Author Topic: Window Sticker Font (Read 47418 times)

Adz28 · « **on:** December 05, 2006, 08:00:55 PM »

Does anyone know the name of the typewriter style font that can be used to replicate the dealer & options text on a Window Sticker?

x77-69z28 · « **Reply #1 on:** December 06, 2006, 02:34:46 PM »

triple a enterprise will do it for you i had mine done there. it looks awesome. i will look for their address. i believe he website is www.tripleaenterprise.com

x77-69z28 · « **Reply #2 on:** December 06, 2006, 02:42:00 PM »

it is www.window-sticker.com

Adz28 · « **Reply #3 on:** December 06, 2006, 04:37:30 PM »

Thanks for the link. I have seen this site, but I figured if I new the font, then I could do it myself and make changes if corrections are needed. Since the blanks are readily available, I could make a MS Word template.

I am sure I could find the font, but if someone knows it, please let me know...

deejaygee · « **Reply #4 on:** December 06, 2006, 05:02:24 PM »

A "Teletype" or "Teleprinter" monospaced font should do the trick.

lakeholme · « **Reply #5 on:** December 06, 2006, 07:33:54 PM »

So, where are you going to find accurate information about the codes, etc. for the window sticker? And in reverse, information to decode a sticker?

Adz28 · « **Reply #6 on:** December 06, 2006, 09:22:24 PM »

Why CRG, of course!

Between the RPO code PDF, CRG site, the many reference books I have (including the "Definitive Z/28 Fact Book"), and my resident 69 Camaro expert sdkar, I figure it will be pretty close.

Unfortunately, I do not have a real one from my car to decode (not that it would match perfectly anyway). It would just be for fun, with no other intent.

While I have your ear, I can't say that I understand what the 2 last digits on the window sticker codes represent. For example... 5D80AA. What does the AA stand for? Not just for the spoiler option, but other optioned line items as well. My guess is color if applicable.

JohnZ · « **Reply #7 on:** December 07, 2006, 06:32:02 PM »

The last two characters are the ECL's - Exception Control Letters. They reference the Engineering Parts List Release configuration for that option, depending on other options it's combined with on a given car. Depending on what other options are present, a given option will require different parts in order to combine with them, and the computerized releasing/procurement system used the ECL codings to generate the parts list required for each car. Very complex subject.

For instance, C60 air conditioning required a completely different set of parts depending on whether it went into a car with an L-6, a SB V-8, or a BB V-8; each of those applications had a unique ECL code after "C60" on the window sticker, and if you had the Engineering Parts List (which was never published outside of GM), there was a completely different parts list for each of those ECL's. Each ECL triggered procurement of a different set of parts, and also generated different codes for parts on the Broadcast Copy which told the assemblers which parts went on the car.

Adz28 · « **Reply #8 on:** December 07, 2006, 07:12:37 PM »

Oof... Great explanation, but you are right, very complex.

So for purposes of creating a replica window sticker, a 5 in front of the RPO code, along with any ECL from a sample found on a real window sticker should do the trick.

Also, what does the 5 represent?

Thank for the reply.

KurtS · « **Reply #9 on:** December 07, 2006, 10:20:14 PM »

The car line.
Full-size is 1, etc.

JohnZ · « **Reply #10 on:** December 08, 2006, 03:53:49 PM »

Quote from: Adz28 on December 07, 2006, 07:12:37 PM

Oof... Great explanation, but you are right, very complex.

So for purposes of creating a replica window sticker, a 5 in front of the RPO code, along with any ECL from a sample found on a real window sticker should do the trick.

An ECL code for a given option taken from another car's real window sticker would only be "correct" if that car had exactly the same combination of options as yours. For car show display purposes, it would be fine - you could probably count the number of people on one hand who know what the correct ECL codes are supposed to be.

Adz28 · « **Reply #11 on:** December 08, 2006, 04:27:45 PM »

Thanks guys. Interesting little details are often hidden in what seem to be insignificant or overlooked items.

Great insight as always.

william · « **Reply #12 on:** December 08, 2006, 04:34:15 PM »

Quote from: Adz28 on December 07, 2006, 07:12:37 PM

So for purposes of creating a replica window sticker, a 5 in front of the RPO code, along with any ECL from a sample found on a real window sticker should do the trick.

You must be joking.

I have been doing '69 ECL research for years and probably add a few every month.

While there are some specific to certain performance options there are many permutations of others. For example Z22 Rally-Sport Equipment currently has 20. One would think Pace Cars would use the same one; no such luck-there are at least 4. A specific performance option may have different ECLs with different engines.

I would go on but when I yap about ECLs Kurt S' BP goes way up.

Nothing wrong with doing a window sticker "recreation" but be aware that for 1969 Camaro used 2 forms [early-late]; both are different than other Chevrolet lines. Prices changed [Z/28: $458.15/$473.95/$506.60/$522.40], options were added/deleted during the year. Some options were not available with unrelated others. You will never get ECLs correct.

And based on what is brewing in the hobby you better note it as a "repro".

lakeholme · « **Reply #13 on:** December 11, 2006, 01:54:23 AM »

So, is it fair to say there is no definitive source for window sticker decoding?

rich69rs · « **Reply #14 on:** December 11, 2006, 03:23:47 AM »

I think that it is fair to say that there will always be those that have access to information that the rest of us can't access. Someone, somewhere, must have a pretty good handle on window sticker info, including ECL codes. Does't mean that the info. is readily available to all of us, but it would be hard to believe that no one knows.

When I have personally run up against this in the past the argument given always followed the thought of "if we make the information available, it becomes easier for those that want to deceive and forge to do so". A lot of truth in that position, but at the same time it would be nice if anyone in the hobby could access the information he was searching for - either free through sites like CRG or through a paid service if that were appropriate.

Regardless of the breadth and depth of CRG knowledge on this topic, in my opinion it would be nice to see ECL data collated and posted somewhere on the CRG site, along with other window sticker decoding information. Outside of POP and Body Build Sheet decoding information, window sticker info has to be a very close 3rd.

KurtS · « **Reply #15 on:** December 11, 2006, 06:27:56 AM »

A source for window sticker decoding?
That would be the RPO listing, http://www.camaros.org/options.shtml#RPOSpreadsheet.

There's no plans to ever post the ECL data on the web. There's no benefit to the hobby in doing that, none. Don't think for a second that that info would not be used for aged WS recreations. If there's ever a question if a WS is real, just ask. There are several people that can ID a real one (ECL's are only one thing to look at), but the fakes do keep getting better.

Want an example of info gone awry? How about the person who tried to help the hobby by posting known BE axle dates. Best of intentions, but immediately restamped BE axles showed up on ebay....

lakeholme · « **Reply #16 on:** December 11, 2006, 09:50:45 PM »

Well, I know Kurt is right and in the end I have to agree... but there are plenty of us out here who are just trying to learn. I learned a whole lot more than I previously knew from this thread. Thanks! ADz28 for asking the question and CRG for the info!

Richard, I think you and I are about at the same place on this kind of information. I wish we lived in a world where people loved cars more than profit.

With what is happening in the hobby now and where prices are going, there is certainly a need for caution.

rich69rs · « **Reply #17 on:** December 11, 2006, 11:28:30 PM »

Amen. For me the main reason that I spend time on the CRG site is to learn. Frustrating when you know that all cannot be shared in the name of, and rightfully so, being cautious.

RamAirDave · « **Reply #18 on:** December 12, 2006, 03:57:28 AM »

I side with Kurt and others on this one.

Its not really needed to have the info public, and the same can be said for the databases that they keep. If you have a question, ask them either through PM or email.

Adz28 · « **Reply #19 on:** December 12, 2006, 05:54:42 AM »

I am certainly not in the position to argue that these ECL codes should be in the public domain, but I have to go back to my previous post. Seems like William had a real problem with me not putting correct ECL codes on a replica window sticker. Since these are not readily available, I have no choice. Hence, it was his recommendation to put "repro" on the Sticker so no one would mistake it for real. I may have read into a bit too far, but the "you must be joking" comment suggests I would be doing something terrible by not making it perfectly correct.

In my opinion, the problem of "what's going on in the hobby" has nothing to do with the car. It has all to do with the person trying to deceive and the buyer of the car and/or parts. If someone is looking to buy a car that is 100% original or correct (and drop big money to do so), it is up to they buyer to do the homework to get the level of car that they expect. I can't imagine that anyone would confuse a freshly printed sheet of paper with a 40 year old window sticker.

Another thread mentioned that their window sticker was "reproduced by General Motors". If he was told that, the seller was deceptive and it should not have been used to help sell the car. I would imagine that most of us have many reproduction parts on our cars that are not labeled "repro". Does that mean we need bumper stickers to alert people that the car is not original?

There is no doubt that most of us in this hobby want to make our cars as correct as possible. This forum and other reference books are great reading and learning from them is half the fun. Conceptually, I guess it is the mission of this group to steer people along the "correct" path. However, the keyword here is "hobby" and it has a different meaning to all.

rich69rs · « **Reply #20 on:** December 12, 2006, 05:02:12 PM »

If you are lucky enough to have a well documented car and you know the history from alpha to omega, then you are a very fortunate person indeed. I know what that feels like. My '66 Chevelle has been in the family since it was purchased by my grandparents on 30 March 1966. I have more documentation, including protect-s-plate, dealer sales documents, etc than most could ever imagine, because my grandfather was one of those guys who never, ever threw anything away.

For my '69RS, it is a different story, as is the case for the vast majority of those who participate in this hobby - most of us have very little original documentation. Consequently, all avenues of research and information tend to take on an elevated level of importance to those without original documentation.

As is the case with any learning process, regardless of where it occurs, there is more to the process of learning than simply asking a question. Can you imagine a school room where a teacher simply would stand up in the front of the class and tell the class, ok, this is calculus, go ahead and ask questions so you can learn. You can’t ask a question if you do not know what to ask or that there is a question that needs to be asked. This thread is a great example of just that fact. I would not have known to ask for a listing of ECL codes for my RS without this thread first educating me that there is such a thing as an ECL code. Consequently, asking isn’t always going to be the answer either - the onus is on the teacher to provide the information to the student.

william · « **Reply #21 on:** December 12, 2006, 06:38:38 PM »

Quote from: Adz28 on December 12, 2006, 05:54:42 AM

Seems like William had a real problem with me not putting correct ECL codes on a replica window sticker. Since these are not readily available, I have no choice. Hence, it was his recommendation to put "repro" on the Sticker so no one would mistake it for real. I may have read into a bit too far, but the "you must be joking" comment suggests I would be doing something terrible by not making it perfectly correct. I can't imagine that anyone would confuse a freshly printed sheet of paper with a 40 year old window sticker.

In recent months several dealers have been "taken" by re-created paperwork. Both were build sheets, one so bad it was amusing ['70 Chevelle form for a '69 Camaro] the other an excellent repro build sheet for a '70 LS-6 that only a very knowledgeable Chevelle guy could spot. A well-known auction house has had to buy back several cars that turned out to be fakes.

If dealers are getting screwed by this stuff where does that leave the average person?

You may be acting in good faith but sell that car with the repro w/s and it could come back to haunt you. Subsequent owners may not know it was a repro. If a large sum of money was involved count on memories to suddenly get fuzzy.

My advice: Forget the repro w/s, broadcast copies, build sheets, body tags, warranty folders.

If you would like an inkling of what is going on behind the scenes go to:

www.copo.com

67ss350camaro · « **Reply #22 on:** December 14, 2006, 01:10:39 PM »

Here is a perfect example. This car is on ebay (Item number: 260062503259). The ad does not say one word about the window sticker, but it is in the pictures. The WS looks kind of old (water stains), but is just made to look like that. Will every potential buyer be able to tell that it is not real? Probably not.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=016&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=260062503259&rd=1,1

lakeholme · « **Reply #23 on:** December 14, 2006, 10:13:10 PM »

True... Absolutely...

But I can also look at those other pictures, including the vin, the cowl tag and engine stamp with some confidence because of what I have learned from CRG. I also chuckled at the fan shroud sticker as overzealous restoration because JohnZ has told us more than once they don't belong on a 1st generation Camaro. I've checked through some of the RPO codes from the window sticker from the CRG RPO listing, just like Kurt referrred to. I agree with Daniel the water stains are suspect.

Now, somebody please help the rest of us, so we can at least sight identify a fake... The reason I should know about the window sticker is because there are no ECL's? In other words, did all 67, 68, 69 window stickers have ECLs?

Adz28 · « **Reply #24 on:** December 14, 2006, 10:39:41 PM »

Daniel, yes you are right that this is a good example. I certainly understand William's and other's points as it is a fair assessment of the current state of affairs.

What initially was a question about creating a Window Sticker for fun has morphed into more of a serious topic for discussion. Since the point has been made clear by a few of the CRG members, I certainly don't want to keep this thread going if all has been said. But I guess as long as there are replies...

"Back in the day" when the Internet was safe, no one had a problem clicking away on links found in emails, or going to web sites that a friend might refer you to. As time went on, it got more dangerous as bad-guys would set traps and viruses to prey on the unsuspecting. It seems like everyone got burned at one point, whether a virus wiped out a hard drive, or SPAM started spewing out of their home machine, etc. Then tools became available to help deter these threats. And, education that there are forces out there who want to do harm changed the way we conduct ourselves on the Internet. My kids won't know the battle we are facing to make the Internet a safer place to be. At some point the average Joe will know not to click on the fake Citibank email and provide their account number to the cheat.

There is no turning back the clock. As long as there are people out there willing to deceive and the technology is out there to help them deceive, then it is up to the enthusiasts to provide the tools to educate people. Some day, the average Joe will know not to by a car based upon what someone says, or by some piece of paper. Unfortunately, as time passes, the pool of well documented cars will get diluted by the fakes (or the misrepresented). It is inevitable. Just as that average person will know not to click on that email, they will also know not to buy that car without the proper education.

Anyone want to buy a real Mickey Mantle signed baseball? I have a letter of authenticity.

Maybe guys like me won't help the bigger picture here. In my opinion, slapping "repro" on my replica Window Sticker is not what is best for me. I have no intention of selling the car (which I often refer to as the Family Jewel). Is this a naive or apathetic point of view? Does this attitude hinder the hobby? Please chime in and let me know. I submit this with the utmost respect for the CRG members as their knowledge and insight is exceptional. Except in this case ;-)

67ss350camaro · « **Reply #25 on:** December 15, 2006, 01:00:27 PM »

Quote

In other words, did all 67, 68, 69 window stickers have ECLs?

Yes.

Quote

In my opinion, slapping "repro" on my replica Window Sticker is not what is best for me. I have no intention of selling the car (which I often refer to as the Family Jewel). Is this a naive or apathetic point of view?

I understand your view. I have done this myself. I have a made up window sticker on my car. My car is also documented in CRG's data base, so if in the future my car changes hands (won't happen if I have anything to say about it), it is already known not to have an original WS.

Quote

There is no turning back the clock. As long as there are people out there willing to deceive and the technology is out there to help them deceive, then it is up to the enthusiasts to provide the tools to educate people.

Your correct about not being able to turn back the clock. What you may not realize is that at this point in time, no one knows all of the ECL codes and the ones that are known have to be guarded. Once they are out, we can not turn back the clock.

If any of you want to know if a window sticker is original or not, all you have to do is send one of the CRG members a scan of it. We would be glad to tell you our opinion.

rich69rs · « **Reply #26 on:** December 17, 2006, 07:27:50 AM »

In the final analysis, there are those of us who would like to have access to information that is known to exist, for our own research purposes. I understand the logic behind restricting "sensitive" information for the sake of protecting the hobby. As some of you all may remember, in previously posted threads, I have vigorously argued the ethics that we should all have, but which many don't with regard to the cloning of and subsequent misrepresentation of cloned 1st Gen Camaros.

Unfortunately at the time anyone buys anything be it a classic 1st Gen Camaro or an antique clock, it is and always will be "buyer beware". It is unfortunate, criminal, and very sad that there are those that would take advantage of others to satisy their own greed. That is and always will be the case. Sicne the CRG is a privately owned entity, the members have every right to control the information of their organization as they deem appropriate - classic case of having to penalize many due to the behavior of a few.

lakeholme · « **Reply #27 on:** December 17, 2006, 07:52:03 PM »

Like JohnZ said a while back, GM was (and is) in the business to sell cars, not document them for us to restore years later. That's part of it...
I did read where for $45, proof of ownership and the VIN, the Chrysler historic group can give you a "build card" on practically any car they build from 32 to 67. Wouldn't that be nice?!?
GM could insist that any company that does a repo. W/S puts REPO on it...

tom · « **Reply #28 on:** December 27, 2006, 10:41:58 PM »

Regrettably, there is no original paperwork that can not be duplicated reasonably well with today’s technology. Paper can be aged to appear older. Old paper can be cleaned and reused for unintended purposes. There have been numerous check scams where the amount was changed. People have 'cleaned' the paper from one dollar bills to print counterfeit 100's. I am glad the CRG has, and does not share some of this information, but will examine what we have. This protects all of us. I wish I had original documentation, protecto plate, etc. I also wish I had a more valuable 69 than my 307 glide. I don't have a Z, or a COPO, or an RS, or an SS, and I will not change it into one. What I will do is continue to keep it somewhat original, and when I do swap in a newer part, I will hang on to the original in case I ever decide to go back.

Thanks CRG!

Merry Christmas, and Happy New Year

Tom

NCCaprice · « **Reply #29 on:** May 24, 2013, 01:36:58 PM »

Hello,

I have been working on having a "representative" window sticker form created for my Caprice. After having one created for me, (twice as a matter of fact), I was still not fully satisfied with the end product. I have been searching for an exact or close font as that used by the original IBM line printers used to create the multi-part forms that included the window sticker. After coming up empty in the font search, I changed my search criteria to "IBM font". I ended up finding what I consider to be the closest version of a modern PC font that is a VERY close match to the font used on late 1960's window stickers. It is found at the following site: http://ibm-1401.info. The link to the font is: http://ibm-1401.info/IBM140310Pitch-Regular.otf .
When you click on this link, you should be presented with the "Open/Save" box, click Save and download to your PC. Go to wherever the file was saved. Double click on it and you should be prompted to install the font on your PC. Your computer knows where to put the file.
The picture below is the result of my using Adobe Acrobat and applying this font to my blank scanned window sticker document, using my Triple A Enterprises version as a guide for the option codes and prices. I really like how this font makes the document look like a multi-part form, as the text is a little blotchy and it looks like some of the letters impacted a little to lightly.
The only thing I am having trouble with is the car production number in blue. I can't find a font that matches that group of numbers, as it is different from the rest of the form. On originals, there is no Serif on the #1, it is just a straight up and down line. The original numbers appear to be more oval than mine are. See attachment of window sticker to see what I created.

Mike S.
1969 Chevrolet Caprice 2 Door Coupe

JohnZ · « **Reply #30 on:** May 24, 2013, 02:12:45 PM »

Quote from: NCCaprice on May 24, 2013, 01:36:58 PM

The only thing I am having trouble with is the car production number in blue. I can't find a font that matches that group of numbers, as it is different from the rest of the form.

That's because the last six digits of the VIN weren't computer-printed - they were manually applied with an indexing office rubber stamp, as the multi-part stack of documents was printed a day or two before the car's VIN was known.

News:

Author Topic: Window Sticker Font (Read 47418 times)