have thought even if the factory missed errors on the PoP before the car shipped, it might have been picked up at the dealership during prep or pre-delivery, or at least when adding the buyer's details.