Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - babaron

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
Originality / Re: VIN stamp location
« on: July 16, 2012, 04:10:47 PM »
Thank you, William.  I suspected as much.  He did a pretty good job on the engine code, would you agree?

Originality / Re: VIN stamp location
« on: July 16, 2012, 12:44:12 PM »

Originality / VIN stamp location
« on: July 16, 2012, 12:38:39 PM »
There's a '69 Pacecar for sale with a pic of the engine pad stamp. 
It shows the engine code on the left and the VIN to the right. Looks real enough but I thought the VIN stamp at Norwood was relocated to the rough cast by the oil filter around Dec. '68.   This is a late Feb. assembly. What gives?

I'll post a pic shortly.

Originality / 69 Z restamp?
« on: February 12, 2012, 06:18:52 PM »
I was always under the impression that the engine block and trans were, as a matter of routine, VIN-stamped at Norwood with the same tool.  And, that the fonts would then be identical. So if the 2 are of completely different fonts, I am inclined to assume restamp.  Am I correct?

Restoration / Re: removing camaro emblems
« on: January 10, 2012, 03:16:49 PM »
Thank you, that was helpful.  It looks like the fenders have to come off. Oh, well...

Restoration / Re: removing camaro emblems
« on: January 10, 2012, 11:51:10 AM »

Restoration / removing camaro emblems
« on: January 09, 2012, 06:00:35 PM »
is it easy to remove the emblems w/o taking the panel off? ??? if so how is it done?

Originality / Re: ?Fake POP?
« on: January 04, 2012, 11:50:51 PM »
It matches the trim tag exactly. The only things I noticed that weren't correct are the front air dam but no rear spoiler (no D80 on tag but I know that it doesn't always show up on the tag) and the restorer put a GM sticker on door jam but shouldn't have.

I still can't understand how a dealer employee could accept the car with an earlier than correct date on the warranty book. It would mean that he lost some warranty coverage. I'll let you know what happens after I contact the seller.

Originality / Re: ?Fake POP?
« on: January 04, 2012, 11:53:20 AM »

Originality / Re: ?Fake POP?
« on: January 03, 2012, 11:46:04 AM »
Just to be clear, my question is, could the number in question for the trans. be designating the model year or is it always denoting the year of manufacture of the trans.? Certainly, if it is always the year of manufacture, then this is clearly a botched POP.  If it is for the model year, then perhaps the extended production time for the camaro could have resulted in using the trans for the 1970 model year for practicality. After all, all the other models were already 1970 models by late Sept. 1969, right?  The other one I saw had a very late build date of 10D.

Originality / Re: ?Fake POP?
« on: January 03, 2012, 03:19:59 AM »
Here is the POP.  No pic of engine stamp.  Could Chevy have started using 1970 trans on the later build Camaros in Sept. '69? I've seen one other one that did but had no paperwork so couldn't be sure if changed or not.  Owner of that car swore it was the orig. Just wondering.

Originality / Re: ?Fake POP?
« on: January 02, 2012, 12:42:04 AM »
There is also a car shipper paper that staes it is an employee order.

Originality / Re: ?Fake POP?
« on: January 01, 2012, 12:49:04 PM »
Here it is...Don't see a pic of actual engine pad stamp posted. But it's all right there on the p-o-p.

Originality / Re: ?Fake POP?
« on: December 31, 2011, 05:51:26 PM »
So, the only explanations would be dealer error or fake pop, right? The engine and trans date stamps are right there on the pop above the dymo label with the delivery date.

Originality / ?Fake POP?
« on: December 31, 2011, 04:52:20 PM »
I'm looking at a 69 Camaro car that has on the POP a sale (delivery date) 3 days BEFORE the engine and trans date stamps. Fake or am I missing something?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6