THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28

[iluv69s]

This is the last production dated 1967 Z-28 known to exist. Of the 200 or so 67 Z's in Jerry Macniesh's registry, I believe this is the only 07C car known and most likely the only one ever made. Just a few hundred cars from the last VIN.

Original white car w/black stripes , low option... cowl plenum cut-out in firewall.

This car shows 17,000 original miles. I have no original paperwork. Selling as a roller..no motor or trans...but otherwise mostly complete...original front discs now changed to drums(this was a common drag racing change as the discs created too much drag)...car has an original 12 bolt w/the bracket(although the bar is missing)..4.10 posi...but not # matching or original to the car...

body extremely solid with original quarters and perfect floors and trunk and rockers,etc....resto. began..needs finished....easy finish...



will be listing on Ebay Sunday...buy-it-now 45k as roller.

Will offer, (to buyer of car only), NOS Smokey Yunick ,mostly complete, MO302 motor that was purchased at his auction. Motor has original GM "born-with" MO assembly stamp but was never VIN'd. Car w/motor 55k buy-it-now.

thought I'd offer it here for a few days first... Thanks Yenko.net...

max

[iluv69s]

07C cowl tag

[firstgenaddict]

What are the dates on the MO engine?

[iluv69s]

heres a pic of the stamping...off the top of my head, I don't know any of the other dates...but i can tell you what I remember when I bought it...I will check the numbers if needed...I believe everything is correct and dated correct, less the distributor http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif...and for some reason I believe the intake was not correct off the top of my head...(both 69's) but according to the docs. I recieved with the motor, everything else is correct, dated and new...carb, heads, etc...apparently Smokeys motors were torn apart and rebuilt before the auction...

[iluv69s]

Here is a pic of the whole motor...it is actually as I purchased it with the Smokey docs. and all...

[firstgenaddict]

PM sent

[quick-bowtie]

Any body pics??

[William]

Close but not close enough.

There is a Z/28-RS nearby within 100 #s from the last '67 produced at Norwood.

[iluv69s]

Yes William..but that is an 07B car I believe...I believe there are a few 07 B Z cars...I was told there are only a handful of total 07C cars known in the CRG database....but please correct me if I am wrong... I do not have access to the database(or any database for that matter)..I'm going by what I was told a few years ago by Jerry....I assume my car was held up on the assembly line for some reason?? Don't know...??? Do you know for sure that this other car is an 07C car?? I'd like to post my ad on Ebay accurately...Thanks, Max

[William]

What matters is the VIN as that establishes when the car was built. I do not believe this car is in any db.

[iluv69s]

[ QUOTE ]
Any body pics??

[/ QUOTE ]

I bought the car totally apart and with the whole rear section stripped to bare metal... I etch primed and urethane primed most of the rear portion...The lower rear quarters just behind the wheels have minor rust issues...(see pic)...I believe the only rust issues with the car are these 2 small spots...this car is one of the most solid cars I've owned....the quarter wheel lips are very nice and solid... the floors, trunk, shock towers, rockers, etc. are excellent.These pics I took a few years ago, but I really have not touched the car since...other than moving it here and there. I am searching high and low for the parts to the car...heheh..still missing a few.But, I will be bolting the car together tomorrow and Sunday and posting better pics on Ebay also...


hope these pics help a bit anyway...for now...the first few are as purchased...

max

[iluv69s]

as purchased...other parts...

[iluv69s]

current condition...

[iluv69s]

current...rocker

[iluv69s]

current drivers side

[iluv69s]

current...floors

[iluv69s]

drivers side quarter...note small patch needed behind wheel ..similar issue other side..but probabaly half as small...this is the worst rust issue with car as far as I can tell...

[iluv69s]

BTW...I always thought that maybe this car was held up on the assembly line because of the 5C code on the cowl tag...this is the shoulder harness option that is even rarer than the Z option itself in 1967!!!! Therefore the 07C cowl tag date...just a guess???????????

[iluv69s]

[ QUOTE ]
What matters is the VIN as that establishes when the car was built. I do not believe this car is in any db.

[/ QUOTE ]

as I stated...I believe this is the last production dated 67 Z-28 known...not that that matters either...hehehe...umless you or someone else knows of another car with a cowl tag date of 07C or later???

[Jonesy]

[ QUOTE ]
BTW...I always thought that maybe this car was held up on the assembly line because of the 5C code on the cowl tag...this is the shoulder harness option that is even rarer than the Z option itself in 1967!!!! Therefore the 07C cowl tag date...just a guess???????????

[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure what you mean http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

My car is an 05D with deluxe shoulder seat belts and it wasnt held up buy that. It will be interesting for me to see what your car goes for. I havent seen a project sell for quite a while. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/worship.gif

[iluv69s]

Hey Jonesy...I'll explain...but, believe me I am no expert at all...so Please correct me if I am wrong..

I can't seem to find the book, but I remember reading that the Shoulder harness option was only put in 400 plus cars...which makes it rarer than the Z option itself...

apparently, there are atleast 2 known (that I have heard of)67 Z-28's with VIN numbers after this car, but both are 07B cowl tag dates..(not sure about this other car that has been mentioned here as far as the cowl tag date)...so I am just guessing that there must have been some reason for my car to sit on the assembly line while other cars passed by...I'm not really sure of the order of the VIN tag, cowl tag installation and all that..

so therefore I was thinking that perhaps GM only made a very handful of the shoulder harnesses for the model year..and they were searching for parts at the end...or maybe with so few made, they just did not work on the car for a few days waiting for the shoulder belts to arrive..which would have pushed it into the next week for the trim tag..???

But, now that I think of it...it probably got the trim tag first before the belts...right?? Is that How the workers knew what to put on???

Like I said..its just a theory...I'd like to know what others think...Any better ideas????

I believe the deluxe shoulder belts were super rare also...I guess your cowl date is in line with your VIN on your car?? Or is it a little late?? Your car sounds sweeeetttt!!!! What color?? http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/worship.gif

Thanks, max...

[William]

I need to state that the owner of the highest known VIN '67 Z/28 known has never claimed it is the last and likely could not care less.

Body tag date is the date the tag was processed at Fisher Body; there was more than one machine producing them. In our CRG db which is in VIN order, 07B and 07C tag dates are interspersed. His car was built after yours, simple as that.

As there were a number of '67s built after his one or more of them could have been a Z/28. Of the 602 reportedly built less than half are accounted for. That is an enormous margin of error.

[Zedder]

Hey Max...William is correct...and given the build process, your car wouldn't be assigned a later body number and ealier VIN due to a lack of seat belts. The VIN determines when the car was built, not the trim tag date.

I'm with you Jonesy...a Z project hasn't sold in quite some time. The last two publicly offered were no sales...Good luck Max! White is one of my favorite Z colors http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/burnout.gif

[70 copo]

William and Zedder,

Could both of you be a little more specific on the assignment of the VIN at the Fisher "Hole" on the Chevrolet side?

Please detail your opinion on the '67 Build sequence at Fisher, the lines that staged the bodys built immediatly on the Chevrolet side and why they were arranged in that manner, and finally the VIN assignment and the build sequence lock for final production.

Remember we are doing the '67 thing here not '68's or '69's.

http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggthumpup.gif

[William]

The key is the body tag meant nothing to Chevrolet; they did not refer to it and assembled cars via body and chassis broadcast sheets. They did have to share scheduling info however and Chevy likely dictated when a certain dealer order was built. Due to the July 4 holiday Fisher probably released all the orders it had [generating the body tags] but started them per the Chevy schedule. Chevrolet assigned VINs in order as bodies were received from Fisher. Cars built later than either of the two in this discussion have 07B tags.

[iluv69s]

http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/haha.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

whhhattt?????

William and Yedder,

Correcr me if I'm wrong because I'm a little brain dead...

I have to assume that the cars got VIN'd in numerical order coming down the line...and at some point my car got taken off the line and other cars with later VINs passed by and got the cowl tag in 07B week. And that my car was held for a while for whatever reason until the following week when the cowl tag was made for the car...is this true??? And if so, why?? I guess it could have been anything...any missing part or paint..or???

So, the bottom line....are there any other known 67 Z's with an 07C cowl date??

Maybe only the GM Gods know this one!!! heheh

BTW....I am probably the most curious about if the car sells or not...and how much!!

Thanks Guys!!!

[iluv69s]

[ QUOTE ]
...Good luck Max! White is one of my favorite Z colors http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/burnout.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey Mark, don't you like red...w/white..better??? hehehe
http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/3gears.gif
Thanks again, Max

[TDW]

http://www.camaros.org/assemblyprocess.shtml

This article from CRG should answer all your questions about VIN assingment.

[firstgenaddict]

Your body may well have been a later produced Fisher Body... but was into Chevrolet Assembly earlier... what this means is that the other cars with the earlier Fisher cowl tags but later Chevrolet vins were the cars that were held up...

[William]

"And that my car was held for a while for whatever reason until the following week when the cowl tag was made for the car...is this true???"

Therein lies the problem. The body tag was the first part made to a specific dealer order, installed on the cowl by Fisher body. Chevy never touched it.

Your car wasn't held up at all. The Z/28 with the earlier tag date but later VIN was.

[70 copo]

[ QUOTE ]
The key is the body tag meant nothing to Chevrolet; they did not refer to it and assembled cars via body and chassis broadcast sheets. They did have to share scheduling info however and Chevy likely dictated when a certain dealer order was built. Due to the July 4 holiday Fisher probably released all the orders it had [generating the body tags] but started them per the Chevy schedule. Chevrolet assigned VINs in order as bodies were received from Fisher. Cars built later than either of the two in this discussion have 07B tags.

[/ QUOTE ]


Is this your opinion, research, or is this from the CRG's technical article? Where did you get your information?

Again, from my previous post:

"Please detail your opinion on the '67 Build sequence at Fisher, the lines that staged the bodys built immediatly on the Chevrolet side and why they were arranged in that manner, and finally the VIN assignment and the build sequence lock for final production".



Thanks http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[William]

John Z

[70 copo]

John Z did not get to Norwood until well after '67 Production ended.

http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[William]

So? The process did not change.

[firstgenaddict]

[ QUOTE ]
"And that my car was held for a while for whatever reason until the following week when the cowl tag was made for the car...is this true???"

Therein lies the problem. The body tag was the first part made to a specific dealer order, installed on the cowl by Fisher body. Chevy never touched it.

Your car wasn't held up at all. The Z/28 with the earlier tag date but later VIN was.

[/ QUOTE ]

Precisely how I saw it William... the 07B's were the held up cars as they arrived at Chevrolet later than his 07C car...

[70 copo]

[ QUOTE ]
So? The process did not change.

[/ QUOTE ]

Opinion or based on research?

Thanks http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[William]

Exactly.

It is possible that the last 1967 Camaro built at Norwood had an 07B tag.

[iluv69s]

ok...so i think I get it now after reading the CRG article...

...the body shells are made and the cowl tags attached each week basically in order....it seems that the second week of July, atleast one other Z body shell was made and then the third week of July my body shell was made....then for some reason, the other car got 'held up' while my car continued down the line to the point of having the VIN assigned...a hundred cars or so later,the other car recieved its VIN...that's interesting...

welll??? do I have it now???

it only takes me a few tries to figure things out...hehehe

Thanks for all the info. guys...

...so I may have the last cowl dated body shell to leave the fisher plant!!! It doesn't really matter to me too much either....I just wanted to find out the real deal before I put some wrong info. in my ad...and what better place... http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/worship.gif

..out of curiousity...what is the last known 67 VIN of all the Camaros?? how far from the last car??

Thanks again!!!

[William]

Nope; bodies were not made 'in order'.

Imagine if you will hundreds of body tags [not assembled bodies] and other paperwork in queue at Fisher body. Maybe it was all in a vinyl pouch. Someone in production control at Fisher looks at the Chevrolet assembly schedule for the day/week and releases the appropriate body tag/paperwork to production. Chevy then gets the assembled body when they expect it.

[iluv69s]

ay ay ay...hahaha....

http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

I'm confused...haha...how about this...my cowl tag was made on the third week of July, right??? Therefore, I have the 67 Z-28 with the youngest cowl tag known???? Can we agree on that?? Of course there could always be another out there...

....it seems that a lot of the 'special and high performance' cars were getting built right toward the end of production...not just in 67...is that true??

http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/3gears.gif

thanks again...Max

I started loosely bolting some parts on today, so it looks a little like a car...still searching for a few missing things...but I found atleast 95 % so far...hehe....here's a few pics..

[iluv69s]

side

[iluv69s]

pass side

[iluv69s]

check out that cowl plenum cut-out...thats pretty ugly...

ya think the dealer did that???

[iluv69s]

the car did come with the " not so factory" cowl-plenum delete plate when i bought it....( a piece of bent sheetmetal painted black and screwed in over the hole)

http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

[iluv69s]

this and the other side similar are the only rust issues with the car......I have the lower patch panels to fix them. I definitely would not replace the quarters...

[iluv69s]

the other side...it had a bit of old muddddd in there already on a prior fix...the car was painted before. I believe once you get into it, you may have to replace a bit larger portion on this side...but definitely not more than just a lower patch panel...

[iluv69s]

the portions in the photos that are pimed were stripped bare including the doors, inside and out, trunklid, etc....the firewall has been stripped and painted, but the undermeath of the body..ie floors and trunk have not been stripped...(just to answer some questions I have recieved...) Heres a pic of the firewall...notice that pretty hole again!! hahaha Thanks again Yenko.net

[70 copo]

[ QUOTE ]
Nope; bodies were not made 'in order'.

Imagine if you will hundreds of body tags [not assembled bodies] and other paperwork in queue at Fisher body. Maybe it was all in a vinyl pouch. Someone in production control at Fisher looks at the Chevrolet assembly schedule for the day/week and releases the appropriate body tag/paperwork to production. Chevy then gets the assembled body when they expect it.

[/ QUOTE ]


William,

Still waiting for your reply's.....

Thanks

Phil http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[William]

Having had a good friend that was a Chevy dealer there was seasonality to HP cars. They peaked spring through late summer.

The CRG db has very few 07C '67 tags. It could be yours was one of the last ordered. Just for grins the '67 Z/28 our business restored had an 06E tag, a July 6th engine, June 22 trans, March 20 axle but a VIN indicating it was built in July with 07B cars.

BTW the last VIN at NOR was N254698.

[William]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nope; bodies were not made 'in order'.

Imagine if you will hundreds of body tags [not assembled bodies] and other paperwork in queue at Fisher body. Maybe it was all in a vinyl pouch. Someone in production control at Fisher looks at the Chevrolet assembly schedule for the day/week and releases the appropriate body tag/paperwork to production. Chevy then gets the assembled body when they expect it.

[/ QUOTE ]


William,

Still waiting for your reply's.....

Thanks

Phil http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Research, same way Paleontologists know about dinosaurs. I have been involved with 1st gens for 33 years.

I am also APICS certified, led certification classes for several years and have been the education chair on the chapter BOD for 5 years. I have worked in manufacturing for 37 years. What all that means is I have some knowledge of production control systems.

[70 copo]

William,

OK - I will ask you once again:

"Please detail your opinion on the '67 Build sequence at Fisher, the lines that staged the bodys built immediatly on the Chevrolet side and why they were arranged in that manner, and finally the VIN assignment and the build sequence lock for final production".

Be specific Please. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/naughty.gif

[iluv69s]

Hey William..thanks for the info. ...so just a few more questions...would my car have probably been ordered?? Were all the Camaros actually ordered by the dealers in the colors/option combos that they wanted?? Or was there any randomness to the build process, and then the dealers got to pick?? or what?? Thanks, Max


BTW...so the last 67 Camaro could possibly be an 07A car I guess???

...and the last known 67?? in the database?? how far from the end of production?? just curious...Thanks again, max

[William]

Unlike Chrysler who actually built cars on spec in those days GM cars were built to a specific order. Dealer orders were for stock, per customer spec or fleet for lease/daily rental. I believe Zone Offices could also order cars as they are sometimes listed as available in Zone newsletters.

So yes, someone specifically ordered your car.

The sequence in which scheduled orders were built was apparently negotiable. High-volume dealers could and did receive preferential treatment. De Loreans' 1973 book alludes to Zone offices threatening to delay cars ordered without radios. He also mentions chronic material shortages due in large part to the long option lists common in those days-too many build combinations.

The CRG db is proprietary so I cannot reveal specific VIN info. There is a '67 very close to the last and it is 07B.

[William]

http://www.camaros.org/assemblyprocess.shtml

[70 copo]

William,

So by posting the link it appears you do not have an opinion yourself?



OK then Help me to understand - lets try to agree on some basics applicable ONLY to 1967 Camaro production: (Please Agree or disagree)

1. In 1967 The TT (Trim Tag) contained the major options on each body built at Fisher Agree?

2. 1968 and 1969 TT's were configured in a different manner from 1967. Agree?

3. The 1967 TT contains the option and basic RPO idenity of each car. Agree?

4. The 1967 TT was affixed by Fisher during the build up of the body. Agree?

5. In the absence of a body with a TT at the Factory there is no car to go to Chevrolet final Assembly (CFA). Agree?

6. The CFA side of the Fisher "hole" was called "Final Vehicle Assembly" Agree?

7. The basic Option content on the body was created prior to the assignment of the VIN# on the Chevrolet side. Agree?

8.The VIN# and the computer lock for CFA (with the specific option content) was partially assigned based upon down line parts availability. Agree?

9. The order where the bodys were staged at the Chevrolet side of the Fisher hole consisted of multiple staging lines. Agree?

10 The order that the bodies were staged on the Chevrolet side was random prior to the assignment of the VIN and final assembly computer build lock. Agree?

11. The VIN# assignment was required to lock the Body into final vehicle assembly sequence to meet the required parts pick. Agree?

12. The Trim Tag identifies the Month and week of body build up. Agree?

13. The build up of a body is part of the assembly process of building a complete car. Agree?

14. Fisher Body and the construction of a body was an overall Part of the GM/Chevrolet Assembly Process.
Agree?

Not trying to be adversarial, just trying to understand why you have the opinions that you seem to have on this specific vehicle in this thread.

Thanks for your time. We will start here. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[iluv69s]

That's interesting...I'd sure as hell would like to know who ordered my car new..and what kind of life it lead...Some of the odd things I found on the car gave some clues...but I wish i had a time machine.....

BTW, As far as the motor dates...I finally dug out and uncovered the motor...the intake and distributor are both 69's....otherwise all the dates and #'s are correct as far as I can tell and according to the Smokey paperwork listing the parts,etc....

Here's a few pics...

[iluv69s]

cast # and date

[iluv69s]

carb #'s...

[iluv69s]

I just could not help myself but to put a cowl plenum air cleaner on the motor and take a pic or two..

I'm gonna pull the motor out and take some better pics...for old times sake...hehehe

Now that's Badass!!! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/3gears.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/burnout.gif

[William]

70 COPO I do not know what your problem is and will have no further response to your asinine ramblings.

[FESTIVAL78]

Cool car.
Chevy body numbers are all that matter.. Vins are Federally mandated and mean nothing with regards to which car came first,
" The moment of conception is when life begins "

[firstgenaddict]

[ QUOTE ]
Cool car.
Chevy body numbers are all that matter.. Vins are Federally mandated and mean nothing with regards to which car came first,
" The moment of conception is when life begins "

[/ QUOTE ]

So if someone is born early they are not older, because they were conceived later?

That is the whole point with this... yes his car was started later... however it was finished earlier (PERIOD). It is an earlier car.

[William]

Nope.

VINs were sequentially assigned, monitored at the car plants by the FBI. When Chevrolet reported month-end production totals by vehicle it was by VIN and they are always in ascending order.

Body number or tag date is not always directly related to when a specific car was built. The CRG db has numerous examples of cars built out of tag date sequence. The particular time frame that this thread began with, 1967 Camaros built early July 1967 is like no other. There are 06E cars mixed in with 07A cars; there are 07C cars with 07B cars. The last Camaro built may have been 07B.

Once again and for the last time the body tag meant nothing to Chevrolet. It was for Fisher body build info only. Chevrolet scheduled car production, not Fisher body.

[iluv69s]

Well, there seemes to be a difference of opinions here...I did not intend to start anything or ruffle any feathers...so I am going to stick with what I definitely know after hearing these posts.........

but hell...I may still have it wrong...hahaha

...This car seems to be the only 'known' 07C 67 Z-28 in existence,

...it is the latest and 'last' known 'assembly dated' 67 Z-28 known...

....it was apparently the 'last' known 67 Z body shell to leave the fisher body side of the Norwood plant...

..and therefore, of the known 67 Z-28's, this car has the youngest and "last" body shell built...period


I guess it depends on what the meaning of the word 'car' is..

for example:
someone steals and then strips my 67 Z-28 and leaves it laying on the side of the road with nothing but the shell and cowl tag...the VIN and all parts have been removed...is it a 'car'?? ..does the car actually exist???...or not until I recover the car from the police and put it all back together and gets the State police to re-vin the car does it exist???

...regardless of this car...I have bought and sold many 'cars' that did not have much more than a shell...

...anyhowwww....it's been fun...I've killed 5 bags of popcorn...Thanks guys!!!

[quick-bowtie]

Who cares?? I dont think anyones knows the exact answers to this stuff and most of its guessing or assuming anyways, either way it wouldnt effect the value of this car.

Good luck with the sale, it seems like a good price to me and that would be a fun car to own when its done.. heck you should just restore it yourself look at the blue Z that had a smokey motor put in it and wanted Insane money!

[70 copo]

[ QUOTE ]
70 COPO I do not know what your problem is and will have no further response to your asinine ramblings.

[/ QUOTE ]

William,

I was simply trying to find a basis for your comments which seem to be your mostly your opinion. No need to get nasty about things. IMO...Festival 78 is 100% correct. The assembly of a car clearly started with the body build at Fisher and that is where the production date is-right on the trim tag along with the option content in 1967.

http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

Happy Easter!

[William]

[ QUOTE ]

...This car seems to be the only 'known' 07C 67 Z-28 in existence,

Possibly

...it is the latest and 'last' known 'assembly dated' 67 Z-28 known...

Nope. The car with the later VIN was built AFTER your car.

....it was apparently the 'last' known 67 Z body shell to leave the fisher body side of the Norwood plant...

Nope. See above.

Everyone thinks that the body tag was immediately attached to a body. It wasn't. It remained in queue, probably in a vinyl bag with the rest of the paperwork until Chevrolet instructed Fisher Body to start production of that specific dealer order. The 07B Z/28 was held up for some reason, started and built AFTER the 07C Z/28.

I have several pages of Canadian import sheets for 1967 Camaros in VIN and production date order. N249411 was built 7/11/67, N250546 was built 7/12/67, N252244 was built 7/14/67, N253319 was built 7/18/67 and on. The higher the VIN the later the date. The last 07B tag in our db [very close to the end] has a VIN 421 #s higher the first 07C tag. But some of you believe the 07C car was built first. Absolute nonsense.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Kurt S]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
70 COPO I do not know what your problem is and will have no further response to your asinine ramblings.

[/ QUOTE ]

William,

I was simply trying to find a basis for your comments which seem to be your mostly your opinion. No need to get nasty about things. IMO...Festival 78 is 100% correct. The assembly of a car clearly started with the body build at Fisher and that is where the production date is-right on the trim tag along with the option content in 1967.

http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

Happy Easter!

[/ QUOTE ]

Please start another thread and we can discuss it. If you start it on the CRG forum, JohnZ will also respond.
But the summation is - the assembly process did not change from 67 to 69. They built cars the exact same way for years until they integrated the body shop into the assembly process under GMAD.

Nice car Max, good luck!

[70 copo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

....it was apparently the 'last' known 67 Z body shell to leave the fisher body side of the Norwood plant...

Nope. See above.

Everyone thinks that the body tag was immediately attached to a body. It wasn't. It remained in queue, probably in a vinyl bag with the rest of the paperwork until Chevrolet instructed Fisher Body to start production of that specific dealer order.

But some of you believe the 07C car was built first. Absolute nonsense.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

William

I streamlined your last reply a bit so I could respond. You are incorrect. The tag was on the car, and paper was already generated even before the roof was attached. The last time I got into a discussion on this issue at two years ago with another guy on this very topic, the guy at that time had the same story that the "tag was delayed Body build up was delayed, tag not attached and that no Paper was generated on the body until the body reached the Chevrolet side". I concluded that discussion by producing the following Photograph which I took from another photo on my kitchen counter. The Glare from my kitchen light is clear on this photo that was stored on my hard drive.

Somehow this same photo was lifted and made it to the CRG technical article. As you can see the Tag was on the car even before the roof was on it and the car had already production Paper Work already.

Cars were built in order at Fisher. How in the world could GM track them any other way? This build order was the Body Number.

Cars were also built in sequence at Chevrolet Final assembly also bu VIN#. The scattering of the VIN's was a product of Downline parts availability and the staging lines where the cars were held prior to VIN assignment and computer lock for final assembly at chevrolet.

This explains why the VIN's appear to be out of sequence compared to the body build up.

Hey Kurt--If you guys at the CRG need a better copy of the photo I posted 2 years ago the last time this topic was raised (and then used by the GRG for its article) - let me know and I will send you a better one without glare from my kitchen light. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

Phil

[Steve Shauger]

Hi Phil,

Did you provide that photo and a couple of others in the mid nineties to the USCC. I seem to remember that picture in their Camaro Enthustiast magazine.

[iluv69s]

Alright....so I am thoroughly confused again...ayayay

So...for the record..I will state what I now'think' is fact... heheh

- I have the only 67 Z-28 that any person has come forward with or that is publicly known that has an 07C cowl tag.

True or false??

-07C is after 07B as far as the GM dating sequence...

true or false??

-My cowl tag was made after any 07B cowl tag...

true or false?? (not sure on this one)

Thats about all I can state for sure at this point I believe..

So I have still a few questions...are you saying that the cowl tags got made..mine being made in the 07C week..but the cars did not even get started while the cowl tags were just all stored in a folder for a while??

and as far as the GM of Canada stuff...Was a Camaro built all in the same day...I realize that many were built each day, but were they started , painted, and completely built in one day??? I'd find that hard to believe..but I really don't know...so, what does the build date actually mean anyway??? Start date?? Finish date?? Ya know what I mean???

The latest pic sure seems to prove that the trim tag was on the car before it left the Fisher side?? But then again, it does not prove that the cars are in body sequence order on the line...soooo???

I think that it is apparent that for some reason one of the cars got held up...but, we will probably never know...and likely will probabaly never know which car was actually the first to be made or started...as the cars may not have been in body sequence order in fisher apparently?? and if so, they were not VIN'd in any type of body sequence order...so depending on where the glich was...would make the reason more clear...

So did I thoroughly confuse those that arent already?? I definitely confused myself some more.. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

Back to " the only publicly known and latest 'cowl tag' dated 67 Z....period...100%%%

thanks again for all the interest...ayayaya http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/worship.gif

[William]

I have finally stopped laughing enough to respond to that 'picture'.

Look behind the Camaro - that's an A or B body. The photo was taken at the Van Nuys plant. The discussion concerns Norwood, where Camaros were built in VIN sequence.

[olredalert]

-----Phil,,,Dont want to get into the middle of this "discussion" but would like to know if the tag was on the body before the roof because they had to know what roof to put on the car??? Vinyl roofs would have had the knobs for the trim clips maybe???.........Bill S

[firstgenaddict]

The studs were welded on later... besides the studs were on the quarters not the Roof for V-top... The studs were on the roof for the front and rear reveal moldings though... CRG assembly process has all the steps including the stud welding.

[William]

I have the only 67 Z-28 that any person has come forward with or that is publicly known that has an 07C cowl tag.

True

07C is after 07B as far as the GM dating sequence...

Of course. But get ‘GM’ out of your mind. The body tag existed only for Fisher Body. Chevrolet did not look at, use or refer to it during the assembly process.

My cowl tag was made after any 07B cowl tag...

Probably true but there was more than one machine making them.

So I have still a few questions...are you saying that the cowl tags got made..mine being made in the 07C week..but the cars did not even get started while the cowl tags were just all stored in a folder for a while??

Under normal operating conditions Fisher would convert Chevy build info into their system. At some point they released their production order paperwork including the body tag. You ALWAYS have a queue of released orders; 1, 2 days worth, whatever. All this stuff sat in a folder, bag, tray whatever until Chevrolet sent them the build schedule. Chevrolet, not Fisher, dictated the build schedule based on material availability, paint color, dealer/customer importance, geographical shipping location and probably other stuff. Under normal conditions body tag dates flow with VINs and build dates. July 1967 was not normal.

Remember this was the end of the model year and at the July 4th holiday when the plant was not at capacity. It is obvious from the CRG db info and the ’67 Z/28 that we had when the workers returned there was a backlog of released but not started orders at Fisher-how else could our 06E Z/28 have an engine dated July 6th? When Chevrolet started scheduling the remaining ’67 Camaro orders the backlog included tags processed 06E, 07A, 07B. That date meant nothing to Chevy; the cars were scheduled according to their criteria. As I have stated those dates are interspersed. The Z/28 I know of has a very rare option that likely held it up. As the last orders trickled in [07C] they were processed as usual but a backlog remained. Your car got released to production probably a few hours prior to the 07B Z/28 car and ended up with a lower VIN as a result.

and as far as the GM of Canada stuff...Was a Camaro built all in the same day...I realize that many were built each day, but were they started , painted, and completely built in one day??? I'd find that hard to believe..but I really don't know...so, what does the build date actually mean anyway??? Start date?? Finish date?? Ya know what I mean???

No. The body tag date is when Fisher released its sub-assembly order. Our 06E car was built by Chevrolet in early July.

The latest pic sure seems to prove that the trim tag was on the car before it left the Fisher side?? But then again, it does not prove that the cars are in body sequence order on the line...soooo???

The tag may have been the first part Fisher attached to anything. Correct-bodies not built in ‘Fisher’ sequence.

[70 copo]

[ QUOTE ]
I have finally stopped laughing enough to respond to that 'picture'.

Look behind the Camaro - that's an A or B body. The photo was taken at the Van Nuys plant. The discussion concerns Norwood, where Camaros were built in VIN sequence.

[/ QUOTE ]


William,

Yes It is a LOS Photo. Are you saying that GM built cars using differing basic processes between Nor and LOS? If so Please share. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[70 copo]

William,

I have read with much intrest your missive in reply to the seller. And I have to say your reply above is much better (and more courteous) than you gave me earlier. In review however you make plenty of totally unsupported assumptions.

I could easily write a page in oppisition to each point you make - save a couple of areas where we both agree.

Here is an offer.. Convince us of your claims. How about sharing the "data" that you base this all on? I am quite sure it's likely % accuracy could then be calculated based on the sample of cars in the D base you are referring to vs the HUGE total production of Camaros in 1967.

How bout it? You are the one who was initially critical of this poor guy's car in this thread. Come on how about it? Share Please. I cannot wait.. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[William]

Yes Norwood and Van Nuys were different. Van Nuys built other Chevy models; at that time Norwood only did Camaros.

I was not critical of anyones car. I pointed out that I know of a '67 Z/28 built later than his.

The CRG db is proprietary; not mine to share. But here is a summary:

Starting at the 1st 07A data point the CRG db has just over 200 cars, in VIN order just like they were built. At data point 18 there is an 06E Z/28 with a July 5th engine. There is no way that car was built anytime in June; according to the few Canadian shipping records I have the car was probably built July 10th. That means all the Fisher build paperwork and body tag for this car sat untouched for up to two weeks. Engines became available; the car was scheduled and built. Moving along another 21 07A builds there is another 06E car with a July 5th engine. That car was definitely built July 10th. After another nine 07A cars the first 07B tag appears followed by 5 more, then another 07A. It goes back and forth until data point 95 – the 67 Z/28 our business owned. 06E tag, July 6th engine, built on or about July 12th. From that point on it is all 07B until data point 187/188, the first 07C tags. A few more 07C tags, more 07Bs. The last data point, very close to the end of production is an 07B tag.

There is no possible way these cars were built in “body tag” order. If they were 06E tags could not have July engines. They were built as Chevrolet scheduled them and received VINs in sequence as all the known shipping records show. Once again Chevrolet did not care one bit about the date on the tag. By July ’67 both plants were changing over to 1968 model production [June 67 builds are known] so there were plenty of scheduling headaches.

Good news!! My last post on this thread.

[Belair62]

Very interesting stuff.

[92646]

I agree, neat information.
Mark Sheppard

[njsteve]

[ QUOTE ]

VINs were sequentially assigned, monitored at the car plants by the FBI.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're kidding right? The FBI has never been involved with "monitoring" VINs at assembly plants.

You may be confusing them with the NICB. The National Insurance Crime Bureau would be the recipient of VIN lists at the end of the model year for statistical purposes but neither the NICB nor any law enforcement agency was ever involved at any level of an assembly plant with VIN monitoring.

[70 copo]

William,

Thanks for the reply. Out of a total production of 220,906 cars you are saying that your determination is made based on a sampling of just over 200 VIN's after July?? So I would have to assume the D base has perhaps 1000 cars more or less in the entire D base?

This out of out of over 200,000 total units made in 1967.

So I guess we agree to disagree then? I am really going to keep this simple. You know photos are worth a alot and the photo is what it is, and in 1967 you cannot seperate GM, Fisher or Chevy in the basic production methods used to build a car.

Where this specific Z-28 listed was delayed in the production cycle can be debated for a long time, but this I can tell you is my opinion:.

The Camaro bodies at Fisher were sequentially built in 1967. This was signified by a body unit number which allowed Fisher to track production by unit.

At the Hole coming out of Fisher the cars were staged in lines for VIN assignment and Chevrolet did not assign VIN's in the exact order produced by Fisher

Further the date on the Trim Tag reflects the date the Body was built up at Fisher, and - in 1967 the basic option content is also listed on this same tag.

In 1968 Firebird production started at Norwood along with production at LOS and Lordstown. This change from a single line to a multiple GM brand line production method at Norwood caused the change in the data on the Fisher tag in 1968 on the Camaro - as Chevy was no longer the only customer for cars out of Fisher.

Let me draw you a picture:

If you were going to testify in court as to specifically "when" this car was built what do you think a Judge think when you present a case that this specific car was not "built" when the Manufacturer - "General Motors Corporation " indicates it was?

Everything else is correct on the Tag: the option content, the color the trim, Just the date is wrong....

Further to support your contentions you present a summary of information with no submission to prove the information is factual. Further the information you have to base your entire case on is from a statistically small sampling and that the actual data in support is not available to examine?

I would think you would have to show that the tag was somehow flawed or questionable...

I think the Judge will believe the data on the tag. The rest of the collector car community believes "the tag". Ask any guy here on this board when the car they have was built and they will check the trim tag.

I agree that in 1968 and in 1969 Changes were made in how vehicles were tracked and I stated specifically why above.

For 1967 you are swimming upstream here my friend,- but you are entitled to your opinion. I am entitled to mine.

The car in this thread was likely the last 67 Z/28 produced by GM.

http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggthumpup.gif

[Kurt S]

Fisher did not build the bodies in body # sequence. It was their tracking # for the unit when scheduling the bodies; that # related the order to a car (talking about 67/68 here). Lot easier to move around a couple of #'s around on paper to balance the line than the logistic nightmare of changing all the order #'s. I.e., it's easier to shuffle paper than it is to move car bodies.
There's tons of data to support this. Look at LOS cars - the work order # sequences up relative to the VIN throughout the day, but the body #'s bounce around. (Assuming you agree with http://www.camaros.org/numbers.shtml#b - I know...the data to support *that* isn't published either...)

VIN's were then assigned when the cars first entered the Chevrolet side. That's why the VIN is never on any order confirmation back then. They never knew it til the car was being built.
VIN order is what decides when a car was actually on the Chevrolet assembly line. But then again, remember when they pulled the last Camaro, Oldsmobile, etc off the assembly line for the musuem, they always say that the last car doesn't always have the highest VIN. Because the staging lanes scramble the VIN order a little. The highest VIN will be the last car thru where the VIN's are assigned, but it probably won't be the last car down the line.

I have no idea what part of the http://www.camaros.org/assemblyprocess.shtml you don't think is correct. This was the same process used at all Fisher/Chevy plants and John was in those (Willow Run) before 67. Have you ever worked in an assembly plant?? They don't resequence the line every year - major undertaking and the tooling is kinda fixed in place. And yes, I did.

*NO* Firebird was ever built at Norwood in 68. Firebird production at NOR started 4/14/69.

The db size is no secret. 15,000+. Just what data are you using to support your 'opinions'??
Look analytically at the data you do have and it doesn't support what you are saying.


This is a post about a car for sale, this discussion should really be in the right forum.

[Charley Lillard]

Of the run of 50 Gibb ZL1's Mine is body # 222001 which is the first one of 50 in sequence but it is car # 14. My car has a 02D trim tag but cars #1 and #2 were delivered in December. Really confusing.

[Kurt S]

69 is a little different. The body # is the confirmation number.
But still the same concept applies - the scheduler moved the orders around as needed. And a call from Estes caused the #1 and #2 cars to be moved forward in the schedule. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

It is a confusing system from the outside. If you haven't worked in production, esp automotive, it can be hard to grasp. Once you understand it, then a lot of things start to fall into place.

[70 copo]

[ QUOTE ]
69 is a little different. The body # is the confirmation number.
But still the same concept applies - the scheduler moved the orders around as needed. And a call from Estes caused the #1 and #2 cars to be moved forward in the schedule. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

It is a confusing system from the outside. If you haven't worked in production, esp automotive, it can be hard to grasp. Once you understand it, then a lot of things start to fall into place.

[/ QUOTE ]

Kurt it is not at all confusing. Go back and re read each of my posts. Really read them please.


Now since there was "no firebird production at Norwood in 1968" you are playing dates. Do you really think GM is going to phase in production of a duifferent brand line COLD?? No they are going to change the tag to prepare for the change. The 1969 models were produced at Norwood in year 1968, as a 1969 models. What about this is not clear??

"Once you understand it, then a lot of things start to fall into place".


Yes I know I live pretty close to the retiree hall for the old Norwood UAW. When we speak of our exacting standards of "date and build" to these guys you get laughed at really quick. Been there done that.

In the end it is still your opinion. In the end the guys who built the cars in 1967 tell a different story.

Phil http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[Unreal]

The youngest kid in the class is the one who was born last, regardless of when he was conceived. Conceived first (Fisher body tag) could have actually been born last (Chevrolet VIN)

[70 copo]

I agree if you are talking about a living thing. Not a Car, with VIN assignment managed the way it was, The earlier car could also make it to the end of the line first. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[Kurt S]

[ QUOTE ]
In 1968 Firebird production started at Norwood along with production at LOS and Lordstown. This change from a single line to a multiple GM brand line production method at Norwood caused the change in the data on the Fisher tag in 1968 on the Camaro - as Chevy was no longer the only customer for cars out of Fisher.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Now since there was "no firebird production at Norwood in 1968" you are playing dates. Do you really think GM is going to phase in production of a duifferent brand line COLD?? No they are going to change the tag to prepare for the change. The 1969 models were produced at Norwood in year 1968, as a 1969 models. What about this is not clear??

[/ QUOTE ]
Phil,
"What is not clear?" Nothing, other that it's wrong. You were talking about 68 model year with the reference to the change to the trim tag and the start of production at LOS in your first post. Then you talk about 68 calendar year. But it doesn't matter.

Absolutely NO Firebirds were built at Norwood in 68 - calendar year or model year. Firebird was removed from Lordstown on 3/15/69 in prep of the stripping of the plant and the installation of the Vega tooling. (JohnZ was the person responsible for ripping out the tooling and installing the Vega tooling, btw. Some good stories there!) Firebird production restarted on 4/14/69, at NOR. This is documented from the General (hence why I know the exact dates). Can you show me *any* NOR Firebirds built before April 69??? Should be easy if you're right. If you want to save time, don't bother - they don't exist.

[ QUOTE ]
When we speak of our exacting standards of "date and build" to these guys you get laughed at really quick.

[/ QUOTE ]Of course. They were there to install a part. They would never look at a build date unless they are entering it for the POP info. Who (in the plant) cares what the date of an alternator is as long as it's the right part #?


I read what you wrote and a lot of it is wrong. Hence my post this morning about how the body #'s and VIN's were handled in the plant. You asked for data and I gave you concrete examples. Just like my post now.

Whether you choose to look at this info analytically and with an open mind, well....

Exactly what do you think was different in 67??
And again, "Just what data are you using to support your 'opinions'??"

[70 copo]

Kurt,

It has become clear that you are here on this site to supress free speech and push your CRG "agenda". I believe that you already have a really good web site where folks can go to express opinions and submit data to the CRG that gets snapped up into the D-base where it then gets used just like you are attempting to use it here.

Since you are no obsessed with the firebird issue Lets go there shall we?

13 years ago I interviewed several retired workers form both Fisher and Norwood who were employed there in 1967 to specifically determine 1967 production processes. These were the same guys that also recalled the pranks that were played on the new car buyer such as the notorious practice of placing a rattle can in the quarter panel. There were other stories as well.

These gentlemen were specific on the TT change in '68 to ready fisher for Firebird production, because this is what they were told by supervision at the time. Despite the fact that Fisher Norwood was ready - Market forces and firebird sales did not require the Production start for firebird there until mid '69.

I do not think it is productive to insult the retired workers. You have an opinion based on your 15,000 car d base of which you are not really clear on what % is 1967 exclusive.... That is your business, and apperently it is -as you are helping to run a website called the CRG. OK by me - but forcing your views down my gut here is not real polite. This is not the CRG.

In your previous post you stated:

"when they pulled the last Camaro, Oldsmobile, etc off the assembly line for the musuem, they always say that the last car doesn't always have the highest VIN. Because the staging lanes scramble the VIN order a little. The highest VIN will be the last car thru where the VIN's are assigned, but it probably won't be the last car down the line"


Your statement simply confirms what I have said previously on this topic and is what the Retiree's told me happened at the hole on the Chevrolet side.

We can keep chatting on this till the web dies or the moderators shut it down - you are not going to change my mind because what you and I believe is really not that far off the mark. I believe the Fisher Body unit number did matter in 1967 and thus the Trim Tag was relevent and you do not.

It is really that simple. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[Kurt S]

[ QUOTE ]
Kurt,

It has become clear that you are here on this site to supress free speech and push your CRG "agenda".

[/ QUOTE ]
OK, so supporting my arguments with facts somehow suppresses free speech? I'm not following.
I'm talking, you're talking, and we're not swearing. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

And what exactly is the CRG agenda?
The CRG site says it's "Accurate, Objective, Useful Content".


[ QUOTE ]
Since you are no obsessed with the firebird issue Lets go there shall we?

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not obsessed with it. It was the only thing that you responded to.

[ QUOTE ]
These gentlemen were specific on the TT change in '68 to ready fisher for Firebird production, because this is what they were told by supervision at the time. Despite the fact that Fisher Norwood was ready - Market forces and firebird sales did not require the Production start for firebird there until mid '69.

I do not think it is productive to insult the retired workers.

[/ QUOTE ]
Interesting. So you're saying the tag change that occurred in 68 across all Chevrolet (and GM I believe) models and plants was due one new product coming to Norwood, one that didn't happen until mid-69? Thought you said it happened in 68? Never mind that Pontiac used the same style trim tag in 67.
I'd say it was a corporate wide change due to changing federal regulations (the conformance text on the tag).
Market forces weren't even a factor. It was a production issue - they needed to prep LOR for the Vega. And it took a month of work to prep NOR for the Firebird.
Oh, and just how did I insult anyone?
[ QUOTE ]
You have an opinion based on your 15,000 car d base of which you are not really clear on what % is 1967 exclusive....

[/ QUOTE ]
67's - 8,700 out of the 15,500 in the db.

[ QUOTE ]
Your statement simply confirms what I have said previously on this topic and is what the Retiree's told me happened at the hole on the Chevrolet side.

[/ QUOTE ]
That part is explained in the assembly article. And you stated it above too. It causes a little bit of variance, but only by a maximum of 50-100 VIN's (normally much less than that). Not enough to be evident or significant to any of us.
Almost noone in the plant looked at body #'s or VIN's anyway. If you go out in the plant and asked about a VIN or a body #, they would look at you funny. The rotation/sequence # is all that mattered.

[ QUOTE ]
We can keep chatting on this till the web dies or the moderators shut it down - you are not going to change my mind because what you and I believe is really not that far off the mark. I believe the Fisher Body unit number did matter in 1967 and thus the Trim Tag was relevent and you do not.

[/ QUOTE ]

The trim tag and all the info on it was relevant and important or it wouldn't be there!

I agree, we are saying close to the same thing.
But you made two statements that are in conflict with what I said:
"The Camaro bodies at Fisher were sequentially built in 1967."
" ....the staging lines .... explains why the VIN's appear to be out of sequence compared to the body build up."

No, the bodies were not built sequentially by the body #. Fisher used a rotation # to built the cars. Cars could and did get pulled out of order for repairs. This rotation # is the # that is written on alot of original firewalls. I can provide more examples if that will help.

Chevrolet then used a different rotation # when the car hit the Chevrolet side. This is the # on the broadcast sheets.

Both rotation #'s had the same purpose - tracking the car and it's subassemblies.

The issue with this car being out of sequence is mostly due to 07C being produced for a very short time. Cars got mixed around on the Fisher side (mainly in the body shop), so 07B and 07C cars could be and were interspersed. It's not uncommon to see but it's much more prevalent here, presumably due to the end of the year.


Could you please detail exactly what you think is different in the 67 process than the 68/69 process? Seriously.

Still don't understand the suppression of free speech thing...

[Kurt S]

[ QUOTE ]
(Please Agree or disagree)

8.The VIN# and the computer lock for CFA (with the specific option content) was partially assigned based upon down line parts availability.

[/ QUOTE ]
Disagree.
The VIN was assigned right as the body was received by Fisher.
If the parts were not available, the body wouldn't have been built.

[ QUOTE ]
10 The order that the bodies were staged on the Chevrolet side was random prior to the assignment of the VIN and final assembly computer build lock.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, the VIN was assigned first and then the cars bodies went into the body bank. The six lanes of the body bank were organized by option (mainly AC, RS, hi-po, and regular). The body bank balanced the assembly line according to option content of the car. Certain stations take more time than others. You didn't want 2 rally sports, etc, in a row. Still true today.

Other than that, looks mostly correct.

[Chateau Slate 66]

It appears that this car possibly sold outside of eBay?

The ad has been pulled. Congrats! (hopefully)

[70 copo]

Congrats to the Seller and to the buyer! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/headbang.gif

Kurt,

I too could waste pages in reply to you. Not going to do that - I have far better things to do, as you are clearly in damage control mode now with back to back posts cluttering up a simple discussion. Proof of your claims or info to back it up all coming from a Research Site (that by policy) gathers but does not share information.

Again and simple: In '67 paper work was with the body at Fisher. (Photo Shows that) All '67 bodies had a Trim Tag installed early on that contained specific option content that was related downline to a final build order to which a VIN# was assigned on a "scrambled" order at final assembly.
("Scrambled" is your term not mine- although I gotta say I have to agree)


It is in the implementation of the process that you disagree with me, and that is fine with me - but it is awfully clear that my opinion although clearly supported with evidence (as I outlined above) and my simple act of disagreeing with you - is not acceptable to you at all.

On the freedom of speech thing it is pretty clear that you are obsessed with proving your point - so you keep placing more and more info here that still fails to support your position with the perception I am getting that you simply seek to attempt to intimidate with unsupported theory that leaves huge gaps in understanding to the avarage reader.

Transulation- thread has become a "yawner" now and the car also appears sold.

Obviously we are now both way off topic. I suggest giving this mess a rest as other people have things to sell You know my opinion.

It has not changed and will not change.

By now I think everyone knows who to find your website too. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[Steve Shauger]

This discussion is turning in to one of personal attacks. Although the information discussed has much merit and has allowed each reader to be fully informed, lets move on. I think we all have formed opinions and no information that has been presented will change anyones. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[Kim_Howie]

With the Gibb novas there is around 50 cars between each VIN# There is 4 different sets of body #s. But the thing I found out is some of the early body #s are on later VINed cars. I thought for a long time that the 4 body #s where related to the 4 colors of the cars. One car showed up that proved that wrong. 20 years of study these cars and still dont know how they were done?? http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif AS the saying goes the more you know the less you know.

[YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY]

[ QUOTE ]
With the Gibb novas there is around 50 cars between each VIN# There is 4 different sets of body #s. But the thing I found out is some of the early body #s are on later VINed cars. I thought for a long time that the 4 body #s where related to the 4 colors of the cars. One car showed up that proved that wrong. 20 years of study these cars and still dont know how they were done?? http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif AS the saying goes the more you know the less you know.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ditto on the Deuces! I came late to this party, interesting read.

[firstgenaddict]

[ QUOTE ]
With the Gibb novas there is around 50 cars between each VIN# There is 4 different sets of body #s. But the thing I found out is some of the early body #s are on later VINed cars. I thought for a long time that the 4 body #s where related to the 4 colors of the cars. One car showed up that proved that wrong. 20 years of study these cars and still dont know how they were done?? http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif AS the saying goes the more you know the less you know.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly Kim... a closed mind is an ignorant mind... none of us know everything and to go into these discussions thinking that we do know everything is ludicrous. There is more and more information uncovered every year and like you said... "the more I think I know... the more I realize I am just scratching the surface!

[Kurt S]

I post twice and I'm in damage control? You've post 16 times on this thread, I've only posted 6!
My last post went thru your list of points and says only two were wrong. I did that specifically cause you asked and as discussion topics.

If CRG didn't distribute info, we wouldn't have a site. We do a whole lot more sharing of info than some other sites.
What we won't distribute is individual car info. We promise that to people who share data with us - that is why we have 15,000+ datapoints and are able to publish the articles and info on our site. Sorry, we don't compromise our standards just cause you don't like it.

I still don't understand what part of what I'm saying you don't agree with. I am more than willing to post some data to support my position - I never said I wouldn't. But you've never directly responded to any of my points except the Firebird one. So I don't even know what needs more evidence. I think I clarified the Firebird part of it.

I get it. Have a civilized, data-driven discussion with you is supressing someone's freedom of speech, somewhere. OK, I don't get it.
And can you point me to that evidence that you posted?


If you can post a specific issue with what I've said, I'll try to post some data to back it up. Else it would appear that the light of data is scaring you away. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

Congrats Max! Sorry that this got mixed up with your for sale post! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[Charley Lillard]

70copo . What I have derived from all of this is that you seem to have it in for the CRG. You seem to come into this thread baiting William by asking 50 questions and taunting for answers like a attorney at a trial. Supress free speech ? Damage control ? If you don't believe what I am saying about how you are coming across, ask someone you are sure is neutral from outside this forum. I personally don't think you are proving any points because of the argumentative way you are trying to make them. If anything it makes you harder to believe.

[70 copo]

Kurt,

You should run for office. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/naughty.gif

As anyone who can read the other posts I did here will see those posts were with "William" who also connected his opinions to the "CRG" as did you. Clearly you two "tag teamed me" and you simply took over after he posted for the last time and promptly continued the CRG "our way or the Highway" agenda.

As for the rest of what you say, I am an adult and I will act like it. Please have a good day! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[70 copo]

Charlie,

You need to read the above reply to Kurt. True or not? I have a right to stick up for what I think is true.

No rules broken. I am sure you ripped William for his Mild obscene remark he made to me in a previous post that I did not deserve at all.

[Hylton]

I always end up putting my nose into things when I shouldn't but I can't let this one go. Although I agree that CRG could do a better job at publishing it's collected information, the work that these individuals have done have been huge for Camaro enthusiasts around the world. Much of the information we know today is a direct result of the hard work and effort of these guys and I thank them for it! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/flag.gif

[70 copo]

I agree 100% The CRG is the best resource on the net. We simply disagree on this one issue. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[Kurt S]

[ QUOTE ]
Ditto on the Deuces! I came late to this party, interesting read.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't know much about 68 Nova's.

The 69+ body numbers are confirmation #'s. The guy entering the data would enter the cars that were optioned the same at the same time. For each car ordered, a confirmation # would be received. It could be the computer system or it could be operator error, but sometimes one in a group was missed, kicked back, or maybe the order was hung up in the computer for a few minutes. However it happened, that order would then drop in the midst of the next group of cars.

The scheduler would schedule them in what ever order he deemed. Add in the possible holdups in the body shop. So for a given batch of cars, relative to the VIN, the body #'s may both up or go down or bounce around. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

[Late BrakeU2]

I knew this thread would blow past 100 posts!

What about the JL8 cars..did they receive TT's and wait on parts and VIN's or were they tight?

[Verne_Frantz]

I've been enjoying this thread too (from a technical side - not the arguments) because I've been trying to understand and document assembly plant practices in the 58-64 era for 25 years.

One thing my research can offer is the fact that (in that era) Fisher Body sequence numbers do not follow in the same order as the final VINs assigned. It is also not uncommon to find a body build date and body # out of sequence (based on VIN final assembly) with other body build dates.

For example, there may be 50 cars in VIN order that have a body build date of (let's say) 05A or 05B, then a car with a VIN 50 higher will show up with a body build date of 04D, and an expected lower body sequence number.

I'm not taking any sides in any argument. Just merely stating what my dbase of 1000s of 58-64s has proven. And like the CRG, my data is available as correlated information, (though it's not on line) and the individual owner information is kept strictly private. Unlike the CRG (or any Camaro research), I've had to deal with 15 different assembly plants over that time. However I can state that the process of order reception, VIN assignment, broadcast to the lines and Fisher Body build orders appears to be the same at all 15 plants, and it closely coincides with the procedures Kurt has described. There are some notable differences of course, but they don't apply to the 67-8-9 topic of this thread. (sorry if I've strayed)

Verne http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Kurt S]

[ QUOTE ]
We simply disagree on this one issue. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[/ QUOTE ]I'm just not sure what that one issue is! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/naughty.gif

[70 copo]

Verne,

The Fisher body # and VIN# do not line up on the 67's either. Thanks for sharing.

Phil http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[Kurt S]

[ QUOTE ]
What about the JL8 cars..did they receive TT's and wait on parts and VIN's or were they tight?

[/ QUOTE ]
No car ever received a trim tag and then waited on parts. The job of the scheduler was to make sure that all the parts for the car were in house before the car even was started.
JL8's appear to fit in as 'normal' production (as opposed to Abby Normal). http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[PeteLeathersac]

I enjoyed this whole thread from the sidelines too..

The great thing of debate is it can often uncover forgotten facts and confirm or debunk old theories also maybe even bring previously unknown procedures to light!.

So thanks fellas...it was good to confirm also learn some new things too and really great to see such passionate enthusiasm from those involved!.

~ Pete
http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/youguysrock.gif

[Late BrakeU2]

http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

And he used to work in Novi
http://www.martyfeldmanchevy.com/AdWizardMainMenu

[iluv69s]

WWWOOOWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eek.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eek.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eek.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eek.gif

So, I left Monday for a short trip and arrived home today to all this....I cannot believe the trouble I have caused..hehehe

WORST OF ALL...apparently Ebay ended my auction because of some type of security breach of my account that due to security reasons they cannot divulge exactly...???? And it actually just disappeared from the face of the Earth...They will not even give me a copy so I can just re-list it...

Needless to say, I am p@**#^ off...I just spent 2 hours on-line with Ebay about it..."But we already credited your account the listing fees" ay ay ay...

So, THE CAR IS NOT SOLD...I apologize, but the car will be relisted soon...

But anyway, I thought maybe I should chime in on the thread I started...hehehe..

I do appreciate all the input and knowledge, and opinions from everyone here and on the other forum sites.

I have not even had a chance to thoroughly read the threads completely since Ive gotten home, but I will later...

I hate to make any more "opinions" on my car at this point...hehehe...maybe it is the " last" known 67 Z "ordered"?? Who knows ???hehehhe

But I would like to say this...I do appreciate the CRG and Team Camaro and Yenko sites and the service and help we all recieve 'if only to ask'...largely because of the hard work of the persons involved with the sites...


I want to say Thank You to this site and the other sites and thier members and administarors...and also to everyone here who has expressed thier viewpoint, facts, and opinions and the genuine passion involved!!!(and for the most part with total respect!!) hehehe

Anyway??? Does anyone want a nice project car...hehehe...before I relist it??? Thanks again...

Max

[iluv69s]

PS...Do I have any recourse with Ebay?? Atleast to know what the heck happened?? ...

also....I'm out of Popcorn.... http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif

http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/youguysrock.gif

[92646]

My opinion is that E-bay is like Dell customer support. They will just wear you down till you give up. Ebay has another white 67 Z/28 listed right now that is complete. Wait till a few days before the other ad ends before you decide to list your car again.
Mark Sheppard

[Kurt S]

I didn't get that for a second. I'm so used to hearing the ads on the radio for that dealer..... http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

You've heard the parody song about him, based on "She's got Bette Davis eyes"?

[budnate]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What about the JL8 cars..did they receive TT's and wait on parts and VIN's or were they tight?

[/ QUOTE ]
No car ever received a trim tag and then waited on parts. The job of the scheduler was to make sure that all the parts for the car were in house before the car even was started.
JL8's appear to fit in as 'normal' production (as opposed to Abby Normal). http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Kurt, what happend to a '67 Camaro if it came down the line and somehow the count was wrong on parts.. like a 12 bolt rear for a SS and a important piece for a SS I would think...would the car go to the side somewhere till they found one?? I saw a car with a casting date on the rear one week after the trim tag date and I would have sworn on oath that it looked like it had never been out of the car...any merit to that??

Thnx Bud.

[Zedder]

I don't think ebay will ever tell you what happened with your ad...so just go ahead and relist it. I know the high bidder from your old ad and he's a really nice guy http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Charley Lillard]

I think I had a COPO years ago with a BE rear dated later than the build date on the trim tag but it was the same rear date on the protecto plate.

[427king]

A good friend of mine had a June car with an original July KQ rear in it. Orange auto on column car

[SuperNovaSS]

Ebay did that to me awhile back. They ended about 50 of my auctions. I called them and they were able to put them in my completed auction category so I could click the relist button.


Jason

[70 copo]

Max,

You did not cause any trouble. Best of luck selling the car. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[Jeff Murphy]

[ QUOTE ]
I think I had a COPO years ago with a BE rear dated later than the build date on the trim tag but it was the same rear date on the protecto plate.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that was common with 06A cars and BE rears. Mine is that way too.

[firstgenaddict]

If I am not mistaken the 06A trim tag was used for most if not all of June of 69...

[1970Bluel78]

[ QUOTE ]
My opinion is that E-bay is like Dell customer support. They will just wear you down till you give up. Ebay has another white 67 Z/28 listed right now that is complete. Wait till a few days before the other ad ends before you decide to list your car again.

That why I buy Gateway.
Mark Sheppard

[/ QUOTE ]

[Kurt S]

[ QUOTE ]
Kurt, what happend to a '67 Camaro if it came down the line and somehow the count was wrong on parts.. like a 12 bolt rear for a SS and a important piece for a SS I would think...would the car go to the side somewhere till they found one??

[/ QUOTE ]
That's why the scheduler had one of the most important jobs in the plant. There was no room to set aside a car and all the incoming subassemblies that were sequenced to that car. If you pulled out the car, it would mess up the whole system - a red front clip would show up to assemble to a yellow car, etc.....

Body assembly dates are not exact and there's still several days until the car gets finished. So axles can be after the body date - but it's not common and generally happened only on months like 69 06A.

[Schonyenko2]

Question: I worked in a factory wher we built combines CNH global. I understand that you didn't actually pull a car/combine off the line over an issue, but if there was an issue with a particular machine, it still went down the chain,( later timed push up stations). Those problems were then fixed in a repair area. Does this apply with car assy?
Would this also apply to line stock shortages, so a part might be changed out after it was off the chain? I understand the scheduler should have all these things in order.I used to work with these guys on getting the right parts to the line on time. Some were much better than others. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif

[budnate]

thnx for the reply, one of those things that has bugged me for years wanting to know http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[Kurt S]

If there was an issue, it might have been resolved by the repairman that worked in that area (as the car continued down the line) while the worker went to the next car. Else it would have been noted on the inspection sheet and sent to the repair bays.

Yeah, you sure didn't pull a combine off the line!! The Willow Run plant (now Hydramatic, next door to the Willow Run assembly plant) was the B-24 bomber plant - making 1 an hour. 100,000 parts coming together; now that would be something to see!

[iluv69s]

Hey Guys..long time no chat...hehehe..

Well, I just had to run home to my computer to add a little flame to this thread. I just got home from my family "Easter Dinner'..a week late, but better late than never.

Anyway, My brother was there with his family and I had to ask him what is the "real" deal where he works. You see, he has been at GM for 24 years and currently works on the assembly line at the Wilmington Plant. He is line manager?? I think??

I mentioned my car. And I got to asking him about the VINs, and the procedures at the plant now. He actually was stamping (actually said it is a scribing machine)the VINS on the blocks and putting the VIN plates in the Saturn cars recently. He even said the machine has an X for if you make a mistake..and then it puts a number below...same as the old days..real interesting stuff..a security guard gives him 50 VINs and exactly 100 rivets...he has to double count them..then he has to return them to the security guard during every break to be locked away...he also talked about the prototype soltise hardtops they recently made...pilot cars!! really cool hearing this stuff from my own brother...after this thread!!

Obviously a lot has changed since back in the day. But I asked my Brother about if there was ever a time when a part is not there for a car..or something goes wrong..if the cars just continue down the line or what?? Could a VIN be out of sequence because of something like that.

He works on the trim line of the Saturn solstice..he said rather often the cars continue down the line with a missing part and then they play catch up, BUT...he said at any given moment there are up to 20 cars pulled off the line in his department alone ..and for up to a few months...beause of a defect or lack of a part...he went on to say how the car has a paper sheet attached and they can tell if it is a dealer order, a customer order, an import, or a fleet order...and if it is a dealer order, they will ship the car without a certain option, but if it is a customer order, it could sit and wait for up to 2 months waiting for a part.."getting all dusty in the corner". He said cars "get lost" in there...

He also talked about at times if there is a bad defect like a bad throw-out bearing, someone will park(hide) the car way out in the lot so it gets lost for a while before they have to repair it. He said it depends how bad the defect is on how quick they want to repair it and put the car back on the line.

I mentioned that there is supposed to be a guy that makes sure all the parts are there before they begin the cars...my brother said "yeh right...there IS a guy alright!!! hahaha"...

He also said that he would assume it was worse back then in 1967 because now everything is computerized and bar coded..don't know??

Anyway...but thats whats happening now at GM assembly lines!!!

BTW The possibly "last ordered" 67 Z-28 is being relisted tonight!! hehehe



thanks again SYC Max

[budnate]

interesting Max...call your bro and ask this specific question "what happens if they yank a car going down the line...does it not mess up other parts arriving for it like Kurt said.. fenders,hoods,a certain color, and special options". http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

http://www.yenko.net/attachments/330274-167asspicresized.jpg

[PeteLeathersac]

Interesting stuff but don't most of today's lines operate w/ individual AGV units carrying each car that can be pulled aside without stopping the rest of the line and if that unit is pulled, parts scheduled for it get sidetracked somewhere too?.
This completely unlike the old days where there was no way to pull a car off the line as the whole line would have to have been stopped so they'd tag cars w/ problems and let them continue along for repairs later?.
http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif
~ Pete

[iluv69s]

Well guys..got the car re-listed..still don't know what happened other than ebay made me change my password...anyway..here is the new link....

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayIS...E:IT&ih=017 (http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=270224254978&ssPa geName=STRK:MESE:IT&ih=017)

I also called my brother to ask a few more questions about the assembly lines, but it seems he is on second shift now...I will try again tomorrow earlier!!

Also I remember my brother talking about stamping the VINs wrong on the motors and trans...he said normally they would have the trans or motor taken to a machinist and the machinist would machine the surface there and he would re-(stamp) the VIN..but he said there are times when the car got too many parts already attached to pull the trans or motor..and there is no room to apply new VINs with the motor and trans in the car..I said.."and so???"

My brother said..."O well" http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

...he did go on to clarify that..." he " never let this occur...hehehe

he said it did not happen much though..Thank God..but apparently there are old Chevys with original motors that have the VIN stamp on the block one digit off...

.....and there apparently still are!!

..just some insight to what happens these days at GM !!

Thanks again!! Max

[Zedder]

Max, Does the car has the correct sub-frame and steering box? Thanks and good luck! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[Kurt S]

Nope, most assembly lines are not AGV's, they are hangers like in the picture above.

And some plants have now worked out systems so they can pull cars off the line (and then all the subassemblies). Conceptually, a good way to be inefficient. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif

[iluv69s]

Hey Mark...

I assume they are correct...are the subframes numbered or dated?? I know the 70 subframes are dated...but the early ones?? I know there is something about the large hole in front?? I will check the steering box and any numbers...are they special?? close-ratio or something?? I'm not such the expert on these things as you...maybe you can guide me on what to look for?? I'll be glad to check anything you'd like Thanks,

and good luck also, Max

p.s....you could eliminate all the suspense by hitting the buy-it-now!!! hehehe

[Zedder]

Thanks Max...I'm not holding my breath...but you never know http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

The steering box is 5679142; pitman arm is 3908391; idler arm is 3908385; steering arms are 3902519 and 3902520. Here is some subframe info from the CRG
http://camaros.org/TopicsofResearch.shtml#1967Topics

[iluv69s]

Mark,
I apologize, but I did not have a chance to crawl under the Z yet and check those numbers...I am pouring a concrete curb and sidewalk in front of my office tomorrow, and my Bobcat blew a hose today...So needless to say, I busted my A** with a shovel all day today...I did swing by the garage where I have the car stored on the way home and took a quick look...The frame seems correct and the steering box does has the correct part number...I did not bring a jack to get under the car...but I will go by tomorrow and let you know what I find. thanks, max

Also, I have not got a hold of my brother yet to ask about the assembly process...I will let y'all know when I here from him. thanks guys...

BTW..only 3 days left!!! Based on the response I've had, I think the car will probably reach the reserve...

Auction ends Sunday Night...THANKS SUPERCAR SITE!!!

http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[iluv69s]

HEY GUYS...LAST DAY OF AUCTION!!! ENDS TONIGHT!!! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/burnout.gif
Good Luck all.. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif me too!! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

THANKS AGAIN !!!! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[BARNFOUND YENKO]

Bidding went to $30k, Did you make a deal and sell it?? http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

[iluv69s]

No sale http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif yettt... http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/naughty.gif

I am considering separating the motor and the car...

...or maybe it's a sign from God to get off my A** and put the thing together...It is by far the closest Camaro I have to getting done...other than the "so-called done" cars...but, they're never done, are they??? Hell, Iv'e definitely had my cars too long now...the so-called done cars now need "redone"...AY AY AY

But I did have fun in the process so far...but TOO MUCH POPCORN!!... http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

Thanks, Max