67 camaro body number 32

[resto4u]

Can someone explain how this low body number would have that trim tag date, and such a high vin number.
ebay body number 32 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Chevrolet-Camaro-Base-Hardtop-2-Door-1967-chevrolet-camaro-project-32-nd-camaro-built-emerald-/321532962225?forcerrptr=true&hash=item4adcdba5b1&i tem=321532962225&pt=US_Cars_Trucks)

[iluv69s]

is that 100032?? almost the 100 thousandth camaro?

[supercomp 8.90]

theres another firewall in the trunk maybe its a closer match lol!!

[1967Z28]

If 100032 was the VIN then you would be talking about the 32nd Camaro but this is the NOR body number. The 32nd VIN car would most likely have a 2-digit body number not a 6-digit one. This 03D car was built when the VINs were going from 199,xxx to 200,xxx and from 5-digit body numbers on the cowl tag to 6-digit body numbers starting with a 1.

[67rs/ss]

I have a 03 B and a 03 C body numbers 89*** and 97***. So appears to be about right.

[70 copo]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 1967Z28</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If 100032 was the VIN then you would be talking about the 32nd Camaro but this is the NOR body number. The 32nd VIN car would most likely have a 2-digit body number not a 6-digit one. This 03D car was built when the VINs were going from 199,xxx to 200,xxx and from 5-digit body numbers on the cowl tag to 6-digit body numbers starting with a 1. </div></div>


Built in assembly sequence was not in VIN order. According to a Norwood Keypuncher--she offered two scenarios to explain this anomaly..Remember after the IBM card is punched the next step was the production scheduling meeting where raw numbers are looked at for inventory metrics vs the RPO content of the days build after that the process creating the body plate (trim Tag) was automated.


IBM card was punched then miss sequenced or lost. When the punched card was found it was inserted into production and built.


The wrong body number was keypunched on the IBM card. (most likely cause)

[resto4u]

So if this was body number 32 it would look like 000032 ? Would this be correct?

[70 copo]

N100032

[bergy]

....or the car build was released against a blanket order.

[Kurt S]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: resto4u</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So if this was body number 32 it would look like 000032 ? Would this be correct? </div></div>
Or NOR 32.

Not 100032, that's mid-way in production.

[67rs/ss]

Remember we're talking BODY # not VIN. From the 67 camaro trim tags I have seen it is just the number, no 0's preceding it. The lowest one I have found in my records is NOR 860.Then I have NOR 5960 and so on. So body number 1000032 is just as it reads. I think part of the confusion is the the 67 camaro VIN's started 100001 and body numbers started NOR 1. The lowest I have seen was NOR 16 or LOS 16.

[Lynn]

Not interested, not even if you GAVE it to me.

[70 copo]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 67rs/ss</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Remember we're talking BODY # not VIN. From the 67 camaro trim tags I have seen it is just the number, no 0's preceding it. The lowest one I have found in my records is NOR 860.Then I have NOR 5960 and so on. So body number 1000032 is just as it reads. I think part of the confusion is the the 67 camaro VIN's started 100001 and body numbers started NOR 1. The lowest I have seen was NOR 16 or LOS 16. </div></div>

Agreed. I just looked at the auction.. That car is pretty badly rusted.

[67rs/ss]

Well now the DA removed the trimtag.
N100032 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/1967-Camaro-K-Emerald-Turquoise-Real-nice-color-combo-trim-tag-was-a-350-car-/221589948744?pt=Vintage_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessorie s&amp;hash=item3397ca4948&amp;vxp=mtr)