CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 29, 2014, 01:40:57 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.
102445 Posts in 12090 Topics by 4668 Members
Latest Member: Carbuff
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  CRG Discussion Forum
|-+  Camaro Research Group Discussion
| |-+  Decoding/Numbers
| | |-+  Late March D80?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2  All Print
Author Topic: Late March D80?  (Read 2606 times)
dave hanson
Newbie
*
Posts: 7


View Profile Email
« on: September 15, 2011, 03:45:56 PM »

i have a cowl tag that reads the build date on my 1969 Z/28 as a 03D which i am told is the fourth week of march. it also has the D80 option stamped on the tag. i have been told that the D80 option was not used until at least 8 weeks after my build date. this guy claims that my cowl tag has to be a forgery therefore it is not a Z/28 !!!!   is this true???
Logged
Ed Bertrand
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 2333


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: September 15, 2011, 03:59:34 PM »

Dave I split your post from the other to make it easier to find.

Yes, your tag shouldn't have D80, so the tag is a reproduction. As for the car being a real Z28, you'll need to look for other clues. Unfortunately, with a repop trim tag, everything on the car is now suspect, but there's still hope. What's the VIN? We may have it in the database. Also post a picture of the trim tag if you can and the engine pad. If the engine stamping is correct, you'll still have a Z28, but with a reproduction trim tag.

And welcome to the forum by the way.

Ed
« Last Edit: September 15, 2011, 04:47:18 PM by KurtS » Logged
1968RSZ28
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4661



View Profile
« Reply #2 on: September 15, 2011, 04:05:27 PM »

Dave,

Here's what CRG says about the D80 option...

"The spoiler option was not available in 1967 on any Camaro. It became available as an option on all cars (except those with a rear antenna) in 68-69. It was not mandatory on any car, except for the 69 pace car replicas and later 69 Z's. The narrower 68 spoiler was used on the 69 Camaro up to January - March of 69, when the wider 69 spoiler was phased in. One of the torsion bars on an original spoiler equipped car will be of larger diameter to compensate for the weight of the spoiler. The front center of the 69 subframe will have a drilled hole to mount the center brace of the front spoiler."

Paul
Logged
Ed Bertrand
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 2333


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: September 15, 2011, 04:07:04 PM »

Paul, I believe Dave is referring to the D80 stamping on the trim tag and not the option itself.
Ed
« Last Edit: September 15, 2011, 04:47:47 PM by KurtS » Logged
1968RSZ28
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4661



View Profile
« Reply #4 on: September 15, 2011, 04:14:00 PM »

i have been told that the D80 option was not used until at least 8 weeks after my build date.

Thanks Ed,

My response was based on the above sentence from Dave's question.

Paul
Logged
dave hanson
Newbie
*
Posts: 7


View Profile Email
« Reply #5 on: September 15, 2011, 04:39:13 PM »

so are we saying that teh cowl tag is a forgery???
Logged
Ed Bertrand
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 2333


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: September 15, 2011, 04:43:27 PM »

Quote
so are we saying that teh cowl tag is a forgery???

Forgery is a harsh word. I like the term "reproduction", but you're correct, it's not a "factory" tag.

Ed
Logged
dave hanson
Newbie
*
Posts: 7


View Profile Email
« Reply #7 on: September 15, 2011, 05:00:19 PM »

Ed:

i think that it is very deceiving to sell a car as a Z/28 with a reproduction tag . i now do not know what i have.
Logged
dave hanson
Newbie
*
Posts: 7


View Profile Email
« Reply #8 on: September 15, 2011, 05:07:26 PM »

Ed:

My cowl tag reads as following:   ST69    12437   NOR3041388DY   TR 716  51  51 PNT   03C   X77D80
Logged
Ed Bertrand
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 2333


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: September 15, 2011, 05:08:12 PM »

Dave, post the VIN and a picture of the engine pad and we can go from there.

Ed
Logged
tom
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1133


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #10 on: September 16, 2011, 06:40:45 AM »

Yes it is very deceiving to sell a car with a reproduction tag. In some cases I would say criminal. However just because the previous owner sold it with the repro tag does not mean they added it or even knew it was a fake. Unfortunately anything with collector value has become a buyer beware market. There will always be fakes and counterfits, and crooks.
Logged

69 X11 Z21 L14 glide
looking for a 69 export model (KPH) speedo
69pace
Member
***
Posts: 373



View Profile
« Reply #11 on: September 16, 2011, 07:26:20 AM »

You have to weigh the circumstance of the use of the repro tag in question. I looked at a car with a buddy who had the itch for a 69 to add to his stable. The owner presented the original cowl tag in a zip lock along with pictures of the damage it had sustained while still attached to the vehicle. It was trashed when the body shop working on his firewall caught it in the sander by "mistake". In MHO the mistake was using that body shop.

The lower GM text was trashed and the tag was distorted by the process along with one of the corners being eaten off. I truly think the sander operator was trying to sand the tag off not knowing what it was. First day on the job inexperience maybe - he looked like he was 12 in the photo's. The vehicle owner at that point made the shop owner order an exact replacement for cosmetic reasons but retained the original tag for chain of custody reasons to make sure everyone down the road understood no embellishment was done. I am willing to accept reproduction mounted tags on a vehicle under these circumstances as long as the original tag remains with the vehicle and is documented as to the situation and reasons for removing and reproducing the original, once separated or undocumented  all bets are off.

So Dave as long as documentation vets out the status of the vehicle as being born Z28 03D, you would have a few options. You could retain copies of all the supporting documentation and disqualify the D80 status on the tag, or at this point since the tag is already suspect, remove it, retain it with the above mentioned documentation, and order a true replacement that agrees with the DOCUMENTATION you assemble from legit sources.

I hope she turns out to be a true Z28 ride for your sake, but if nor there is no shame in documenting her as a clone, again as long as that image is used to market her if you sell her down the road.

Just my $1.50 worth of hi-test.
Logged

1969 Z-11 350/300 with 4 Speed
lynnbilodeau
Member
***
Posts: 264


View Profile Email
« Reply #12 on: September 17, 2011, 06:10:58 PM »

Actually, Dave, I think you have a typo there.  Isn't the trim tag top line "ST69 12437 NOR 04138BDY" ?

I am guessing this is your car:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQ_trksidZp3984Q2em1423Q2el2649QQitemZ260851006947QQsspagenameZSTRKQ3aMEWAXQ3aIT

Further, I am guessing, based on your response, that you had no idea it was a fake trim tag on the car when you purchase it.
Actually, under Oklahoma law it is technically a "counterfeit" tag... others may wish to call it reproduction, or whatever, but if it doesn't reflect the exact same info as what was on the original tag, what is it reproducing?  ... guess that is a whole other topic.
You are not the first guy to be taken advantage of.  I can only imagine the sick feeling in your stomach right now.
Sad thing is, there may be nothing you could do about it.  But... then again, there may be.

Send me a PM if you wish.

Lynn
Logged
1968RSZ28
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4661



View Profile
« Reply #13 on: September 17, 2011, 07:38:23 PM »

Cowl tag photo from Ebay listing...

Paul
Logged
Ed Bertrand
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 2333


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: September 17, 2011, 09:03:28 PM »

Quote
Isn't the trim tag top line "ST69 12437 NOR 04138BDY" ?

NOR 304138 BDY

You made a typo too Lynn!!

Ed
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  All Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.074 seconds with 17 queries.