Author Topic: 67 Z stamp (Read 33571 times)

BillOhio · « **on:** May 16, 2014, 09:25:35 PM »

Any opinions? Car has a tach I don't think is right with 5500 redline. Some finishes not correct but color is turquoise on deluxe turquoise.

BillOhio · « **Reply #1 on:** May 16, 2014, 09:27:29 PM »

Stamp

dutch · « **Reply #2 on:** May 17, 2014, 01:42:17 AM »

Don't see any broach marks and the area of the stamping looks like it has been played with (cleaned up) - in addition to the font of the actual VIN stamp looking pretty large relative to that of the engine assembly code stamp from what I see..

z28z11 · « **Reply #3 on:** May 17, 2014, 02:36:43 AM »

Pad appears to have been scraped; you can see the suggestion of "crosshatch" marks of a blade-type scraper in the reflection of the pad. Font looks a little too crisp, and I agree with the suspicious VIN font sizes.

All in my opinion - for what it's worth.

MO · « **Reply #4 on:** May 17, 2014, 02:37:04 AM »

Nice color combo. Tach is likely correct, pad is suspicious.

BillOhio · « **Reply #5 on:** May 17, 2014, 03:15:55 AM »

It has a few paint issues. Fuzzy in color near rear stripes if you look close, too much gloss in places. The combination is striking. I will post more pics. Has California smog on it. Jerry's book has one mp stamp and it is similar but you can't see the vin in his picture.

BillOhio · « **Reply #6 on:** May 17, 2014, 03:38:15 AM »

Rest of car

jack92584 · « **Reply #7 on:** May 17, 2014, 06:29:03 AM »

Sold for $104,000

BillOhio · « **Reply #8 on:** May 17, 2014, 11:52:30 AM »

That was the non RS car. Had replaced block . Had great letter from early owner complaining to gm that a rod bolt came loose and damaged the block. He had asked for a new throw out bearing when the motor was out and dealer forgot/didn't do it. Was upset it cost him $35 to get it fixed!

jack92584 · « **Reply #9 on:** May 17, 2014, 01:35:29 PM »

Quote from: BillOhio on May 17, 2014, 11:52:30 AM

That was the non RS car. Had replaced block . Had great letter from early owner complaining to gm that a rod bolt came loose and damaged the block. He had asked for a new throw out bearing when the motor was out and dealer forgot/didn't do it. Was upset it cost him $35 to get it fixed!

Hmmm..bad eyes on my part. Didnt realize there were not 1 but 2 67 Z28s in the auction. I see the one your talking about is actually going today. I'm heading to Indy today and going to stop by the auction tomorrow and catch the tail end of it. Hope I get a chance to see these cars before they leave.

Petes L48 · « **Reply #10 on:** May 17, 2014, 02:13:38 PM »

Quote from: dutch on May 17, 2014, 01:42:17 AM

Don't see any broach marks and the area of the stamping looks like it has been played with (cleaned up) - in addition to the font of the actual VIN stamp looking pretty large relative to that of the engine assembly code stamp from what I see..

Just to address the font size - I've seen many LOS cars where the partial is smaller than the engine code

dannystarr · « **Reply #11 on:** May 17, 2014, 04:11:22 PM »

Here it is facing you and punched up a little in size. I think I see a 3 and a maybe 7 and possibly some other numbers in the smooth area of the pad. As it looks concaved to me. I would be SUPER suspicious about that no broached area. Just my 2 cents, I wouldn't buy it JUST cause of that. Factory regrind and stamp?? Danny

z28z11 · « **Reply #12 on:** May 17, 2014, 04:36:19 PM »

There seems to be an extra VIN stamp above the engine stamp - didn't quite get cleaned off. I don't think the factory would have done that, considering the VIN stamping was at the Norwood. See the small font "4" in the attached pic (arrow).

The area around the stamping does appear if it was shaved down compared to the are above it. I really don't think it's legit - considering the worth of an original block to the selling price of a car without one, it adds considerably to the suspicion that it's not original.

Just my opinion -

Regards

z28z11 · « **Reply #13 on:** May 17, 2014, 04:59:04 PM »

Compare the 67 pad to this original 68 MO pad for font size, position and relation to the head and engine code. I know it's a 68, could be a little different, but it's an original Flint stamp and Norwood VIN - for comparison -

Regards

BillOhio · « **Reply #14 on:** May 17, 2014, 05:13:05 PM »

Got a better picture. On the 5 last in vin
You can see what appears to be another 5. I am suspicious. Probably someone won't see it and bring to much. I know tranny has no stamp springs painted, wrong booster and some paint has wrong gloss. Of course no owner!

BillOhio · « **Reply #15 on:** May 17, 2014, 05:14:46 PM »

Pad of 124377L159715

BillOhio · « **Reply #16 on:** May 17, 2014, 05:25:28 PM »

Better of date. Looks odd under loop of p also

BillOhio · « **Reply #17 on:** May 17, 2014, 06:43:07 PM »

125,000 sold

BULLITT65 · « **Reply #18 on:** May 17, 2014, 09:11:45 PM »

Great color combo, but with the white stripes wouldn't the seats have had a white inlay instead of black?

dannystarr · « **Reply #19 on:** May 17, 2014, 10:13:49 PM »

I am VERY suspect. Seller got too excited if ya ask me. Pour some acid on that front pad and watch the numbers arise

... Danny

jims69 · « **Reply #20 on:** May 17, 2014, 10:58:53 PM »

It looks odd to me

Jim

BillOhio · « **Reply #21 on:** May 18, 2014, 02:49:05 AM »

Interesting to see after I got home and blew it up on the computer. Where it looks shiney is a different texture to the block. It appears more like it was recent, if the factory did it, the whole thing should be aged even by now.
It had several things wrong. Wheels dated after car, the inner fenders and whole underneath painted a shade of black that almost looked to have some blue in it, and too much gloss. Carb was dated similar to one on ebay and I don't believe it was old enough to be on car. The smog motor had a different carb so I imagine next to impossible to find. Booster looked new, radiator cap new, radiator itself might have been new. Just a lot of things to question. The owner was never there. Who knows, maybe the stamp was corroded and they ground it off and restamped it but take a picture first!!! The smog cars were sold in California so it should not have been too rusty. I did notice the dates were on the quarters but I need to see how a 67 is put together. It almost looked like they laid new quarters up to the top peak of the old ones. There looked like a seam running along the inside there. Granted its an old car but too much to question

BULLITT65 · « **Reply #22 on:** May 18, 2014, 02:55:08 AM »

thanks for the review!

Mike S · « **Reply #23 on:** May 18, 2014, 01:33:51 PM »

Was it possible to get that VIN stamped so close to the head with the head on?

Mike

JohnZ · « **Reply #24 on:** May 18, 2014, 04:11:23 PM »

<<Was it possible to get that VIN stamped so close to the head with the head on?>>

Not really. Here's a photo of the assembly plant VIN derivative stamp gang holder.

z28z11 · « **Reply #25 on:** May 18, 2014, 04:21:20 PM »

My point exactly - thanks, John.

The head would have to be off the block to get the stamp in that location. Seen that mistake before -

Regards

BillOhio · « **Reply #26 on:** May 18, 2014, 05:11:16 PM »

Great picture John. I appreciate all the comments and all I bought was food! Just didn't have a good feeling on it.
I did participate on a beautiful 55 Chevy

BULLITT65 · « **Reply #27 on:** May 18, 2014, 07:21:04 PM »

1955 Chevrolet is a sweet piece. How about a pic of that?

BillOhio · « **Reply #28 on:** May 19, 2014, 02:27:59 AM »

The orange is house of color and I bet glowed in the dark. Kinda kicking myself. It was stunning. Car sat right, 502 with 3 2 barrels, 5 speed, exhaust had a great deep rumble.

BULLITT65 · « **Reply #29 on:** May 19, 2014, 05:14:25 AM »

and winning bid was?

jack92584 · « **Reply #30 on:** May 19, 2014, 12:40:44 PM »

Quote from: BULLITT65 on May 19, 2014, 05:14:25 AM

and winning bid was?

63k plus buyers commission..paint is amazing

BillOhio · « **Reply #31 on:** May 19, 2014, 01:11:39 PM »

They couldn't hardly start the bidding. I think finally someone bid 25. I looked at it for my brother in law and he thought my sister would be irate so he didn't want it. He had a 70 something firebird and likes those too. He would fit better in the 55. I couldn't believe how slow the bidding was

BULLITT65 · « **Reply #32 on:** May 19, 2014, 02:58:51 PM »

so even less a 13k paint job, that seems like 30k to much.

69Z28-RS · « **Reply #33 on:** May 19, 2014, 04:11:49 PM »

looked about right to me....

BULLITT65 · « **Reply #34 on:** May 19, 2014, 04:37:22 PM »

They made a ton of 55 chevrolet 2 door cars. This car is a 2 for post at that, and they tend to sell for a bit less than the hardtop. I watch them on ebay often, and 63k is deffinetly outside the norm. I wonder if someone jumped in to get the bidding up

BillOhio · « **Reply #35 on:** May 19, 2014, 05:23:39 PM »

I couldn't find any paint jobs for my z around here under 15. Most toward 20. I would guess house of color paint is higher than normal. 502 crate motors are 9000 and art Morrison chassis is about 16000. I think the transmission was a tremec 5 speed. Interior was all custom. I didn't see anything left of a 55 other than the shell

jdv69z · « **Reply #36 on:** May 19, 2014, 07:44:02 PM »

I love 55 Chevy's, but what they are doing to them nowadays doesn't appeal to me. I like the 60's/70's hot rod versions, but I hardly ever see them like that anymore. I guess today's versions don't jive with my nostalgia version.

BULLITT65 · « **Reply #37 on:** May 19, 2014, 08:04:54 PM »

There are many out there still in the 60's/70's hot rod version. My friend just bought a 2 door post, and is doing a straight axel gasser, Ihave seen them slammed, I have seen original restos. My point is this is not a rare car, which means they are still out there to purchase, and put together however you seem fit. Get it done, and change your mind down the road, do another clean up on it and change the look of the car yet again. Guys have been modifying 55 chevys almost from day 1, it seems.

69Z28-RS · « **Reply #38 on:** May 20, 2014, 03:54:53 PM »

Quote from: BULLITT65 on May 19, 2014, 04:37:22 PM

They made a ton of 55 chevrolet 2 door cars. This car is a 2 for post at that, and they tend to sell for a bit less than the hardtop. I watch them on ebay often, and 63k is deffinetly outside the norm. I wonder if someone jumped in to get the bidding up

Here's you another one Austin.. a bit 'outside the norm'...?

http://www.trifive.com/forums/showthread.php?t=124552

BULLITT65 · « **Reply #39 on:** May 20, 2014, 04:06:00 PM »

"A moderate reserve is set at $265k".....

BillOhio · « **Reply #40 on:** May 20, 2014, 05:17:29 PM »

Found this 67 z stamping on yenko.net. also an mp code. It was in a t bucket and sounded like it was reunited with the car. I read where these mp codes were probably under 100 built. Hope this isn't too small. Had trouble getting it on here

BULLITT65 · « **Reply #41 on:** May 20, 2014, 06:39:15 PM »

very cool, it found its way home.

Hideawaze · « **Reply #42 on:** June 12, 2014, 01:57:49 AM »

Directly under the V looks like 702

little_hoss · « **Reply #43 on:** July 02, 2014, 12:36:13 AM »

Great thread on original stampings! I was looking at the 1967 MP block and was wondering if it was common sometimes for the factory to stamp the VIN upside in relation to the block code. I've never seen that before.

Mike S · « **Reply #44 on:** July 02, 2014, 12:46:26 AM »

Quote from: little_hoss on July 02, 2014, 12:36:13 AM

Great thread on original stampings! I was looking at the 1967 MP block and was wondering if it was common sometimes for the factory to stamp the VIN upside in relation to the block code. I've never seen that before.

Yes, it's happened a few times. There was a small run where the year and plant code were reversed (ex: L7xxxxxx vs. 7Lxxxxxx). I have one such stamping on my 67 BB from LOS where is it L7153XXX

Mike

little_hoss · « **Reply #45 on:** July 02, 2014, 10:31:33 PM »

Wow! Thanks for the information. If I would have seen that stamp I would have figured it an attempt at a re-stamp. Thanks again.

VINCE Z28 · « **Reply #46 on:** July 02, 2014, 11:45:35 PM »

Mike, the stamper dude may have smoked something other then tobacco products at break time. In my State (Washington) if your 21yrs. it's now legal.

News:

Author Topic: 67 Z stamp (Read 33571 times)