CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 24, 2014, 04:35:06 PM

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.
106545 Posts in 12423 Topics by 4788 Members
Latest Member: capt68
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  CRG Discussion Forum
|-+  Camaro Research Group Discussion
| |-+  General Discussion
| | |-+  Stripe delete
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8  All Print
Author Topic: Stripe delete  (Read 5951 times)
KurtS
CRG Coordinator
*****
Posts: 3293


View Profile Email
« Reply #75 on: May 21, 2014, 05:48:06 PM »

No, a promo pic from GM with a woman stretching the stripe around the nose of the car.
Logged

Kurt S
CRG
JoeC
Member
***
Posts: 350


View Profile Email
« Reply #76 on: May 23, 2014, 09:43:48 AM »


The Yenkos were running MV code motor which probably was not certified and were going to be sold new with a 427.  So they were not in compliance with federal regs.
That leads to our conclusion of why the Yenko cars got the ACC tag.

this is my opinion based on  what I found when researching the 1967-68 Yenkos.

It is hard to believe that Chevy would sell a car to a US dealer that did not meet all the Federal regulations, but if that were the case , it still does not explain the use of the Magic Mirror tag. The statement on the normal 1968 tag  is not for engine/emission regulations , it is just to date the safety standards.

Chevy was already in a lot of trouble with the Corvair safety issues so I don't think they would sell a car to any US dealer that did not meet safety laws. More on this later.

I have done a lot of research on the Yenkos as the Magic Mirror tag is an interesting mystery to me.

We know they needed to show special orders or fleet orders on the trim tags, for some reason, and they did use a special order tag the year before on some 1967 Yenko Camaros.

The 68 Camaros with special paint used a special order trim tag but was just omission of the paint code. That was enough to do the job for special paint but I think something more was needed to show a special order car or a fleet order or a COPO order.

What would a 1968 special order Camaro tag look like for a build like a show car, an export,  a police, fire, military, or a fleet order if they had to build one?
Not many examples found to do the research on.

Not counting special order paint (dash) tags, what examples do we have for 1968 Camaros?
I only know of the exports, the Yenkos, and two other Camaros with Magic Mirror tags.

We know that GM used special order tags and we have examples from Camaro, Chevelle, Impala, truck, Firebird, and others, where they used  numbers or words such as SHOW, MEMO, COPO, SPEC, SPECIAL, and others codes on the tags.

I think they selected the magic mirror tag to show the special order as I have not seen the other codes used like GM used on the other makes and models.

The  mystery is why did they use the Magic Mirror tag?
If they just wanted to omit the safety statement, they could have just used a 1967 Camaro tag or another 1967 tag since they did not have the safety statement.

Hard to say what they were thinking, but the magic mirror tag was an old tag. It was used from about 1962 to early 1966 in some plants.
If they wanted an odd ball tag that would stand out as a special order tag, the Magic Mirror tag would do the job.

on the safety statement..........

I did some research on the safety statement looking at what was used in 68-69 by GM, Ford, Chrysler, AMC, and Chevy Trucks. There does not appear to be a Government regulated statement required as they all used different ones. One thing common in all of them is that the build date of that particular vehicle is always associated with the safety statement.

I think that is why GM put it on the trim tags. So the vehicle build date can be cross checked with the cut in date of the Federal regulation. AMC and Chevy trucks used a separate tag with a blank field to stamp the vehicle build date.

The new 1968 regulation cut in dates were for Jan 1st but due to the design and production times, many of the safety features had to be done before the required date.
It looks like the dated safety statement was needed so they can correspond to the regulation versions for that vehicle's build date.

I did not find anything saying there was a Gov requirement for a safety statement as some MFG did not use any so I don't know if that was a problem to omit the safety statement on the 1968 Yenkos.

here is the 1968 Camaro safety statement on the standard tag.........

 "GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION CERTIFIES TO THE DEALER THAT THIS VEHICLE CONFORMS TO ALL FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS APPLICABLE AT TIME OF MANUFACTURE"

  here is some of the 1968 Federal reg........

"In 1968, the precursor agency to The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) show the safety technologies installed in passenger cars by model year 1968, responding to the initial FMVSS of January 1, 1968, included lap/shoulder or lap belts at all seat positions, energy-absorbing steering assemblies, dual master cylinders, and seat back locks, among others. In addition, model year 1968 passenger cars were equipped with side marker lamps, anticipating a requirement that would take effect on January 1, 1969."
Logged
69Z28-RS
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2488


owner since '76


View Profile Email
« Reply #77 on: May 23, 2014, 09:58:34 AM »

Was there a condition or statement associated with the sale that the cars were for 'off road' use?  ie. not for highway passenger car usage??   I seem to recall that a number of these 'dealer' 427 cars (Baldwin Motion in particular) were ordered/delivered with 396 engines, which the dealer pulled to install the 427's....
« Last Edit: May 23, 2014, 10:19:40 AM by 69Z28-RS » Logged

Gary W.  /  69Z28-RS, 72 B 720 cowl console rosewood all tint
69 Corvette convertible, silver/black 350 hp,
60 Corvette white/red, 72 Corvette coupe (2), 
90 ZR1 red/red #246, 90 ZR1 white/gray #2466
72 El Camino, '55 Nomad, '57 Nomad, '57 B/A Sedan
JoeC
Member
***
Posts: 350


View Profile Email
« Reply #78 on: May 23, 2014, 10:17:25 AM »

That was another interesting thing I see in my notes on this but didn't copy to my reply because it was getting too long and most people would be asleep before finishing my post Smiley

The 68 Yenko was a fast car with a high power to weight ratio so would be somewhat unsafe but they actually had safety upgrades.
The 1968 Yenko COPO 9737 had disk brakes, HD suspension, larger ft bar, 140 speedo, and other items.


In comparison, look at the 1968 COPO 9738 Chevy II. Fred Gibb was allowed to special order  50 of these  L78 TH400 Chevy IIs to meet the NHRA rule book for the auto trans drag car class. Chevy knew these cars were ordered to drag race and they have the safety statement.

Same issues with the L88 Corvettes and the 1969 ZL1 Camaros. 500 HP and lighter weight, built to meet the racing rules. They were somewhat of a safety risk as compared to normal production cars but they have the safety statement.

 
Logged
JoeC
Member
***
Posts: 350


View Profile Email
« Reply #79 on: June 05, 2014, 10:35:24 AM »

just to ad something to the special paint / special trim tag research

not a Camaro but shows what was done by GM in 1969 in one plant

In a discussion on a special paint 1969 Chevelle built at the Leeds plant in Kansas City with "AVO" on the tag
AVO is not used on the normal tag and only found on a small number of tags, some are documented special paint cars

I found in GM BUSINESS SYSTEMS BS 1457 GM GLOSSARY OF TERMS
 ......AVO...... "avoid verbal orders"   listed  as a form used to document verbal communications

Logged
firstgenaddict
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1255



View Profile WWW
« Reply #80 on: June 05, 2014, 02:46:39 PM »

Correct me if I am wrong but it appears Mark is stating that that information applied to TT would be furnished differently based on the plant...

Example... LA produced cars with no stripe would have a - - since they did in fact paint the front ends, BUT Norwood would have standard information? 

It makes more sense that all information would be sent to the initial point of assembly, it seems it would be easier to assign all information the same regardless of whether it applied or not, it would eliminate the possibility of not enough information at the assembly plants.
Logged

James
Collectin' Camaro's since "Only Rednecks drove them"
 
Check out the Black 69 RS/Z28 45k mile Survivor and the Lemans Blue 69 Z 10D frame off...
https://picasaweb.google.com/112392262205377424364/1969_Z28_Restoration
Fred Mertz
Member
***
Posts: 21


View Profile
« Reply #81 on: June 05, 2014, 03:08:06 PM »

I considered buying a '68 Z/28 in Rally Green back in '71.  It was a stripe delete car and was still original paint.  I didn't care for the color and the motor had already been patched up from spinning a rod bearing.  I didn't but it.  It had the numbers matching "MO" engine with the matching VIN.

In hind sight I guess I shouldn't have let it get away.  I later bought a Lemans Blue '68 Z. and only had it for 3 years.  Wonder where it is today?
Logged
Fred Mertz
Member
***
Posts: 21


View Profile
« Reply #82 on: June 05, 2014, 03:09:47 PM »

I considered buying a '68 Z/28 in Rally Green back in '71.  It was a stripe delete car and was still original paint.  I didn't care for the color and the motor had already been patched up from spinning a rod bearing.  I didn't buy it.  It had the numbers matching "MO" engine with the matching VIN.

In hind sight I guess I shouldn't have let it get away.  I later bought a Lemans Blue '68 Z. and only had it for 3 years.  Wonder where it is today?
Logged
Mark
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 944



View Profile Email
« Reply #83 on: June 05, 2014, 07:28:51 PM »

Correct me if I am wrong but it appears Mark is stating that that information applied to TT would be furnished differently based on the plant...

Example... LA produced cars with no stripe would have a - - since they did in fact paint the front ends, BUT Norwood would have standard information? 

No, I'm just stating that GM at Norwood did not use the - on the trim tag to clue them in as to either a special color paint, or a stripe delete, since the paint shop never saw the body tub or the trim tag.  Fisher obviously used the - to designate a special paint instruction on their side of the plant.  If you take the paint code off the tag it forces the lne workers to look at the paperwork for that car.  If the instructions were for a special color they would have to spray it with a hand held gun with a 5 gallon pot, or fill one of the color loops with the special color if the number of cars in the order was large enough to justify that.  If the car was a Z28 and it wasn't supposed to get the rally stripes that info would be in the paperwork as well.  But once the car got to GMs side of the plant, the body tub went one way and the front end sheet metal was painted and striped without the workers ever seeing the car, or the tag.  All of GM's special paint instructions had to be carried on or referenced on the body broadcast sheet.

LA had a common paint shop so all the parts of the car would have been painted together so it doesn't really matter what the instructions said, they would have been carried out by the same group of people.  They obviously need to know about special paint colors and deletion of stripes, but the coordination of actions was carried out differently.
Logged

Mark C.
1969 Indy Pace Car
350/300HP RPO Z11
janobyte
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 760


1968 z/28

bajcer@msn.com
View Profile Email
« Reply #84 on: June 05, 2014, 08:06:51 PM »

No - on the trim tag of my Norwood built Z. (GG) Original owner verified  he ordered the car stripe delete , spoke with the man about 20 years ago who shot the stripes in 69-70. The 2nd owner had it done when he ordered the cowl hood through Milad Chevrolet.
Logged
rare396bronze
Member
***
Posts: 66


View Profile Email
« Reply #85 on: June 05, 2014, 11:00:30 PM »

As stated before 68 Big Block cars with black tail panels stripe delete cars. I talked to both original owner's who special order the cars without stripe's.  One owner worked for Chevrolet in 1968 stilled owned the car  when I saw the car both had - where the paint code on trim plate. Other car I own the car since 1981 has -1 where the paint code is on the trim tag.  Did title search in my state & got MSO & original Dealer invoice plus all owner's names talked to original he stated to the dealer if it came with a stripe he would not take the car. Other previous owners stated car had no stripe. Further more If you will look at the trim plate section in this group it talks about. It show - being used on trim plate for stripe delete car as they were considered special order cars Do not no about z28's. It is shame that other people have shown you to this link on trim tags but yet you fail to look! Sorry for the long message but if I was not 100% sure what I was talking about I would keep my mouth shut . I have nothing to gain because I hope to never sell my car.    
« Last Edit: June 05, 2014, 11:19:29 PM by rare396bronze » Logged
rare396bronze
Member
***
Posts: 66


View Profile Email
« Reply #86 on: June 05, 2014, 11:15:30 PM »

Also both cars where Norwood cars mine Corvette Bronze the other Turquoise both 68 Camaro factory colors.
Logged
firstgenaddict
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1255



View Profile WWW
« Reply #87 on: June 06, 2014, 05:29:52 PM »

No - on the trim tag of my Norwood built Z. (GG) Original owner verified  he ordered the car stripe delete , spoke with the man about 20 years ago who shot the stripes in 69-70. The 2nd owner had it done when he ordered the cowl hood through Milad Chevrolet.

Ok I hadn't realized your car was stripe delete, that throws a monkey wrench in assumptions.
Logged

James
Collectin' Camaro's since "Only Rednecks drove them"
 
Check out the Black 69 RS/Z28 45k mile Survivor and the Lemans Blue 69 Z 10D frame off...
https://picasaweb.google.com/112392262205377424364/1969_Z28_Restoration
bc69
Member
***
Posts: 215



View Profile Email
« Reply #88 on: June 06, 2014, 06:00:19 PM »

I have a BB stripe delete 67 that has no tag markings at all to reflect such. But I do have notes with dates, names and phone numbers where the factory had been contacted day after car was ordered at dealer.
Logged

Brad
RSSS
janobyte
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 760


1968 z/28

bajcer@msn.com
View Profile Email
« Reply #89 on: June 06, 2014, 08:09:56 PM »

As stated before 68 Big Block cars with black tail panels stripe delete cars. I talked to both original owner's who special order the cars without stripe's.  One owner worked for Chevrolet in 1968 stilled owned the car  when I saw the car both had - where the paint code on trim plate. Other car I own the car since 1981 has -1 where the paint code is on the trim tag.  Did title search in my state & got MSO & original Dealer invoice plus all owner's names talked to original he stated to the dealer if it came with a stripe he would not take the car. Other previous owners stated car had no stripe. Further more If you will look at the trim plate section in this group it talks about. It show - being used on trim plate for stripe delete car as they were considered special order cars Do not no about z28's. It is shame that other people have shown you to this link on trim tags but yet you fail to look! Sorry for the long message but if I was not 100% sure what I was talking about I would keep my mouth shut . I have nothing to gain because I hope to never sell my car.     


I've read the link several times ,and I'm not debating you. Curious myself. And it means little to me seeing as I just had the car re-shot, with stripes, with quite a bit of research involved to replicate the not so perfect factory finish. Just putting out what I know as history on this Z. I have been fortunate enough to have grown up with the car,then taking ownership in 89. It's never left a 10 mile square area other than initial delivery. Pretty well known being the only Ash Gold one around. I've ran into guys who rode in it when they were young, who did work on it and was told the history many times by different sources over the years, at shows, with nothing to gain. Including the original owner, who called me.

I would think some of the info on this site comes from cars like these, and I like to share as I've drawn so much out of it.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8  All Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

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 0.101 seconds with 18 queries.