CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2015, 05:40:31 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the CRG Discussion Forum!
Forum registration problems: Make sure you enter your email correctly and you check your spam box first. *Then* email KurtS2@gmail for help.
111362 Posts in 12823 Topics by 4913 Members
Latest Member: devodave
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
1  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Ron Pratte collection on: January 16, 2015, 10:37:01 AM
Mecum is allowed to bid up cars to the reserve. I have seen on TV where a car goes good then stops reserve not met. You hear them say we don't have anyone and they go to the next car. Speeds things up but makes it look like someone thinks its worth something

Its called chandelier bidding. As mentioned its a way to move things along and get the bids up close to the reserve to see if there are any real buyers near the reserve price and a deal can be made. Its totally legal but can be abused. Worst case I ever saw was this Carolina blue Z28 at the Indy Mecum auction.
https://www.mecum.com/lot-detail.cfm?lot_id=SC0514-184213
I think we all could agree this car is probably a low six figure car at best yet it was "bid" to 450K and didnt meet the reserve. What stunk about it was that the car was personally owned by Dana Mecum (not disclosed at the auction). Now he can say the value is $450K because thats what was bid?
Anyway, with BJ being no reserve chandelier bidding shouldnt come into play (illegal) and thats why I'm somewhat baffled as to why that Z went for so much. Only thing that makes sense is the buyer got sucked into "Ron Pratte only buys the best" line saw what he had paid for it (125k) and figured it must be worth at least that plus a little more because it now was once part of the Ron Pratte collection. Well good luck to him when he tries to sell it and the potential buyer Googles the vin.
2  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Ron Pratte collection on: January 15, 2015, 07:44:12 PM
Can somebody please explain this all to me? How is it that what is now acknowledged as being a rebodied Z28 with a Jerry MacNeish  report from 2008 stating it has a "restoration drive train" ever be worth anything close to 148K. Confused..........
3  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: More 69 Z/28 Ebay fraud on: January 05, 2015, 10:06:20 PM
Well from what I read on the CRG site on the D80 option, the only cars that were required to have spoilers were the pace car replicas and later build date Z/28's. Still would like to know when the spoilers became a mandatory option on Z/28's though.


April
4  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: More 69 Z/28 Ebay fraud on: January 04, 2015, 11:08:59 AM
Hmmm....looks like they forgot a little something on that tag. Nice catch
5  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Motor vin stamp vs. transmission vin stamp on: December 30, 2014, 07:49:25 PM
My understanding is that the trans and block vin stamps should be identical as they were done at the same time. Having said that I also remember reading that there are confirmed cases very late in the 69 model year where for unknown reasons different stamps appear to have been used.
6  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Trim tag and engine stamp opinion on: December 29, 2014, 12:08:42 AM
Its got the same assembly stamp on it, because its the same car, how many 76B, 714 yellow houndstooth z28s could they make with a Tonawanda engine..  Its not legit.  Vin is 9N608302
Oops...Should have looked closer at that thread. So change that to read car and stamp were previously discussed here Smiley
http://www.camaros.net/forums/archive/index.php/t-178851.html
7  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Trim tag and engine stamp opinion on: December 28, 2014, 10:52:38 PM
Another thread re: a Z28 with assembly codeT0225DZ
http://www.camaros.net/forums/archive/index.php/t-178851.html
Maybe its legit
8  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Trim tag and engine stamp opinion on: December 28, 2014, 08:47:49 PM
Changing my vote..Although its not very clear if you blow up the latest pic it appears the block is actually a Flint block with the oil galley plug.
9  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Trim tag and engine stamp opinion on: December 28, 2014, 07:08:23 PM
A Tonawanda built SHP DZ block?Huh   Is that possible??
That is clearly a Flint block due to the presence of the 1/4" pipe plug in the oil gallery.

I dont think that what looks to be a pipe plug really is. Regardless there are no DZ blocks with a Tonawanda stamping. For my money I would guess its a Tonawanda block that has been restamped.
10  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 1968 Camaro Z/28 Sequoia Green on: December 28, 2014, 06:42:10 PM
http://www.camaros.net/forums/showthread.php?t=25183
11  Orphans - documentation or VIN-stamped drivetrains - in search of the original cars / 1969 - Orphans / Re: 9Nxxx007, 69 DZ 302 shortblock on: December 16, 2014, 09:28:45 PM
Hmm, could this be the block that goes to this former race car discussed on the Yenko site??

Nice catch Austin...I wonder if this will help to solve the mystery of the "Hog Wild" trim tag. Earlier in this thread I threw out that based on the pad date the vin might start with start with 615. Looking at it again 615 might be early but 616 or 617 makes way more sense then 627. I spent a little time researching early March DZ motors when I was trying to figure out what date my 3B vin 614xxx should have. My best guess for my car ended up being 0304. By vin 617xxx DZ dates were already 0312. From my admittedly small sample seems to me a vin of 627007 should have a motor somewhere around 0325. For instance vin 627703 is 0325. Hmmm indeed...
12  Orphans - documentation or VIN-stamped drivetrains - in search of the original cars / 1969 - Orphans / Re: 9Nxxx007, 69 DZ 302 shortblock on: December 15, 2014, 08:47:18 PM
How would someone prove they own a car that the vin ends in 007, must only be several thousand of them in that time frame, would have been better off with the front half  or front 4 of the vin. 
Should have given the first 3 because with a pad date of 0310 you can figure the whole vin would be 615007
13  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Who's going to SEMA ? on: November 02, 2014, 07:44:04 PM
I have credentials and would like to go but no luck so far finding anyone to go with. If anyone is heading out from Southern Cal I'd love to tag along.
14  Orphans - documentation or VIN-stamped drivetrains - in search of the original cars / 1969 - Orphans / 19N676496 0820DZ on: October 30, 2014, 10:33:43 AM
Block  listed on Craigslist 10/27/2014
Ad text as follows

1969 camaro z28 engine 302
.30 over 10/10 on 1178 crank. Have receipts from Cole Well for machine work. Bearings included.
186 heads with new valves and Manley springs
472 intake media blasted clean, no cracks no issues
Engine VIN: 676496

NO TRADES - Must pick up in Columbus, OH

Call or text Lee @614.440.9555
15  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 68 RS Z28 - opinions please on: September 20, 2014, 09:33:08 PM
Can't get the pic's much better. Never seen a baby "MO" stamp like that, and all crooked??? Guess I am about to learn something... Danny

I may have been to quick to label it a restamp.I bet your right that were going to learn something here. Never seen a hand stamped MO before. Its so bad that I cant help but wonder if its some kind of factory correction, everything else on the pad looks good.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.264 seconds with 18 queries.