CRG Discussion Forum
Camaro Research Group Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: rccthatsme on October 05, 2022, 04:33:42 PM
-
Full disclosure, I know I will get some flak here but this car is worth saving, so beat me up, but understand I am trying to save a 69 Camaro. Why post? I am not up on Chevy, at all. What I do know is this car is bad *** and I have the chance to own/save it.
69 Camaro
302
4 speed
Has not moved in 30 years. Sitting in the driest of areas in the SW. NOT for sale but mine if I want it. Saw it in the field but was not able to grab photos. I only have photos of the exterior, and not very god ones. A few are attached. No under body, under hood or, as stated interior.
Heading to the site in a few weeks. Hoping to get more photos before then but asking for any insight from this group of enthusiasts.
What to look for (I get the numbers matching and body rot but am not up on the details to look for and challenges of this car. (I will share any other photos delivered.
Thank you in advance.. and sure razz me. I have a 70 Super Bee... I am used to it. LOL
-
Welcome and congrats on the potential purchase but that's a 67 (not a 69) and doesn't appear to be a Z. I would suggest starting with the main page of the website and learning as much as you can before heading out to the car.
http://camaros.org/ (http://camaros.org/)
Click on the tabs at the top of the page and look through "Numbers Decode (http://camaros.org/numbers.shtml)", "Drivetrain Decode (http://camaros.org/drivetrain.shtml)" and the rest of the tabs.
-
Pictures of the following are a minimum to start:
1. VIN on the driver side door jam
2. Trim Tag on the firewall
3. Suffix code and partial VIN on the front passenger side of the block (if it still has an engine)
Optional stuff would be:
1. Picture of the date code and partial VIN on the transmission which is usually on the side of the main case.
2. Picture of the rear axle date and code on the front passenger side axle tube.
Ed
And to be honest, post a picture of your Super Bee! I LOVE those cars!
-
Never have to ask twice for pics of the the Bee.
The owner of the camaro is the ex-wife of a mechanic and she insists he always called it a 69. Not in my wheel house but if I can save this thing from rotting into the Earth, I will. I will either learn all about it with a restoration process (back to original if indeed numbers matching) or swap it for something I know more about. I am not a snob for one muscle car plant over another (had a 67 Mustang GT fastback to cruise through college). Born and raised in the Detroit are and my father worked for Dodge (any from there get that link). My first car was a 69 Charger (wish it weren't those damn things are ridiculously expensive). Always liked camaros and firebirds (pre 72). if possible, I am going to save this car. The challenge will be the price. She doesn't want to sell it because she thinks it is gaining in value rusting in the field. I have convinced her it is not but she still hasn't put a price on it.
-
Man, that is a BEAUTIFUL car!! And by the way, you'll never get any flak trying to rescue a Camaro!
Ed
-
1967 VIN Tag will be located in the Drivers front Door Jamb.
-
Beautiful Super Bee!
As for the 67 Camaro, yes its defiantly worth saving. I bought a similar condition 69 a year or so back and brought it back to life here at home paint & all. lol.. Its far from perfect but still a bunch of fun to drive..
-
[...] The owner of the camaro is the ex-wife of a mechanic and she insists he always called it a 69. [...]
There are lots of people who have called my car a Mustang. So, it's no surprise. But, yeah, it's a 67. I prefer 67, but 69 is definitely the more valuable model.
This particular car is going to be a base model car. Not an SS and not a Z28. So, as Daytona Yellow said above, deciding to restore this one may, in fact, take some defiance to more rational advice to let it go (though he may have intended definitely instead of defiantly, :D).
But, please do share more information as you obtain it. As Ed/Bert mentioned above, we'd love to get more detail about what this car is/was. Thanks for sharing the Bee pic. I love all of the classic muscle cars and enjoy seeing them all.
-
Sounds like the owner thinks the car is worth way more $$$ than it is. You can be honest with her and still risk insulting her. At least you know the lady and cash talks or offer to pay for an Alaskan cruise or something , maybe her ex never took her anywhere, Best of luck and that is a damn nice Bee you have
-
Pictures of numbers means everything.
Plum Crazy!
-
Sounds like the owner thinks the car is worth way more $$$ than it is. You can be honest with her and still risk insulting her. At least you know the lady and cash talks or offer to pay for an Alaskan cruise or something , maybe her ex never took her anywhere, Best of luck and that is a damn nice Bee you have
That sounds like exactly what's going on here. A Red 1969 Z/28 is way way more valuable than a 1967 Plain Jane so she will be in shock at it's real value. Don't be surprised if it turns out to be a gold on gold colored, Power Glide automatic, 6 cylinder car when you run the numbers. I also don't expect a car sitting on the ground for 30 years to have any floor trunk or rockers left. It may tear in half when you try and pull it out of where it has grown back into nature.
-
Sounds like the owner thinks the car is worth way more $$$ than it is. You can be honest with her and still risk insulting her. At least you know the lady and cash talks or offer to pay for an Alaskan cruise or something , maybe her ex never took her anywhere, Best of luck and that is a damn nice Bee you have
That sounds like exactly what's going on here. A Red 1969 Z/28 is way way more valuable than a 1967 Plain Jane so she will be in shock at it's real value. Don't be surprised if it turns out to be a gold on gold colored, Power Glide automatic, 6 cylinder car when you run the numbers. I also don't expect a car sitting on the ground for 30 years to have any floor trunk or rockers left. It may tear in half when you try and pull it out of where it has grown back into nature.
I also agree with that comment. It is sad that 'some' cars are just not worth saving. I know we would like to save 'em all...its just not worth the time and money to do so. That said, a nice rust free base car would be worth it....IF the price was good.
Btw, the 'Bee is awesome! Thanks for sharing.
-
68 Ragtop is 100% correct, plan on both inner & outer rockers, floor etc.. at a minimum on a project like this. I ended up replacing more metal than I left on the car, but IMHO its still worth saving if you can & like doing the work yourself..
-
Looks like this car could be surprisingly solid…trunk lid looks solid so does hood and upper fenders…sitting in dry area…certainly worth looking closer at it….solid body first gens bring more than you may think….options may not matter much if body is supper solid! Someone would be more then eager enough to build it their way.
I certainly would be looking at it if I lived closer.
-
I have to agree. Supper solid cars are delicious. ;D
-
Goes to show us, their still out there......
-
Definetly worth saving. Hope you get it. Awesome Super Bee. Always wanted a Superbird.
-
So how is everyone so positive that this car is in no way a long unaccounted for 302 Z28? Yes, the wife of the owner got the year wrong from what she "thought" the husband used to say, but what if she got the "302" part right?
With only those three photos to go by, and no photos of the 302 or engine bay, nor any pics of at least the 4 speed in an interior shot, that we know it should have, (even though that could have been changed over the years),...the car could have been painted so lack of stripes on the hood isn't a deal breaker, and we can't see the front of the fenders for any emblems...nor can we see the rear end, shocks springs, or any other tell tale signs that it is or is not a Z.
Are all 602 67 Z28s accounted for, and that why it has been mentioned that this can't be, or is not a Z28?
Or has the OP presented the VIN, data plate info, or other documentation showing it's a plain Jane, and I missed that?
-
You really can’t tell if it is a true Z28 or not from these pictures…you can however tell is not a RS or SS from these pictures.
-
You really can’t tell if it is a true Z28 or not from these pictures…you can however tell is not a RS or SS from these pictures.
Yes, I agree. But it was mentioned twice in this thread that it was obviously a plain Jane Camaro and it's not a Z28. I was just wondering if someone knew something I didn't about this particular Camaro, because like you said, those 3 photos definitely don't rule out it being a Z28.
-
My assumption, and it may be a poor one, is that a car in that spot, in that disrepair is wearing its original paint. Hence my earlier statement about it not being a Z.
-
I would get it. It is camaro i wouldn't care what kind of camaro it was!
-
So how is everyone so positive that this car is in no way a long unaccounted for 302 Z28? Yes, the wife of the owner got the year wrong from what she "thought" the husband used to say, but what if she got the "302" part right?
With only those three photos to go by, and no photos of the 302 or engine bay, nor any pics of at least the 4 speed in an interior shot, that we know it should have, (even though that could have been changed over the years),...the car could have been painted so lack of stripes on the hood isn't a deal breaker, and we can't see the front of the fenders for any emblems...nor can we see the rear end, shocks springs, or any other tell tale signs that it is or is not a Z.
Are all 602 67 Z28s accounted for, and that why it has been mentioned that this can't be, or is not a Z28?
Or has the OP presented the VIN, data plate info, or other documentation showing it's a plain Jane, and I missed that?
Since I was the first to comment on this car I will respond to your comment. No where in my reply did I say it was 100% not a Z.. Read it again as I quoted myself for you.
Welcome and congrats on the potential purchase but that's a 67 (not a 69) and doesn't appear to be a Z. I would suggest starting with the main page of the website and learning as much as you can before heading out to the car.
http://camaros.org/ (http://camaros.org/)
Click on the tabs at the top of the page and look through "Numbers Decode (http://camaros.org/numbers.shtml)", "Drivetrain Decode (http://camaros.org/drivetrain.shtml)" and the rest of the tabs.
So again from what the original poster shared it does not appear to be a Z. I also gave helpful links for information to help the OP to learn for himself. Don't make assumptions that I said it was "obviously" a plain jane. I hope for the potential buyer that it is but I certainly do not want to mislead or get his hopes up.
I can't tell you how many times I have seen someone get excited or their hopes up and for instance say they have found their original block and then share photos and it be a restamp and then quickly the photos disappear. So helping people without misleading them should be first and foremost.
-
I wouldn't bring it inside your garage until you clean it out. Critters, spyders , bugs and God only knows what else you'll find inside it. But then if you are trying to get rid of your wife by all means bring it in!!
-
My bet is the floors and trunk are gone.
-
Since I was the first to comment on this car I will respond to your comment. No where in my reply did I say it was 100% not a Z.. Read it again as I quoted myself for you.
Yes cook, I see your reply mentioned it "doesn't appear to be a Z28" so,... you are correct in saying that you never claimed it was 100% not a Z, but your post certainly implies and leans toward that conclusion,....along with the post below.
This particular car is going to be a base model car. Not an SS and not a Z28.
I just thought I was missing some more concrete evidence that others might have been aware of that I wasn't privy to. I love the finding a "hidden gem" story as much as the next guy, and would love to hear that this might indeed be a real Z. The paint being in such shape that makes it appear to be original, with no Z stripes, could very well be a repaint from any time during it's 55 year life,....a repaint from just 20, 30, 40 years ago, or 50 for that matter, could very well look like that if left outside in the elements all that time.
My 68 Z28 had no stripes on it when I bought it in 1981,...had the special paint denotation on the cowl tag that I thought might have meant "stripe delete". Only after finally tracking down the original owner who had the car until 1972 did I find out the special paint option was black Z28 stripes. He bought a cowl induction hood for it in 1970, and because he had to paint the hood, and he said the lower sides of the car had some sand blasting wear from the road, he decided to have the whole car painted, but didn't have the stripes redone. So, that car was painted and it was only 2 years old. Ya never know, especially looking at just 3 pictures.
-
To "imply" something is to strongly suggest something to be true. Me saying it doesn't appear to be something from what was shared is not a strong statement more so that more info needs to be presented. We are using semantics but please to not try to turn my words around. I am not going to speak for anyone else but if you would like to discuss this further privately by all means pm me.
Also,
Since you brought up your 68 Z please share with the group its story. I know its a very special car and great racing history. Many of us would love to learn about the Bob Johnson 68 Z. Maybe start a new thread so this one doesn't become more muddied than it already is.
-
To "imply" something is to strongly suggest something to be true. Me saying it doesn't appear to be something from what was shared is not a strong statement more so that more info needs to be presented. We are using semantics but please to not try to turn my words around. I am not going to speak for anyone else but if you would like to discuss this further privately by all means pm me.
Also,
Since you brought up your 68 Z please share with the group its story. I know its a very special car and great racing history. Many of us would love to learn about the Bob Johnson 68 Z. Maybe start a new thread so this one doesn't become more muddied than it already is.
You're right, it is semantics, and I didn't think I turned anyone's words around, nor did I try to, and I am sorry you thought so, it was not my intension. I was merely stating what impression "I" got from those two posts, and how "I' perceived them. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, like I had said previously, I just wasn't sure if I had missed some info on the car.
Here's a link to the story of my Z. Enjoy.
https://www.camaros.net/threads/my-bob-johnson-1968-z28-from-scuncio-chevrolet.484666/#post-1783316682
-
No worries and I replied to your Team Camaro thread.
-
Correct. I should have used softer language -- it's rarely a good idea to speak in such absolutes -- or, at the very least, state assumptions up front (rather than how I only later expressed those assumptions). Cook's response was more measured than mine. So, not the greatest communication on my part.
With only 602 made against 220,906 Camaros in 67 for a whopping 0.27%, it's almost always going to be correct to say, "Not a Z." :D
-
No big deal guys. Typing one's thoughts and ideas often don't get relayed quite as well as when actually talking to someone. It's the internet world we live in. Sorry for the confusion. Cook, I'd be glad to have you ad my car to your data base as mentioned in the thread on Team Camaro,...I'll keep in touch.