LOS COPO 9561

[Carleen]

It dosent say its a Clone or Tribute.
12A LOS
CBE Rear end
VIN 124379L511422

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Chevrolet-Camaro-427-COPO-/152056154140?forcerrptr=true&hash=item236740c81c:g :zeIAAOSw3mpXEYfl&item=152056154140

[William]

Production date on the NCRS is December 5, 1968. Axle is stamped C BE 0107G.

You be the judge.

[Jonesy]

Restamp

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd316/vettegirl66/1969%20Camaro%20427%20COPO%20Garnet%20Red/69copoCamaroRed0024_zpsbcs29tzc.jpg

[Jonesy]

LOS COPO? (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Chevrolet-Camaro-427-COPO-/152056154140?forcerrptr=true&hash=item236740c81c:g :zeIAAOSw3mpXEYfl&item=152056154140)

[bergy]

I'm thinking that we shouldn't add that one to out registry!

[Jeff H]

That seller looks familiar. <<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/whistle.gif

[John]

.... they said it was a real copo ..... and it is sold

12A LOS
CBE Rear end
VIN 124379L511422


<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/dunno.gif

[aafa701]

Hi there, im new to the forum, was trying to do some homework on a VIN for a 69 copo and found it here. theres a pic of the VIN stamped on the block, and some talk about whether or not its authentic. would anyone be able to help me out with this? Im considering buying this car, and if theres any doubt about its authenticity I would really like to know that. Thanks so much, Brett

[William]

The very first L72 COPO Camaro 427 engines were assembled January 3, 1969. That's a common date, along with January 4th. Those engine dates are found in the earliest COPOs, built starting January 15, 1969 at the Norwood, Ohio plant.

The vehicle in question has an engine stamped T1120MN. That's 44 days prior to the earliest known L72 engines. It is also the only one known with that date. The car was built December 5, 1968, 41 days prior to the first COPO Camaros out of Norwood. The ducted hood that was standard equipment on all COPO Camaros did not exist in production at that time.

You be the judge.

Here's another thread.

http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?topic=14502.0

[aafa701]

thanks for your response. So understand I know 69 camaros decently, but not anything about the copo's, lol. So excuse my questions. So I hear and understand the date codes and build dates, but is this up for interpretation, or is it absolutely positively not real? I mean one post from someone said, I dont think we should put it in the registry. So sounds like its not considered a real copo car? i wonder how john cena bought it if it wasnt a real deal car for 175 grand? I saw something saying in 2017 from mecum it sold for 62,500. I mean how can this be? Also is the pic posted of the block and date code/VIN considered restamps? Looks to me like you can see the broching? any way someone might give me a call and discuss this more with me? it would mean the world obviously, cause I dont wanna buy a car thats not 100% legit. I thought it all checked out, but Im no expert on copos, so I needs some schoolin!! lol Thanks man

[PLATINUM6BBL]

I am no Camaro man having been into Mopars all my life. That said if I were looking to buy a high value Camaro I would trust the voices on this board. If the validity of it is called in to question on this board I would most definitely be walking away from it.

[70 copo]

thanks for your response. So understand I know 69 camaros decently, but not anything about the copo's, lol. So excuse my questions. So I hear and understand the date codes and build dates, but is this up for interpretation, or is it absolutely positively not real? I mean one post from someone said, I dont think we should put it in the registry. So sounds like its not considered a real copo car? i wonder how john cena bought it if it wasnt a real deal car for 175 grand? I saw something saying in 2017 from mecum it sold for 62,500. I mean how can this be? Also is the pic posted of the block and date code/VIN considered restamps? Looks to me like you can see the broching? any way someone might give me a call and discuss this more with me? it would mean the world obviously, cause I dont wanna buy a car thats not 100% legit. I thought it all checked out, but Im no expert on copos, so I needs some schoolin!! lol Thanks man

The first COPO's were built at Norwood. This car has major component parts that are either timeline incorrect, are restamps, or production non-existent when compared to the physical build date of the car.

I wrote the book on the Norwood plant and interviewed the guys who were involved with the COPO programs at the beginning of production.

This particular car is better described as a tribute or a recreation.

I hope this helps you in understanding the car.

[x33rs]

William is one of the most knowledgeable people I've ever met when it comes to 69 Camaros. I would heed his advice.

It's pretty well known that the ZL2 hoods weren't even in production until very late December and that's a mandatory option on the COPO cars. The #1 ZL1 was the first to get it and that car wasn't finished until Dec 30th or so? (Correct me William, I know that's close)


Just the hood dilemma would shy me away from this car despite how good the engine stamps may look.

[Tracker1]

) Just the hood dilemma would shy me away from this car despite how good the engine stamps may look.

And they don't look very good.

[William]

The earliest documented [at this time] production special ducted hood build is a Z/28 at Van Nuys, on or about December 27, 1968. At Norwood, ZL1 #1 was final assembled December 30, 1968. Both cars have production broadcast copies.

The press release notifying dealers of the ZL2 option is dated November 25, 1968. Typical order lead time was 28 days.

[NorCam]

i wonder how john cena bought it if it wasnt a real deal car for 175 grand?

Because at one time, he had more money than common sense and became the person who bought the car. If he would have done his homework here, perhaps he wouldn't have bought that car. :rolleyes2:

[Jonesy]

I said it 4 years ago and I will say it again. That engine pad stamping is a restamp.
Im glad I posted that picture of it and it possibly saves someone from getting screwed.

[Steve Shauger]

I've been contacted a few times about this car, most recently by Jeff L. in Colorado two weeks ago. There is nothing correct from build date, stampings, no history available and it's a VN built car and only one has been documented.

I'm not sure why we keep getting inquiries.... perhaps they don't like the obvious answer.:bs:

[Stefano]

thanks for your response. So understand I know 69 camaros decently, but not anything about the copo's, lol. So excuse my questions. So I hear and understand the date codes and build dates, but is this up for interpretation, or is it absolutely positively not real? I mean one post from someone said, I dont think we should put it in the registry. So sounds like its not considered a real copo car? i wonder how john cena bought it if it wasnt a real deal car for 175 grand? I saw something saying in 2017 from mecum it sold for 62,500. I mean how can this be? Also is the pic posted of the block and date code/VIN considered restamps? Looks to me like you can see the broching? any way someone might give me a call and discuss this more with me? it would mean the world obviously, cause I dont wanna buy a car thats not 100% legit. I thought it all checked out, but Im no expert on copos, so I needs some schoolin!! lol Thanks man

Just because someone is is a celebrity doesn't mean that they are an expert on all other things, to include authenticating / validating COPO Camaros. The price paid or current asking price has no bearing on authenticity. I watch people make bad buying decisions on a very regular basis!

[marxjunk]

i am a novice..i found an L89 block and these guys shark tanked it..and the one thing i learned, it was fake, and the big indicator was the zero..and that zero looks exactly like the zero on the fake block i found..theres a def style of zero and that aint it

[Bill Pritchard]

I'm not sure why we keep getting inquiries.... perhaps they don't like the obvious answer.:bs:

Yep.....just waiting for someone to tell them what they want to hear. :thumbsdown:

[Mr70]

"The Emperor Has No Clothes".

[nova67]

That engine is a re-stamp. Wasnt there a documented VN Burnished Brown Copo? Wasnt there a VN Copo lost in a fire many years ago? Its always buyer beware on a lot of this high dollar stuff.

[DW31S]

Just because someone is is a celebrity doesn't mean that they are an expert on all other things, to include authenticating / validating COPO Camaros. The price paid or current asking price has no bearing on authenticity. I watch people make bad buying decisions on a very regular basis!

Couldn’t agree more.

[GMC_Typhoon]

I love this site. A car can look 100% perfect,but then somebody will notice that the wingnut holding the air cleaner lid is wrong.

[Big Block Bill]

Yes, I agree 100%, there are some Very Smart people here, better than any other site that I know of, but there is WAY more wrong with this car than a wing nut. Bill

[njsteve]

I love this site. A car can look 100% perfect,but then somebody will notice that the wingnut holding the air cleaner lid is wrong.

Actually this car is the opposite: the wing nut is authentic...everything under it, is not. ;-)

[firstgenaddict]

Just TRY TO Find a ZL2 hood dated late Nov 1968 or first week of December 68.

[x33rs]

With all the knowledge these days of these cars, particularly 69 Camaros, it's surprising to me to still see this stuff floating around touted as the real thing.

I just got back from Goodguys this weekend and I truly think I had the only real 69Z on the entire grounds.

There was one other 69Z there, nicely restored but many incorrect details. What got my attention was the claim that it was the very first prototype 69Z built serial number 500003 with this huge sign made up for display. So I had to look closer.
First thing I noticed was the data plate removed with 2 holes left in the firewall. It also had a complete ZL2 hood setup on it and we all know from this discussion, the hoods didn't hit production until very late December, and Z/28's were well into production by that point in time, so a prototype couldn't possibly have it? The rear stripes were done incorrectly, console with gauges and no clock in the dash, chrome gills in the quarters but no style trim anywhere else?? Nice car, Hugger Orange with black stripes, but a Z prototype?
Maybe someone here knows the car or that serial number has been tossed around here in the past? Maybe I'm wrong about it but it had a lot of red flags to make me a believer. Is there more to the story??

[enio45]

was that larry christensen's car that you were looking at? Did he not uncover and restore the z prototype? I have not seen the car, but have talked to Larry about it....same car?

[Stefano]

What is believed to be the 1969 Z28 Prototype was at MCACN.

[x33rs]

was that larry christensen's car that you were looking at? Did he not uncover and restore the z prototype? I have not seen the car, but have talked to Larry about it....same car?

I know Larry, he always has some kind of interesting 69 Camaro. I don't know if this one was his or not. There was a guy sitting next to it but he looked nothing like Larry, maybe a friend?

I'd like to hear more of the story but at first glance, there were a lot of things off cue about it to make me believe the story. The ZL2 hood was a biggy and anytime the data tag is missing or tampered with, I'm a skeptic.

[x33rs]

What is believed to be the 1969 Z28 Prototype was at MCACN.

So in other words, the Orange 500003 serial number Camaro touted as the prototype Z isn't it?

I know William would know more about this. I seem to remember William and I talked about a Prototype Z that the owner of D and R Classics owned at the time and was waiting for restoration.

William please correct me if I'm thinking of a different car, my memory is fuzzy on the details.

[ssl78]

Larry bought Steves pro type Z from D&R

[x33rs]

Ah okay, so maybe same car? Cool.

Hopefully William could shed some light on this then and maybe explain the oddities I was seeing that I mentioned earlier.

[Steve Shauger]

was that larry christensen's car that you were looking at? Did he not uncover and restore the z prototype? I have not seen the car, but have talked to Larry about it....same car?

Hi Eddie,

I heard Larry's car came away with an award. He also had the car at MCACN last year.

[William]

'Pilot' cars were built on the line using mostly production parts. N500003 was an engineering car, built up out of a '68 body and some hand-fabricated parts including the instrument cluster and trunk floor. Intake manifold had a stamped casting number. Since it was never in production, there was no body tag. All bets are off; anything could have been done.

There are two photos of it in the October '68 Motor Trend. In those days, magazine lead time was about 90 days so the photos were probably taken late June '68. In both, the car has a ducted hood. Since it virtually had to have been built with panels off of production tooling, entirely possible the hood tooling was done at the same time. Hard to say for certain but in the photos it appears to have 15 x 6 wheels.

I had the opportunity to examine N500003 at D & R a few years ago. Very interesting car. Engine is stamped V0615DZ; VIN hand-stamped by the oil filter. Probably done later on after it was assigned a VIN and very surprisingly sold. Those were the days!

[Carleen]

There was fiberglass ZL2 Hood already in 68 for the Cross Ram intake.

[x33rs]

'Pilot' cars were built on the line using mostly production parts. N500003 was an engineering car, built up out of a '68 body and some hand-fabricated parts including the instrument cluster and trunk floor. Intake manifold had a stamped casting number. Since it was never in production, there was no body tag. All bets are off; anything could have been done.

There are two photos of it in the October '68 Motor Trend. In those days, magazine lead time was about 90 days so the photos were probably taken late June '68. In both, the car has a ducted hood. Since it virtually had to have been built with panels off of production tooling, entirely possible the hood tooling was done at the same time. Hard to say for certain but in the photos it appears to have 15 x 6 wheels.

I had the opportunity to examine N500003 at D & R a few years ago. Very interesting car. Engine is stamped V0615DZ; VIN hand-stamped by the oil filter. Probably done later on after it was assigned a VIN and very surprisingly sold. Those were the days!


Thanks for that William, I knew you'd be the guy to shed light on that :biggthumpup:

[Xplantdad]

From this past weekend at Goodguys Scottsdale (from the pics in the Lounge area)


Larry Christiansen's Pilot 1969 Z28

https://www.yenko.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=179107&d=1606014924

https://www.yenko.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=179108&d=1606014924

https://www.yenko.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=179109&d=1606014924

[x33rs]

Not to be picky, but trying to learn.

Some things still a little fuzzy.

So this car having a steel cowl hood with pics of it around late June of 68. We know the press release for the hood wasn't until November 25th of 68, and didn't hit production until December 27th of 68.

Any reason why the hood wasn't used sooner? Or is the first known Camaro with ducted hood on December 27th all the data we have?

If this is the case, then the whole hood dilemma on the car that was originally in question I suppose now doesn't hold much weight.

Also wouldn't this Z have an earlier style smog tube on the driver side since it was built in June of 68? Any early engine pics? I would have also expected to see the reverse polarity battery with the ground wire on the core support rather than the fender that the early 69's had.
Were there some liberties taken during the restoration?

Just trying to understand it more. There were a lot of oddities on the car that weren't really explained with the brief description on the sign, leading to skepticism.

[Lee Stewart]

https://i.postimg.cc/25chLNjz/33.jpg (https://postimg.cc/PLDP0c8c)

When was the Cowl Hood added to the Estes 1968 Z/28 convertible?

[x33rs]

Hmm, That one Lee gives me the impression it might be a fiberglass version? Just the bow in the center makes me wonder.

[Lee Stewart]

https://images2.imgbox.com/81/6a/Za0tvsuJ_o.jpg (https://imgbox.com/Za0tvsuJ)

https://i.postimg.cc/Qxy2mH65/Camaro-Museum-Z28-1968-21.jpg (https://postimages.org/)

[Steve Shauger]

https://i.postimg.cc/25chLNjz/33.jpg (https://postimg.cc/PLDP0c8c)

When was the Cowl Hood added to the Estes 1968 Z/28 convertible?

It was configured for Pete Estes with many unique racing components installed by engineering :crossram, cowl hood, JL 8 brakes. They were removed when it was sold to a GM employee. When Al Maynard purchased the car he reinstalled those components to make it identical to how it was delivered to Pete Estes.

[olredalert]

It was configured for Pete Estes with many unique racing components installed by engineering :crossram, cowl hood, JL 8 brakes. They were removed when it was sold to a GM employee. When Al Maynard purchased the car he reinstalled those components to make it identical to how it was delivered to Pete Estes.

----I hope everybody onboard knows the impact of Al Maynard on both Detroit and all gearheads all over the place. He was a really cool guy and a good friend (RIP)......Bill S

[1967Z28]

These original pictures of the car show it had a single four barrel intake and carb with a custom cross ram air cleaner on top. Are you really going to send your GM out to drive around town in a temperamental cross ram car? I find that very doubtful.

[x33rs]

It appears my hunch was right, even though that pic is black and white and a little fuzzy, it appears the hood springs are missing and it has a ratchet style prop rod you see on Corvettes from the period.

That's a fiberglass good. Which still leaves some unanswered questions about the steel hood dilemma.

[Stefano]

It appears my hunch was right, even though that pic is black and white and a little fuzzy, it appears the hood springs are missing and it has a ratchet style prop rod you see on Corvettes from the period.

That's a fiberglass good. Which still leaves some unanswered questions about the steel hood dilemma.

Yes, it is a Fiberglass X-Ram Hood

[Carleen]

Here is a 69 Camaro, Trim Tag is gone but the VIN number indicates that it is a 12B, 2nd week December 68, Relay for ZL2 hood is there and it also says 427 on Firewall. I know what you are thinking and what you will say, but I think the first COPO 9561 were made 2th week December 68

[William]

Can you get a pic of the area of the fuse block?