PDA

View Full Version : '68 Yenko, Transplant vs. COPO


YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY
04-18-2001, 03:24 PM
Here is a pic of the documentation regarding the L72 engine being tested in a '68 Camaro for Yenko Chevrolet in May of '68. Keep in mind that we should never say 'never' where GM is concerned.

One possible theory is that Yenko purchased this car from GM after their test, as an export vehicle. Yenko then sold it to a participating dealer through his network, with his own warranty just like the other transplant cars. This is not impossible, remember the hemi cuda proto-type story in MCR last year.

Kevin has studied these documents, and can add explanations better than I.
M

http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=378134&a=2796933&p=46198619&Sequence=0&res=high

http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=378134&a=2796933&p=46198622&Sequence=0&res=high

http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=378134&a=2796933&p=46198623&Sequence=0&res=high

bowtie3168
04-18-2001, 03:30 PM
Marlin,
Thanks for sharing the info.

Andrew

Mr70
04-18-2001, 03:40 PM
Very interesting reading.I enjoy the obscure. http://www.yenko.net/ubb/smilies/images/icons/smile.gif

JoeC
04-18-2001, 06:39 PM
Wow - interesting document. Special instructions "report name as Excalibur" ? Sounds like someone was being secretive. Not sure why Yenko would need a Federal Emission test on a car sold for Export. My guess would be that the GOV was requesting the L72 Camaro emission test numbers from Yenko and he asked Chevy to help him by performing the test on their equipment. If Chevy was openly selling the L72 Camaro then they would have persued the GOV approvals. The GOV was going after shops that they considered manufactures no matter how small the number of cars produced. In the 60's the GOV shut down some small manufactures like John Fitch by requesting crash test results and emission test results that they could not afford to do.
Marlin-Is there a vin number on the document?

Yenkofan
04-19-2001, 05:43 AM
It reads to me like GM is testing Yenko's car for Yenko at Yenko's cost. It doesn't seem to shed any light to me on the transplant or GM produced issue. Yenko wouldn't have had equipment to do the smog tests correct?
Also what does it mean at the bottom when it says "closed" and "no report issued"?
JMHO
Gary

SuperCars
04-20-2001, 04:03 PM
Gary, I think you are correct about testing Yenko's car at Yenko's request. But I believe that this could be a 427 Camaro already at the factory that was built by Chevrolet for Yenko. I wouldn't think it would make sense for Yenko paying for shipping a Camaro from the factory, then Yenko go through their transplant process; then pay to ship the car back to the factory, and then pay to ship the car back to Yenko when it was done. I think it was easier to drop in a 427 in at the factory instead of shipping a car 3 times. It is my belief that a Camaro like my 68 Yenko which has the tag from GM that says "special order drag car" is such an example. You can see this tag on my website with the little Chevy bow tie in the rib line of the tag. I don't believe that it would have this tag like this if it was just another RPO L78. I'm not suggesting though that my 68 is a COPO 9560 like in 69 though. I believe this it is possible my car could be a pilot 427 motor but hidden in the COPO 9737 sports car conversion. Jim Mattison in his interview in MCR touches on this a bit. Jim was in charge of COPO orders at GM and makes the comment on this very same subject. He says the guys in engineering where always doing something like that; and I don't think Mattison has any agenda for making statements like this unless they were true.

Lots of strange things have happened when it comes to GM's engineering research and development department. Another example I can give, is that for years it was believed that no M22's where ever put in a 65 Vette. This is because it was never listed as an RPO from GM. I own such a M22 Vette that is used in Alan Colvin's book "Chevrolet by the Numbers" and is the documented example of a M22 Vette which was instrumental in proving that. You can see my M22 Vette in the appendix of Colvin's book.

Then is the controversy of the 66 427 L72/M22 Vette to which some claims are made of these as being a cast iron head version of the L88. The reason that some suggest this is that for example in 1967 there were 20 L88 corvettes and 20 M22's produced. On this very subject there is an old article by Martyn Schorr as well. Interestingly Martyn as a young writer was at Motion Performance in 1966 when a 66 L72/M22 Tanker Vette was brought in for modification. Martyn writes that on the window sticker the motor was listed as L72-B. When the motor was taken apart for blueprinting it was discovered to have a gear drive timing gear with reverse rotation distributor. It also had a different valve train and the piston compression was not identified. Strange story, right? (I have to get Denis over to my house to post this as I have a scanner but yet to learn how to do it.) Anyway, this summer in Bloomington, Al Grenning whom is an NCRS judge and Corvette historian will do a presentation on 66 427/M22 Corvettes. He asked for my 66 427/M22 Tanker which raced at Daytona to be there as a part of his demonstration. I am sending it and it will be there as part of the special collection. He has uncovered GM factory documents documents on these 1966 427 Vettes which when having the M22 they were not the conventional L72 427, but a cast iron head version of the L88. I've yet to see these documents myself. Anyway, I guess all the more for the saying "never say never".


[Edited by SuperCars (04-20-2001 at 11:03 AM).]

JoeC
04-21-2001, 01:03 PM
Kevin. I am curious where these documents were found on the 1968 L72 Camaro. Did they come with the car when the original owner purchased it? The other document on this L72 Camaro that was shown in the Chevy Action article appears to provide more information. The picture in the magazine was not very clear but it appeared to be a COPO form that deleted some RPO's in exchange for other parts. Can you post this COPO document? It has some writing on the bottom that I could not read.
About the L72 M22 1966 Corvette. Don Yenko orderer a 1966 Corvette for a customer/friend who wanted the best possible race car he can get from Chevy. I have read that it was ordered as a L-72, M-22, J-56 dual pin brakes, F-41 suspension, G-81 positraction, K-66 transistorized ignition, and had no radio or heater. It was said to have been one of two 1966 L72 Corvettes with a special engine suffix code. I don't know how accurate this info is but I wonder if this Corvette had one of the cast iron head L88 type motors in it. This is a picture of it after it was race preprepared by Yenko including cutting off the windshield and adding a 42 gal. gas tank.
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1169942&a=8610132&p=29489227

SuperCars
04-23-2001, 05:56 AM
Joe, I was given a file of about 50 pages from Chevrolet Engineering Archives, that I believe I was told came through help from Herb Fishel, a Chevrolet Engineer, and I believe along with Fran Preve. The bulk of these documents pertain to COPO 9737. Most of which deals with suspension parts such as tie rod ends, sway bar components, steering and a bunch of stuff I haven't paid much attention to. The key pages I have focused on are this smog test, but also there were engine assembly numbers that were added and deleted number through this 9737 process as it appears to have evolved during 1968. Also for example, is one Engineering Change Recommendation on COPO 9737 (dated 4-10-68) is noteworthy, as it is typed "NOTE: RPO L78 Fuel Pump will used for delivery of vehicles only". Typed below that is "RPO L78 Fuel Pump required to facilitate assembly". In between these two typed sentences is handwritten: "Make Exp V78 Mandatory on all exceptions with Engine Changes- add to cost sheets." (signed with initials ARB 4/15/68; A.R.Baker was one engineer listed at top of page) Then, when I refer to the list on the COPO 9737 sheets, which is titled "Exception Control Letter Sheet" it lists all the RPO's to configure the COPO 9737. The first COPO 9737 Sheets do not list V78. RPO V78 was added to COPO 9737 on 4-3-68 and is: "V78 Less Certificate of Compliance/For Export/". It is my belief that this RPO V78 addition, plus handwritten in by an engineer the words "engine changes", is exactly what happened.

In answer to your question of the COPO order document in the Chevy Action Article, I thought I had a copy, but can't find it right now. I know who does have it and will get a copy one way or the other (I hope).

The 66 L72 Vette you posted is one of the L72/M22 that created the controversy over whether there were 66 L88's. There was a Lawsuit going on between a couple Corvette guys over this car, it got kind of ugly. But, I do believe it to be another of the L72-B/M22 cast iron head versions of the L88 as previously discussed. It was special ordered by Don Yenko for friend/customer named Mike Summers who owned "Best Photo Service". It was raced extensively and you will see the BEST PHOTO name on it. I can type another whole story on this car but won't right now.

By the way this reminds me of another interesting item about Don Yenko. It was told to me that his special order performance cars were white with red interior. We see that this 66 Vette is white/red and my 68 Yenko is white/red. When I was told this I didn't really think any significance to it; but has anyone else heard this?



[Edited by SuperCars (04-22-2001 at 12:56 PM).]

YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY
04-23-2001, 04:59 PM
More pics relating to Kevin's explanation;

http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=378134&a=2796933&p=46198625&Sequence=0&res=high

http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=378134&a=2796933&p=46198627&Sequence=0&res=high

M

JoeC
04-24-2001, 03:13 PM
Kevin, The document shown in the Chevy Action article is the best evidence I have seen to date of a COPO 427 1968 Camaro maybe two. I scanned and magnified it to 8x11 size trying to read it. Some of it is legible but some of it is too grainy. I sent a copy of it to Jim Mattison and he replied that he hadnĂt seen one for many years but remembered it as the śGSD-578” form. The copy shown on the Speedvision Musclecar COPO TV show looked like the one I emailed to Jim. I did tell him that there seemed to be some good evidence that not all the 68 Yenkos were MV code 427 engines but on the TV show Jim seemed to indicate that he still believed they all had the 427. I am not convinced that they all had the 427.
The GSD-578 form shows a COPO 9737HD. The "HD" is the ECL (Exception Control Letters) code to show a configuration change in a RPO or COPO number. Such as on the Yenko Chevelle build sheets that show 9737LD and 9737KD. Chevy could have used a different ECL suffix code on the 9737 to build different configurations of the 1968 COPO Camaro. From what I can read on this COPO order form it is dated 2-13-68 requested by Yenko Chevrolet and Span inc. for two 9737HD sports car conversions to ship ASAP. ( It appears to show quanty as 2 but not clear). One line of the document listed the RPO's that appear to have been deleted and replaced by other components. They are as follows; Z23, L78, M21, AXL2 (crossed out), J52, J50, U63, G80, N40. I decode this as; Z23 = special interior package (looks like it is not on this car), L78 = 396 (the article claims the original motor is a 427 with L88 parts), M21 (they claim the car has a M22, AXL2 = special performance axle (this is crossed out on the form) J50/J52=power disk brakes (the car looks like it does not have power brakes but may have J56), U63=AM radio (the car has no radio) G80= Posi rear (the crossed out AXL2 could spec. the axle 4:56) N40=power steering (the car looks like it has no PS). I can email a copy of what I have but I hope you can find the original.
On the Yenko colors “ I am not sure about the red interiors but Don Y definitely liked his racecars to be white with blue stripes down the center. He used this paint scheme on his early Corvette race cars and on the first Stinger Corvairs.

http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1169942&a=8610132&p=47170391

Kurt S
04-24-2001, 10:44 PM
I'd like to see a copy of the paperwork (could be helpful with our work on suspension and steering part #'s too), but one thought is the V78 is what cause the old style trim tag (with ACC on it) to be used.
Export cars used that same trim tag.

Kurt

YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY
04-25-2001, 08:11 PM
KurtS;
Are you saying that the V78 could be for a different trim tag size or design??
M

YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY
04-25-2001, 08:22 PM
Here is a pic of a what I believe is a Corvette L72 fuel pump. (Rowdyrat, confirm????)If it is, I can see why they would have to change it in order to put the L72 into the Camaro subframe. Could this be why they wrote the notes on the test paperwork?
M

http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=378134&a=2796933&p=47176900&Sequence=0&res=high

JoeC
04-25-2001, 10:37 PM
If the car used the L88's Holley 850 double pumper carb Chevy Engineering would probably specify the L88 fuel pump. The L88 fuel pump was probably in short supply since not many L88s were built and would have to come from the Corvette plant so maybe there was a problem getting the L88 fuel pump or maybe the Corvette L88 pump would not fit in the Camaro. It appears they just put in a fuel pump to make the car driveable then let Yenko worry about replacing it. A 1968 Camaro with a L72 427 equipped with L88 parts, an M22, and 4:56 gear would be a quick drag car. It's too bad Chevy didn't make the 50 cars required to qualify it for NHRA like they did with the ZL1.

Chevy454
04-25-2001, 10:58 PM
When did GM start using the double pumper? Was it in '69 only? Weren't there availablity problems when the ZL-1s came out? Wasn't it Charley's ZL-1 that started out with a vacuum secondary because Holley hadn't delivered the 850s yet?

When did Holley start making the double pumper?

JoeC
04-26-2001, 03:12 AM
I believe the 1967-68-69 L88 Corvette and ZL1 Camaro used the 850 Holley DP. When the Gibb/Harrell ZL1 went to its first race it failed tech inspection for not having the correct factory numbers on the Holley. It was discovered to have a 780 Holley on it instead of the correct 850 Holley. When Cars magazine tested Charlie's #3 ZL1 it had the incorrect 780 and still ran 13.16 @ 110.21. I'm surprised no L88s or ZL1s have shown up at the Pure Stock Drags. They sould be among the quickest factory built cars ever made.

[Edited by JoeC (04-25-2001 at 10:12 PM).]

Chevy454
04-26-2001, 03:58 AM
Hassett had his ZL-1 at the FSCMDR in Ohio last year. I'm not sure if he's gonna have it back this year or not, or if he's bringing another car.

You out there, Mark?

MrMotion
04-26-2001, 09:35 PM
My understanding of V78 mandatory is that export vehicles, especially the Camaros that were ordered for Canada, did not have to comply with air pumps or even having the L72 engines installed if the vehicles were ordered under COPO paperwork.

Kurt S
04-27-2001, 04:09 AM
Marlin,
Yes.
V78 is defined as 'Plate, compliance, delete', which fits the Yenkos and exports.
In 68, any car that was exported got the old style tag with the ACC on the bottom like the Yenkos.
They did this cause the car did not conform to US regulations so they didn't want to put a tag on it that said it did. Always wonder how they handled this in the plant.
I think we (CRG) have about 5 export 68's documented so far - 3 in Chile, 1 in Brazil, and 1 in France (396 car). All have the ACC tag and some have documentation.
We also have info on 68's built in other 3 countries, but that's a different story.... http://www.yenko.net/ubb/smilies/images/icons/smile.gif

[Edited by Kurt S (04-26-2001 at 11:09 PM).]

Rowdy Rat
04-27-2001, 01:47 PM
Marlin,

The configuration of that fuel pump appears to be identical to the one installed on my 1969 (part number 6440482). I do know that during 1967-69 the L-88 Corvettes always received a different fuel pump than the other high performance big blocks although I haven't done any research to determine what the internal differences are. I can tell you that the external configuration is the same as the other Corvette fuel pumps used during that time period so if installation of the pump in the photo is not possible due to clearance in the Camaro subframe (DISCLAIMER - I don't know this to be true and have never attempeted this installation so I am going by Marlin's original statement), then the same would hold true with the L-88 fuel pump. If the "MV" code engines were originally slated to get the L-88 fuel pump along with the L-88 carburetor, I can see why the engineers would note this.

I have seen the fuel pumps installed on L-88 Corvettes (and one ZL-1 for that matter) as well as a couple of ZL-1 Camaros. The fuel pumps used on the two cars are VERY different in appearance; there had to be a reason for this.

I believed (like Joe) that the carburetors for the L-88s were all 850cfm models with mechanical secondaries and dual accelerator pumps. However, I'm beginning to think that this may only be true for the 1968-69 L-88s (and ZL-1s). I'm showing the original carburetor for the 1967 L-88 as part number 3886091 (Holley List R 3418 A) which is an 850cfm but with vacuum secondaries and a single accelerator pump. The 1968-69 L-88 carburetor is 3925579 (Holley List R 4054 A) which is an 850cfm "double pumper" (can you confirm these numbers Joe?). Kurt, you had mentioned in a previous post that Fran Preve knew the carburetor on the "MV" engines was changed to the L-88 unit. If you have the part number from the bill of materials, can you tell us which (if either) of these two part numbers was used?

Regards,

Stan Falenski

Kurt S
04-30-2001, 04:10 AM
Sorry, I don't have the carb part #'s. Just heard that via a CRG member who had talked with Fran.

SuperCars
04-30-2001, 02:35 PM
Kurt & Stan, I have the documents that may answer these questions. Also have 67-68-69 L88 vettes from which I could check carb numbers on. They are Bloomington Gold certified so I would believe they have the right Carbs. But I believe the GM paperwork that I have best explains our questions.

I have an Engineering Change Recommendation (ECR) dated 10-26-67 on COPO 9737, that states: "Furnish log sheets and necessary drawings covering changes required to install the 850 CFM Carburetor and intake Manifolds from the Corvette RPO L88 Engine (427 Cu In) on the Camaro L78 Engine (396 Cu In)". An accompanying ECR is specific with part numbers: "add Inlet Manifold #3933196 in place of #3931075". Also have a Deviation Notice that states: "Install one (1) additional pipe plug 444667 in the heater hose hole on the top right front of the inlet manifold assembly". Could this mean these Camaros had to be heater delete?

The above L88 carb and manifold ECRs were the first change to the COPO 9737's having L78 engine and started somewhat early in the production year. When I refer in this time frame to the COPO 9737 Exception Control Letter Sheet, dated 12-11-67, the only item listed that pertains to export is the U18 Speedometer/Export/, there is no V78 Export on this sheet.

A few months later came along the ECR dated 4-10-68 (which is posted above), it says: make Exp RPO V78 Mandatory on all exceptions with Engine Changes-add to cost sheets. (initialled ARB 4/15/68). So when I refer to the COPO 9737 Exception Control Letter Sheet dated 4-18-68, RPO V78 Less Certificate of Compliance/For Export/ is added on for the first time. Also appearing for the first time at the bottom of this sheet is Sports Car Conversion/Yenko/, as the word Yenko was not on the earlier COPO 9737 sheet.

Maybe I am wrong here, but I believe the ECR with the GM engineers words "engine changes" showing up at the same time as the V78 Less Certificate of Compliance/For Export/ on the Exception Control Letter Sheet, means that there was an engine change. I don't believe it would be an engine change from a L78 to another L78 with L88 carb and manifold, as that already took place months previously. Additionally when you see the V78 Export show up for the first time at this later date, it tells me that this is to cover an engine change to one which was one that had not been approved. If so, what was this new engine? I believe it is the L72 427, and is the reason for the request by Yenko to do the Federal Emmisions Smog test. Kevin.



[Edited by SuperCars (04-30-2001 at 09:35 AM).]

JoeC
05-01-2001, 03:31 AM
I have read that all L88s had the 850 Holley DP but I think Stan is right that at least in the beginning of the year the 67 L88 used a 850 vac sec. I have an old L88 Holley sitting in the garage that I hadn't looked at for 10 years and incorrectly remembered it to be a monster 850 DP. I dug it out today and it is a 850 Holley vac sec carb. The numbers are 3886091-AN list 3418-1 dated 0B2 so it must be a service part # carb made in 1970. (Al Colvin's book shows the 67 L88 Holley as 3886091 list# 3418) The throttle bore on the 850 is 1.750 dia where a 780 Holley is 1.687dia. Getting back to the 68 Yenko Camaro - the Super Chevy article on the blue 68 Yenko Camaro raffle car claims it had a L88 carb list# 4054 which would be a 1968 -69 L88 Holley DP. They also claim that this blue 68 Yenko is a COPO L72 MV code car.

Kurt S
05-02-2001, 04:20 AM
I can see a different possible meaning to: "make Exp RPO V78 Mandatory on all exceptions with Engine Changes-add to cost sheets. (initialled ARB 4/15/68)"

I think it is a CYA move on their part. On all ECR's that have any engine modifications (9737 and any other ones in their system), they put the export style trim tag on the car because the car may not meet the federal regs that the standard trim tag claims.

I only have info on one early 68 Yenko and it skimpy on details. All the other ones I know about are April cars with the V78 export tag on them.

Still can't figure out why they would have export speedos on the ECR though....

Since we are talking 68 Yenkos, does anyone know the VIN for the 68 Yenko that was in the book "How To Restore Your Musclecar"? The body # is 113453 and it's YS-8021.

Kurt


[Edited by Kurt S (05-01-2001 at 11:20 PM).]

Denis
05-02-2001, 04:21 AM
If the 68 Yenko in the "How to restore your musclecar" book was restored by the author, you can reach Greg at 352-344-4329.

SuperCars
05-02-2001, 01:51 PM
The COPO 9737 Exception Control Letter sheet "ECL" lists all the RPO's that are combined to mke COPO 9737. Most of you know it already, but these are separate documents from the Engineering Recommendation Changes or "ECR's". The pre-April 68 COPO 9737 "ECL" does not include the V78 Export on it. But it does include the U18 Speedo/Export. Could it be that Federal regulations only allowed the standard 120 MPH speedo; and in order to have the 140MPH speedo it was only able to be permitted by labeling the car for export. It's likely that pre-April 68 Yenkos having Export Trim Tags may only be from the change to the 140 MPH Speedo and had no relevance to engine changes.

Then when V78 Less Certificate of compliance is listed for the first time on the COPO 9737/Yenko "ECL" of April 68; it most likely was a result of this GM engineers words on the April 68 9737 "ECR" pertaining to Yenko; "make RPO V78 mandatory with Engine Changes". Since the V78 Export prompted by "Engine Changes" came into effect in April 68; the cars "without engine changes" prior to April may've had the Export trim tags only because of the U18 Speedo/Export designation.

JoeC
05-02-2001, 03:41 PM
Kevin,
Have you tried to contact Jim Mattison or JohnZ? They may be able to shed some light on the COPO documentation since they were witness to some of the activities. JohnZ posts on TeamCamaro and the Corvette Forum sites. Here is a recent post of JohnZ's on a COPO thread.
"Zone Sales Managers had nothing whatsoever to do with COPO's or product promotion - their job was to make sure sales targets were met and cars were distributed/allocated to dealers to keep their inventories in line with demand - to "move the iron".
All COPO activities were managed from Detroit, by Ed Barlow, Jim Mattison and Joe Pike in Sales and Marketing, and by Vince Piggins in Product Promotion Engineering.

There was no shortage of cars to be modified at Chevrolet, whatever the purpose, without going to the trouble of ordering them and having to wait for them to be built; Chevrolet Engineering had over 1,300 cars in their fleet (including mine), and there were several thousand more in the Sales/Marketing/Public Relations fleet.

Inidvidual dealers occasionally modified their own cars for local community activities to create their own marketing opportunities, but all COPO activities and Product Promotion "special cars" were handled from Detroit"

YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY
05-02-2001, 04:21 PM
Kevin;
Your various items of information are starting to come together in a 'timeline, or chronological process. It appears that some changes superceded others, ect, and therefore required export exceptions. Very interesting, I also wonder what Mattison and others remember about the export compiance ect.
Marlin

Jim Mattison
05-02-2001, 11:18 PM
Guys, I see that there is quite the debate on if the '68 Yenko Camaro COPO 9737 actually came with the L72 engine. Hopefully, I can help to set the record straight on this issue!

In 1968, I worked in the Chevrolet Fleet & Special Order Department that processed all COPO orders. We were the sales and marketing arm of Chevy Special Vehicles. It was also in 1968 that I first met Don Yenko. At that innitial meeting, Don wanted to get close to the person at Chevy who was handling the orders and paperwork for Yenko Sportscars, a division of Yenko Chevrolet. I was that person.

What started as a business relationship, became a real friendship between Don and I, although he was conciderably older than I was. He loved life and people and it was very easy to like him.........as he loved to party and have a good time!!! As we became friends, he confided to me many of the behind the scenes things that effected the Yenko programs.

The authorization for the 1968 Yenko Camaro (COPO 9737) came about in quite an unorthodox way, as passed-down from Ed Cole, who was the President of GM at the time, to E.M. "Pete" Estes, Chevrolet General Manager. Having those two names on anything at Chevrolet gave a project the highest priority. I later found out that the Yenko family, through Don's dad, Frank, were very close with Ed Cole.

Don told me that in a meeting that he had with Ed Cole, he proposed his idea for a "factory warranted" 427 Camaro. The conversions that his people were doing at the dealership were costing him a fortune in conversion time and warrantee expense. I don't know all of the details of the meeting, but in the end Cole told him that if he could sell half of the cars he claimed to be able to sell, Chevrolet would help him out..........however, he could not publish, nor tell anyone that the cars were actually factory produced.

Cole and Estes also wanted to be able to track these vehicles for ownership, as well as warrantee expense. They had the Chevrolet Product Planning Department issue a special engine code for the "427" engine that went into the 1968 Yenko Camaro COPO 9737. That code was "MV".

Tonawanda records show that a total of 79 engines were built in 1968 with the "MV" engine code. I don't know if all of these engines went into vehicles (some were held for warrantee), but I do know that they were (L72) 427's.

The success of the 1968 Yenko Camaro opened the door for the 1969 COPO program......... and as they say "the rest is history".

I apologize for the lengthy post.

Jim Mattison

bkhpah
05-03-2001, 01:17 AM
I feel very strongly that the MV code is a 396/375 and here is why. I have gone over this before, but this time we are on top of a new car. My friend has in his garage a MV code standard bore 1968 396/375 block with a Norwood Camaro VIN. I would be happy to share the VIN if you like at a later date. This motor has been rumored to have been one of the sold short blocks from a Yenko conversion 1968. Also I have just been in contact with a owner of a 375 68 Yenko Camaro 9737 car that is a non converted car. It has all the 9737 things like 1 1/16 sway bar, 140 speedo, special trim tag and rear code. But it was never a 427. It was sold to the original owners as a 396. It has warranty book and POP. I am going to inspect the car in a few weeks. It was Corvette Bronze a Yenko color. I have also talked with another local Canonsburg Yenko 68 396 Camaro owner that bought a new car with all the goodies but a 427. That makes two. If the MV total was 79 and Yenko only sold 64/65 cars that leaves a few unconverted and sold as 396 cars. There may have been a mule 427 test car, but the rest seem to have been delieverd as 396's. Would not at least one MV code 427 engine have shown up by now that is not a restamp? If I am wrong about this I will be the first to admit it. I may have not been there in the day, but the MV code just does not add up to a 427 engine...BKH

Jim Mattison
05-03-2001, 02:00 AM
I'll agree that some of the early '68 Camaros were converted at Yenko's dealership and those cars could have started out as most anything. You wouldn't believe what some of the early Yenko conversions "really" started out as!

As for the 1968 "MV" 427 engine issue, I can still remember quite clearly the conversations that I had, not only with Yenko, but also with our engineering release engineers on this subject. I think that part of the confussion exists because Chevrolet didn't "officially" recognize the 427 engine in the Camaro until 1969....... Remember, Yenko couldn't tell anyone that these cars were factory built 427's.

Jim Mattison

bkhpah
05-03-2001, 11:31 AM
If I can show you a engine with a Yenko Camaro 1968 VIN that is an MV code standard bore four bolt main 396 what would your opinion be? Stan, your opinion on this engine, you have seen it. The newly discovered non-converted Yenko Camaro that I just talked to the owner of knows what he has an it was never a 427. It has all the tell tail signs of a 427 Yenko without the 427. This car still has glovebox paperwork. I get to meet with this owner in just a few weeks. Yenko took out ads in the local paper selling unused 396 engines to help get rid of the extras. If you would like I will bring this block to the Super Car Reunion as part of our Yenko display we set up every year. Jim,I respect your work and opinion and have talked to you before. This is just what I have learned on my own...BKH

JoeC
05-03-2001, 12:28 PM
Jim - Welcome and its great to see you adding to the discussion here.
I know it was many years ago but do you remember this name "Excalibur”? It seems like Engineering used it as some sort of code name like in a James Bond movie. I have been following the story on the 68 Yenko Camaro engine for many years and there appears to be evidence for a 427 MV and a 396 MV. One thing I notice is the date on that emission test document is 6-21-68 which is very late in the 1968 model year since change overs began in late July 68 for the 1969 model year. That "GSD-578" form dated 2-13-68 requesting the 9737HD build for Yenko is also half into the 68-model year. If Yenko wanted to sell COPO 1968 Camaros I would think the paperwork would have to be started in late 1967. This leads me to believe that early 68 Yenkos were transplants. Just my observation. On the other hand, the paperwork Kevin has especially the GSD-578 seems to indicate a COPO 427. Also the article on the blue 68 Yenko Camaro in Super Chevy claims that car has the original motor and it is a MV code 427. They claim to have the POP and a broadcast sheet and the original owners name which they state in the article bought the car in December of 1968. I also heard of a 3rd 68 Yenko owner claiming to have a 427 MV code block with a Dec 67 date. (I have his name and have been trying to contact him) I am curious if the build dates of the MV 396 cars are all early and the build dates of the cars claiming 427 MV motors are later build dates. I guess it would be very odd for Chevy to build a MV code 396 and a MV code 427 but that sure would hide it from management if that were their intention.

Chevy454
05-03-2001, 01:15 PM
Jim:

Thanks for stopping by! It will be good to see what you have to say, and maybe you can help shed some light on the COPO paperwork, and explain what moves were made to make a thing like a COPO car happen.

JoeC:

Could "Excalibur” possibly have been a name that Yenko came up with? Kind of like "Stormer" & "Stinger"? Maybe he was considering this name, and GM used it just to kind of keep track of the combo? Who knows...just thinking out loud...although it might not be very loud!

Rowdy Rat
05-03-2001, 02:48 PM
I've been trying to purchase the engine that Brian mentioned for about five years now. It is definitely a standard bore 396, casting number 3916323. The casting date is B 15 8 and the assembly date/broadcast code is T0223MV. The VIN derivative is 18N412### which appears to be for a mid-April 1968 car. The NICB records as well as information given to the current owner of the block indicate that the car it was installed in was originally delivered to Yenko Chevrolet. It is the real deal; there is nothing about this block that makes me believe it was restamped or altered in any way. I hadn't realized that there were other "MV" 396s out there until Kurt spoke up about the ones he he has found as well as Brian's recent finds. This leads me to believe that "MV" code 396s were being installed in Camaros as late as April 1968. Whatever theory you may have for 427 engines in 1968 has to account for these 396s.

Jim, good to see you here. A couple of questions that I have that perhaps you can comment on as you were involved in the project and with the people. First, federal emissions compliance went into effect for all 50 states for the 1968 model year (hence the emissions testing data that Kevin was kind enough to provide and Marlin to post). Would Cole or Estes jeopardize their professional careers (and pensions/retirement plans - they were both getting close to retirement, right?) by selling cars in the U.S. without emissions compliance. Doing so would certainly risk a run in with the federal government. If not, then the earliest possible date for production would have been 6/21/68 according to Kevin's documents. That's assuming that the tests were satisfactory and GM was ready to immediately start building cars at that point (I doubt that GM moved that quickly). Second, if the purpose of the "MV" code was to identify the engines for warranty issues, then you've created a real problem by using "MV" for both 396s and 427s in the same platform. Which is which?

Joe, I appreciate you digging out that 1967 L-88 carburetor. It adds some support to what I had discovered so far.

Regards,

Stan

YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY
05-03-2001, 06:17 PM
Kevin;
I will take a stab at your question! Florida??
M

SuperCars
05-03-2001, 06:39 PM
Marlin,
You got me grinning here. http://www.yenko.net/ubb/smilies/images/icons/smile.gif Is that just a stab, or is there some basis for that guess?

YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY
05-03-2001, 07:10 PM
Kevin;
With all honesty, that is a guess. Although, it is based on the fact there has seemed to be a strange amount of '68 Yenko Camaros being sold out of Florida within the last few years. I'm assuming that they all weren't brought there after being sold new.

I know that one of the Island Teal cars was sold by the Camaro Club, which is/was in Florida. I believe one of the red, RS cars was sold in Hemmings a couple of years ago - from Florida (?). I know that a member of this board has YS-8030 - in Florida. The car on the screensaver has a Florida license plate. BeaumontBill just purchased the Corvette Bronze '68 Yenko that I know was sold new in Florida. I believe there are others. I checked my dealer listing that I have been assembling over the years, and found that Florida had at least 4 dealers in the Yenko network.

So, that is my guess!! Is it correct??????
M

[Edited by YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY (05-03-2001 at 02:10 PM).]

SuperCars
05-03-2001, 07:46 PM
Marlin,
You are correct. What I couldn't understand is what prompted this region of the country to get these? It must have been all in the marketing and sales. Which ever Dealership promoted them best, got the sales and sold cars.



[Edited by SuperCars (05-03-2001 at 02:46 PM).]

Chevy454
05-03-2001, 07:58 PM
Whoa, Marlin! You are like Sherlock Holmes...or Kreskin...or lucky...something! Did you peak at the answer or something http://www.yenko.net/ubb/smilies/images/icons/wink.gif?

Interesting post, Kevin. You are probably right about the marketing thing in Florida. You'd think, though, that he could have sold them around PA easier, but who knows. Wouldn't it be cool to somehow get Vince on here and pick his brain a little, and see what info we are leaving out? Then, maybe, we could be put a BUNCH of pieces of the puzzle together!

YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY
05-03-2001, 09:22 PM
Kevin;
That is very interesting regarding Florida receiving so many '68 Yenkos. I was originally surprised that Florida received any Yenkos, and while talking with Tim Lapatta a while ago he said that racing was, and still is, a year-round activity down there. This might explain the volume in '68, and maybe that volume saturated the market by '69. I know some ZL1's went to Florida as well, but it I don't know of any '69 or '70 Yenko cars, (?). Additionally, I know that one of the '81 Turbo Z's was originally sold out of Tampa, but it was transferred to them because they had a buyer, not on speculation.
M

Jim Mattison
05-04-2001, 12:02 AM
Guys, I don't profess to have all of the answers to the questions of the universe and I cannot explain why there is a '68 396 block with a "MV" code floating around. However, I do know that we (Chevrolet) built some 427 Camaros for Yenko Sportscars in 1968 with a "MV" engine code. I wish that I had saved more of my old factory paperwork. Then I could answer more of your questions. If I had only known......!!!

I can't help but think that what makes many of these COPO cars collectible today is the fact that we were busy building cars to satisfy what the market was asking for. These COPO cars were actually driven! Not like today, where folks buy a "new" special performance model and put it away, or trailer it everywhere!

I sincerely doubt if many of these newer models will ever be as collectible. No one ever gets to see or hear them on the street. Just my two cents worth!

Jim Mattison

JoeC
05-04-2001, 12:05 AM
The Yenko name must have been pretty well known in Florida in 1968. If my records are correct,Yenko racing had a big year in Florida in 1967 winning 1st in GT at the 12 Hours of Sebring race in a 1967 L88 Corvette then Jerry Thompson won the SCCA D-Production national championship in the Yenko Stinger at Daytona on Nov. 26, 1967. Yenko raced the 1968 DX Oil L88 Corvette at Daytona and Sebring in early 68 and had been racing at Daytona and Sebring since the early sixties. Maybe "Win on Sunday Sell on Monday" worked well for Yenko in Florida in 68.

bkhpah
05-04-2001, 12:11 AM
The 68' Yenko Camaro the we restored at Super Car Workshop was a 07E build date. This is a very late build date and most likley the last week of production. I interviewed the original owner at lenght. He said that he and his brother bought the car as partners. Age 18 and 20. They lived in Bentlyville at the time ( home of the original Yenko Chevrolet). They bought the car right from existing stock. It was an SS 396 car. They sat down and ordered the 427 engine ,headers, mags, and a few other items. Being young and living close they went and checked on the progress of their car daily. They were there when the engine was pulled, the day the 427 was installed etc. This is surely not the standard practice on a car that is factory fitted with a 427. These guys are not old or senile at this stage in life and I believe them 100%. Since POP's were with these cars the MV code would appear on the plate. This tells you nothing about engine size. My bet is that some surving 68 Yenko's with POP's that did not have the original CE block may have been "hit" to become MV 427's. Thus the large amout of MV 427 Yenko's that appeared a few years ago. I feel that Kevins car is the lone exception in this mystery. It is unusual in my opinion that a test car would be later sold to the general public. I have talked to Yenko employees an the story is always the same, transplants. And does anyone understand why the use of the Pontiac 14X6 rallye II's. Again I cannot understand why Yenko would use a wheel like that. Again no one at Yenko can remember this item. The guess I would make on the most sold state would have been Florida as well. A good many cars trace back there. The one famous picture that most everyone has seen is the 68 Yenko with the palm trees in the background. This is not PA for sure. This is a very interesting topic. Would anyone be interested in seeing the MV 396 block at the reunion this year? This alone may bring a few left coasters to the event..BKH

SuperCars
05-04-2001, 02:22 AM
Well, Florida always was one of my favorite vacation spots. Now I will probably be staring at every 68 Camaro and wrecking yards, etc, when traveling there next. Marlin, maybe you can talk your wife into going there for your next vacation. I would like to hear more stories of you being chased out of someones backyard from checking VIN's on abandoned 68 Camaro's in their yard.

Jeff H
05-04-2001, 02:47 AM
Jim, it's great to have you join in on this dicussion. I will agree with you on your statement about these modern performance cars being bought and stored away. I have one of the 93 Indy Pace Cars and I know it's not really a high performance model but it is a limited production model. I put a supercharger on it and I drive it to work every day. I can't see how someone would buy such a great car and not enjoy it as much as possible. This is a little off topic on this post, but do you have any information regarding the JL8 4 wheel disc brake option? We all see that the number Chevrolet claims made were 206, but a lot of people feel that number was an arbitrary number made up to satisfy the SCCA. It appears that it might actually be closer to 100 units sold. Do you have any insight on this?

BUIZILLA
05-04-2001, 02:57 AM
Hi all, I have been following this BB lately and enjoy the camraderie. Since I have lived in South Fla most all my life and attended college in Tampa, Fla. I know all the roads. Further to that, I have drag raced Chevy's for 30 years now. Also, I was the new car get ready manager for a large Chevy store and remember well the good 'ol days, since I was in charge of all the HP cars...
Yes, there were a few sYc cars down here then. And, two or three 69 Camaro's right in my neighborhood now. I specifically remember a bronze color 427 68 car that raced at Miami-Hollywood track in the late 60's to early 70's. There was also a red 69 427 Chevelle. I guess why I remember the bronze 68, was that I never saw that color on another Camaro, ever. There was also a green car that raced at Desoto Dragway in Bradenton and Oldsmar Dragway in Tampa, and this was in 70-72 time frame.
I would be *VERY* curious what dealers sold the sYc cars in this era. Anybody have that info?

I was very familiar with the following dealerships in Miami>
Luby, Don Allen, Anthony Abraham, Sark, Tropical, Costley, Sun, Potamkin, Leiphart.

Jim Haas

Chevy454
05-04-2001, 03:11 AM
Jim:

Good to have you here! I guess since the Buick board has been down, people have kind of "migrated" to other boards! Casey was in here yesterday, and now YOU! Who knows...maybe Mike W. will show up next http://www.yenko.net/ubb/smilies/images/icons/wink.gif!

Also, maybe some of the people here know the whereabouts of the cars you remember from "back in the day", and you can check them out in person some day!

JoeC
05-04-2001, 03:12 AM
The pictures of the 68 Yenko with the palm tress is in the article with the Don Y interview. The car has 4 miles showing and does have the Pontiac wheels. I thought the palm tress may be in California where Dana Chevrolet was. There appears to have been some type of arrangement with Dana and Yenko. One question in the interview was "Were any SYC conversions done on customer cars"? Don's reply was that he did a dozen or so in 67 and 68 but Dana Chevrolet did a lot of them. I have an add for the Dana Camaro that lists many of the same components Yenko used and states on the bottom line "All prices are f.o.b. South Gate, CA. and Canonsburg, PA." Also the 68 Yenko and Dana both used the same glass hood. So does this mean that Dana was doing Yenko conversions in 68? Why is that 68 Yenko there posing with palm trees with a PA dealer plate and 4 miles on the odometer?

Kurt S
05-04-2001, 05:02 AM
I have data on a 68 Yenko, April car, with the POP (MV) and the original engine it left Yenko with, which is a CE block.
Also, Fran Preve has dug into the Tonawanda records and determined MV's were 396's.
Now, there could have been a running change during the year, but re-using an existing engine code would be unusual.

One other thing: if Chevy was installing 427's into cars in 68, then what held up the 69 COPO's until January of 69?

Just more fodder for discussion. http://www.yenko.net/ubb/smilies/images/icons/smile.gif

Kurt S
CRG - www.camaros.org

SuperCars
05-04-2001, 05:42 AM
This is getting interesting. Thanks for your posts Jim M. It is great to hear from someone like you who was involved with these processes. I was especially keen to hear about your personal contact with Don Yenko and the part about Don Yenko, Ed Cole, and Pete Estes agreeing together for production of the 427 Camaro in 1968. It sounds as if this took place in the middle of the 68 Production year. I always wondered how Yenko could afford to do the 427 transplant conversions and warantee them on his own.

I have heard of this MV 396 block also, and is evidence for 68's having been transplants. But, we also see here as Jim states; that later in 1968 Chevrolet committed to 68 427 Camaro production under COPO 9737. I believe at least one 427 Camaro was built, such as my 68 Yenko with Chevy tag: "special order drag car".

I am repeating again from GM documents under COPO 9737/Yenko/, April 68 is the first appearance of the RPO V78 "Less Certificate of Compliance/Export/". This is what would cover Chevrolet (Cole and Estes) from the Emissions regulations and thus put the matter on Yenko's shoulders to resolve. Now that Yenko was successful in getting Chevrolet to commit to build 427 Camaros, his next challenge was to keep Federal Emissions guys from contacting him, if he were selling non-compliance cars. Technically at this point a factory production 68 427 Camaro could only be sold as a race car or exported. This most likely resulted in Yenko's request for the Chevrolet Engineering Test Order for the L72 Camaro smog test (with the code name "Excaliber) which as dated May 20, 1968, with 6-21-68 as completion date. I believe this Smog Test request is the fall-out after a 427 Camaro with V78 non-compliance was built and Yenko realizing he had to deal with Federal Emissions as well.

I have a last side note here. Just for the heck of it, as I didn't think the answer would be yes; two days ago I asked Vince the question: were any 68 Yenkos exported? He said no they weren't, and actually most of them went to one state. He told me the state, and was a complete surprise to me; what state that was.

Casey Marks
05-04-2001, 11:29 AM
Hey guys ......

as a Chevrolet neophite, but avid *all-musclecar fan*, this discourse is very interesting. The history and background on the Chevy Supercars is one of the most interesting to me.

I've followed this specific thread for quite a while now. I tip-my-hat to the gentlemanly way that you discuss some differences in opinion on *MV* coded blocks, and their intentions / origins. This solidifies in my mind what a class-act you guys are !!

And they say the Buick boyz go Fast with Class ........

Casey Marks
1970 Olds F85 W-31
13.xx @ 10x.xx <---(I gotta keep Rob on his toes....) http://www.yenko.net/ubb/smilies/images/icons/smile.gif

Chevy454
05-04-2001, 11:46 AM
Casey:

Good to have you aboard! So, what are you doing with all of your free time now that the Buick board is down?! http://www.yenko.net/ubb/smilies/images/icons/wink.gif

You correct with your "gentlemanly way" statement. We have to look at pretty much everything concerning these cars with an open mind, because you sometimes never know! And we all know some odd things happened along the way with these cars!

Now, about those ETs...so, you are STILL not going to divulge any info, huh? Well, if you keep posting those 13.XX ets, that may give Pete or Marlin something to shoot for, and you just may get your wish about running a small block Nova... http://www.yenko.net/ubb/smilies/images/icons/wink.gif

JoeC
05-05-2001, 05:29 AM
There may have been at least two of the COPO 427 cars built by Chevy. On that form that was shown in the Chevy Action article there is a field on the top line that appears to be a quanty number and has a "2". I can't read it that well so a better copy will need to be checked. Jim M. may remember if that was the field for quanty on that form. Our engineering forms at work always have the order quanty on the top line like that. Does anyone know where the "one and only" raffle car 68 Yenko Camaro is now?

[Edited by JoeC (05-04-2001 at 12:29 PM).]

YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY
05-07-2001, 07:31 PM
Brian;
That is a good point you make about blocks getting 'hit' once the word was out regarding them being 'MV' codes. We both know how people will try to make something appear more 'original' just for the money.

I also believe Kevin's car is the exception to the transplant rule for '68, and agree that it is unusual for GM to let a 'test mule' go to the public. I think that they did this because they had a Purchase Order from Yenko for this test, and I don't think either side wanted to crush the car when the test was finished. The paperwork that Kevin has with this car certainly points to a process change within a few short months in '68, and outlines some of the hurdles that GM was jumping over to get this car out of their hair. (Fuel pump, smog, export tag, ect...)

I think that after Yenko received this car, he did what Chrysler did with their 1st Hemi Cuda, put it way out in the middle of nowhere - certainly not in a big city with media and lawyers. Kevin can divulge the originating dealership for his car if he wants to, but I think it was a wise move by Yenko not to publicize this particular car, just move it out!
M



[Edited by YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY (05-07-2001 at 02:31 PM).]

YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY
05-15-2001, 06:24 PM
This topic has been, and probably always will be, a source of long debate with contrary opinions, views, recollections, and quotes. Rarely do we conclude a discussion topic, but as this particular post slips down on the list I think it is wise to do so.

The purpose of bringing this topic to the BB was simply to present, and receive feedback, that there is sufficient evidence supporting a 'gray' area between the quotes from (with all due respect to the individuals) Vince and Don Yenko that the '68 Yenko Camaros were transplants, vs. Jim M. that most or all of them were COPO 427's under #9737. The paperwork that Kevin has supplied shows that at least one test vehicle with an unknown VIN # was produced by GM, and that it apparently went to Yenko Chevrolet. It is probably wise to stop with that one conservative conclusion, and consider the purpose achieved.

I think is it commendable to all who contributed to this lengthy post for keeping an open mind, because as we all know we can't say 'never' or 'always' with GM!

Marlin