Caveat Emptor...another repro body tag?

[William]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/115404754241?hash=item1adea8cd41:g:HTIAAOSwlLJilXk r

123379N660459

From the ad:

"Body off frame, nut and bolt restoration. Factory correct L89 396-375 hp with aluminum heads. The factory only made 311 of these cars. This one is built to correct specs using period correct driveline. The tag on the firewall has code 72 72- correct for Hugger orange, no vinyl also has X22 code indicating SS396."

Missing from the ad: clone, tribute, re-creation. Guess they didn't notice the 6-cylinder VIN.

[Mr70]

.....you had me at Volo.

[MosportGreen66]

Bad reproduction tag

[the427king]

priced at only 99K, so when the buyer eventually finds out, the defense will be it was priced well below what a real one is.

[PeteLeathersac]

'

Yet to be seen again but sporting a currently unknown Vin 1243 Tag?:mad2:
It may end up w/ another TT replacement too whether same/different # than Repop NOR 356723 Tag on it now?
:beers:
~ Pete

.

[Bill Pritchard]

Not defending Volo, but their description reads: "This one is built to correct specs using period correct driveline." To me, that deciphers as a clone.

[JMB]

I hate when that happens lol...and did they use a soldering iron rather than a rivet to install that trim tag lol...

[William]

Not defending Volo, but their description reads: "This one is built to correct specs using period correct driveline." To me, that deciphers as a clone.

Why should the average buyer have to 'decipher' a classic car description? Not only do they fail to clearly state the car is not authentic, they make a misleading statement:

"The tag on the firewall has code 72 72- correct for Hugger orange, no vinyl also has X22 code indicating SS396." The tag is a reproduction, not original to the car. The car was originally a 6-cylinder.

That statement misrepresents the car, and may induce an unsophisticated buyer to act.

[67ssmn]

the dealer knows full well the tt IS FAKE, they only care about $$$, id like to see a few of these dealers behind bars

this is the best part of the add "I, Jay Grams, take pride in personally writing the descriptions for virtually every car for about the last 30 years now. A significant amount of effort goes into fact checking"

[William]

Be sure to check out their silver Z/28 RS.

https://www.volocars.com/auto-sales/vehicles/17194/1969-chevrolet-camaro-rs-z28

[Jonesy]

I love how the Z28 has a VIN sticker on end of the door with a VIN 124379N632690 and it says the build date 07/69 which is way off. Too early of a car to have the sticker.

Was for sale at Corvette Mikes awhile back

[Jonesy]

The engine pad stamping is legit on the Z. The rear axle tube stamping also looks good. Too bad the orig tag got swapped. Probably for a color combo change.

[Jonesy]

Tag is an easy to spot early reproduction tag

[wayoutz]

Not defending Volo, but their description reads: "This one is built to correct specs using period correct driveline." To me, that deciphers as a clone.
Thats the new spin for the frame off cars without the original components.

[wayoutz]

Be sure to check out their silver Z/28 RS.

https://www.volocars.com/auto-sales/vehicles/17194/1969-chevrolet-camaro-rs-z28
LOL and that fellow says he takes pride in his listings? What s a shake down artist

[William]

Its back, now at a different dealer. Still misrepresented.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/155686003796

[Steve Shauger]

Be sure to check out their silver Z/28 RS.

https://www.volocars.com/auto-sales/vehicles/17194/1969-chevrolet-camaro-rs-z28

Yikes another train wreck ...

[TMagda]

Seller just bought it, properly represented, on BAT for $65K.

https://bringatrailer.com/listing/1969-chevrolet-camaro-261/

[William]

Nope, didn't sell. High bid was $65,500.

Still on ebay @ $94,900.

[TMagda]

You're right! I must have mixed it up with the other one. 2 original 6 cyl COPO ish clones listed at the same time and roughly bid to the same value.