1967 Z/28

[JHS]

FOR SALE: 1967 Z/28, Butternut Yellow with black vinyl top and interior. Born-with, factory original, numbers matching and correct date coded drivetrain including MO code block, double hump heads, M21 Muncie with VIN and 12 bolt posi w/traction bar. This car is an older restoration (circa 1998) with no documents but previously owned by a sYc member, recently certified by Jerry MacNeish and is car number 170 in the Registery (per Jerry). This is a low option car that runs and drives great. Car also has the correct carburetor, distributor, alternator, starter, exhaust manifolds, alum. intake, fan clutch (incorrect fan blade and a '68 Z/28 water pump), what appears to be the original Harrison radiator, WT master cylinder and early model DF 15" wheels w/repro redlines. I have misplaced the data sheet that I compiled containing all the numbers and dates but will gather the info. for serious prospective buyers. I am posting pics of the pad, which was the subject of an earlier thread posted on this site, along with some older pics but I will post/email recent ones if needed, as soon as I can figure out my http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif digital camera. Everything works except the radio. The undercarriage is clean and all pans/panels are solid. Some detailing of the undercarriage will be required as it appears that whoever did the resto did not do a concourse job in this area. I have completed the punch list compiled by Jerry except installing the correct steering wheel (which I have), the fan blade assembly ($1600+ for one on eBay a while back) and replacing the rear deck lid (currently from a '68 model).
I am not a '67 Z/28 expert nor do I play one on TV; I am representing this car as it has been represented to me by the previous owner and MacNeish and will make his report available to anyone interested. Asking price: $90000.

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p22/jhs396z11/67z28/BYlrearweb1.jpg

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p22/jhs396z11/67z28/tn_Z28PAD2.jpg

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p22/jhs396z11/67z28/tn_Z28FRONT.jpg

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p22/jhs396z11/67z28/tn_z28VINTAG.jpg

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p22/jhs396z11/67z28/tn_Z28TRACTBAR.jpg

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p22/jhs396z11/67z28/tn_BYdashweb1.jpg

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p22/jhs396z11/67z28/tn_Z28ENGINE1.jpg

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p22/jhs396z11/67z28/tn_Z28COWLTAG.jpg

[92646]

I know I am going to pay for this comment. What a beautiful car. Do you need a 1969 SS RS Camaro with a 540 to keep the Chevelle company?
Mark Sheppard

[Zedder]

Good luck with the sale Joe! To be honest, I am very tempted to buy the car back given what I am seeing for sale for $90K these days - and especially since it has the original motor! Someone can enjoy this car as is for a number of years and still be OK after a freshening if they wanted http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[Belair62]

[ QUOTE ]
I am not a '67 Z/28 expert nor do I play one on TV

[/ QUOTE ] http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/haha.gif ...I think it looks excellent in Butternut too.

[Hotrodpaul]

Am I seeing that right. Motor V0703MO (July 3rd) Trim Tag 06E (Fifth week in June). Was the motor built after the body???

Paul

[427king]

The M and the O are at different angles,and at different heights than the V0703 and also to each other ,were the 67 Zs engine suffix hand stamped ??

[JHS]

[ QUOTE ]
Am I seeing that right. Motor V0703MO (July 3rd) Trim Tag 06E (Fifth week in June). Was the motor built after the body???

According to MacNeish, this is correct and not uncommon, I had the same question. The pad stamping has been looked at by numerous, knowledgeable people and determined correct. As I said, this pad was the subject of a thread a few months ago when someone interested in the car posted a copy on the site, asking the same questions as 427king did.


Paul

[/ QUOTE ]

[Zedder]

There are numerous examples of the engine suffix being uneven with '67 Z's. In fact, I can't say that I have ever seen a real stamping that wasn't a little off. Jerry's book shows a couple of examples...

[JHS]

[ QUOTE ]
I know I am going to pay for this comment. What a beautiful car. Do you need a 1969 SS RS Camaro with a 540 to keep the Chevelle company?
Mark Sheppard

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks Mark for the offer but I am trying to divest myself of a few vehicles and the Z is beautiful but it does not fit in with my SS BB collection. I already have a '70 RS/SS L78 Camaro under resto.

[Stefano]

Can someone post the prior stamp thread mentioned? Any known reason why the vin tag has a std pop rivet.

Looks like a cool car.


Thanks,

[Zedder]

Numerous examples of mixed rivets exist...the 10,000 mile unrestored '67 L78 that was discussed on this site a while ago has one standard and one rosette rivit also.

[JHS]

Stefano,
I do not remeber which forum the previous thread was posted nor have I EVER had any luck searching the forums for previous topics! I did print the old thread and have it at home so will see if I can determine when/where the posting occured. I do have some recent pics of underneath, trunk and engine compartment if anyone wants more posted. I do not have a lift so underneath is hit and miss as far as quality.

[SS427]

Stefano,
Can you be more specific what previous thead you are looking for? I will see if I can find it.
Rick

[JHS]

Stefano does not know anymore about the previous post, he is asking based on a comment I made in my sales ad. I can't remember which forum or when the previous post was made but I believe a member named Alan was inquiring about the pad. Zedder may know more as well. I do have a hard copy of the discussion at home and will try to determine more about it. Thanks for your offer to assist.

[Stefano]

Yeah that's it. I just wanted to read the discussion mentioned I don't recall when it took place or under which thread?

[JHS]

Here are updated pics taken on 10/31 while trying to avoid the trick-or-treaters:

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p22/jhs396z11/67z28/tn_DSCN0811.jpg

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p22/jhs396z11/67z28/tn_DSCN0813.jpg

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p22/jhs396z11/67z28/tn_DSCN0821.jpg

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p22/jhs396z11/67z28/tn_DSCN0830.jpg

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p22/jhs396z11/67z28/tn_DSCN0827.jpg

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p22/jhs396z11/67z28/tn_DSCN0828.jpg

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p22/jhs396z11/67z28/tn_DSCN0824.jpg

[YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY]

Can I have the guard dog? http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[JHS]

[ QUOTE ]
Can I have the guard dog? http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

He would just bite you, as he does me and I have had him 12 years...

[JHS]

[ QUOTE ]
Can someone post the prior stamp thread mentioned? Any known reason why the vin tag has a std pop rivet.

Looks like a cool car.


Thanks,

[/ QUOTE ]

The previous post was made by quick-bowtie on 2/24/06, I am attempting to post the link

link to pad stamping post (http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB1&Number=193001&Searchp age=1&Main=193001&Words=need+help+re-stamp++original%5C%3F&topic=&Search=true#Post19300 1)

[Rick H]

I don't get the date stamp. How can that be correct? Just asking.

The motor build date doesn't even fall into the last week of June, 1967. The 3rd of July in 1967 was on a Monday and would have placed the engine build date in 07A. The VIN on the car falls in with the cowl tag of 06E . There were 5 weeks in June with Friday being June 30. Even if the week ended on Sunday, that was July 2nd. Last I knew the week didn't end on a Monday.http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif

What makes it even more confusing is the VIN is a few thousand before the end of the June month VIN. Add in the fact the M and O look out of whack and more http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif


These cars whether a Z or not all rolled down the same assembly line did they not? Was a motor not available when this one came down the line until the following week?? http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

The car is still nice regardless.

Rick H.

[Zedder]

Read this for your answers...assume that the body build at Fisher was started late in the Day Friday June 30th and it will all make sense to you...

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

[Pacecarjeff]

Not sure how an engine could be assembled at Flint, after the car was built at Norwood?
Don't really understand that part, but the MO part is how they did it.

The MO is the only part of the stamp pad that I really like...
I would like to see a close up of the VIN that is stamped on the trans?

Very Nice car. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/worship.gif


Here is a picture of a untouched pad from a 67 SS350
Sold this car last year, was absolutely the original engine.
http://www.broachbuster.com/12df4770.jpg

[Rick H]

With a VIN of 247737 and a final VIN in June of apprx 251048 I don't see this car beng built on June 30th. Especially with a production of 912 cars a day at a plant that only produced Camaros.

251048-247737=3311/912=3.63days before June 30th.

Puts it about the middle of the day the 27th of June. Almost a full week before the engine was made?????

So yes, that answers my question.

Rick H.

[Rick H]

[ QUOTE ]
Here is a picture of a untouched pad from a 67 SS350
Sold this car last year, was absolutely the original engine.
http://www.broachbuster.com/12df4770.jpg

[/ QUOTE ]

Now that VIN and engine stamp works. VIN is first week of June with an end of May engine stamp. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggthumpup.gif

Rick H.

[Pacecarjeff]

I actually like the 7N247 and I like the V07 MO
Not sure about that other stuff - is the pad completly flat?

Beautiful Car http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/worship.gif

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p22/jhs396z11/67z28/tn_Z28PAD2.jpg

[Zedder]

Hey Joe...rather than wallow in the mud, I'll go with my understanding of '67 Z's and Jerry MacNeish's certification and gladly give you what you paid me for the car last October http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/naughty.gif

This is a very nice, driveable '67 Z guys...someone should pick her up!!!

[Pacecarjeff]

Legally speaking, that is all a seller is responsible for.
Refunding the original purchase price.
I am sure last october this car was sold for "all the money".

What does Jerry's certification say about the stamp pad?
Does he certify this stamp pad as being the original? I wouldn't think so.

No doubt in my mind at all - this is a genuine 1967 Z/28, with a real MO 302 engine.
It is a gorgeous car, that anyone would be very lucky to own. I would like to myself.

I just can't see this engine starting life in this car.
Especially since the engine post-dates the car. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

[1967Z28]

I work with Jerry on the '67 Z28 Registry and also with the CRG group. When you gather enough data, you see that 06E is a oddball build week that ran longer than usual for some reason. We have seen this with other months and in other years. There are very few 07A '67 Norwood cars. There are at least 7 06E-built '67 Z-28s with engine stampings in July. The latest 06E car has an V0706MO engine in it. I understand the initial skepticism but it is unwarranted. This car is a nice, legitimate '67 Z-28.

-Jon

[Pacecarjeff]

Hey Jon,
Based on your professional experience, are you certifying that this engine stamp as THE original born with stamping?
Or, are you just saying the original engine was stamped this way, and this was possible?

We all know this is a nice legitimate 1967 Z/28 - NO QUESTION.
I am asking you directly: In your professional opinion - from working with the Z/28 registry, and the CRG.
IS THIS THE ORIGINAL ENGINE AND VIN STAMPING?

Would really like to hear this from the CRG.
I really like the car, this is just a real weird one???
We all know that anything was possible, but is this a true example?

[1967Z28]

I'm not a certified appraiser. I guess my opinion should carry no more weight than the next guy but this block pad looks legit to me based on many others that I have seen over the years. That is just my 2 cents worth, which is maybe all it's worth.

-Jon

[427king]

I dont think anyone would touch that subject or give thier guarantee.I cant really blame them. Im sure any appraiser will have plenty of clauses in his inspection clearing him of any errors or misjudgements.Alot of what is stated would be based on "experience" and similar cars and criteria,not on written guarantees. Alot of people use to assume that since a corvette got a top flight, that the ncrs was verifying the engines as being original. They may not deduct any points for a stamp pad on the judging form , but they would never guarantee they were right either,which is being realistic

[Zedder]

Jon, thanks for giving your opinion and sharing some of the info that you and Jerry have collected over the years. I too can understand the questions, I just hate to see people infer that the engine is a restamp without having the experience with '67 Z's to make that judgement or having seen the car in person. Everyone has to remember that these were very low production car and odd things are seen with them all of the time. Maybe they ran short of engines in 06E or something to cause a delay for a few days??? Here is a better pic of the pad that my inspector took prior to my purchase. For what it's worth, he is an NCRS master judge and used one of Jeff's broach busters for viewing the pad. He then took this high res pic with a macro setting. This pad is beautiful!!!

[Jeff H]

Great information on the 06E week Jon. I've heard of the problems with the 06A week with the 69 Camaros and how many cars have later dated engines. But I had not heard about the 67 06E week. It almost sounds like they left the trim tag stamp 06E on into the 1st week of July.

[YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY]

This doesn't surprise me, don't we see the same situation with other years of cars built in June? Aren't the rears of June of '69 Yenko Camaro's built after the scheduled build week on the TT? The deuces have this situation as well, and have the vin/body #'s in reverse in some weeks. So, once you've gathered enough data on a particular car's build range you will recognize patterns - even strange ones! Nice work Jon http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggthumpup.gif

[Pacecarjeff]

The second pad picture is actually much better then the other one. Even the pad surface looks better.
Yes, it is very hard to tell without seeing it in person.

I WILL NOT call it a restamp, it is just very strange.
If you guys say that an engine later then the build date is typical for that time period,
then I will have to defer to the experts.
Sorry, I just have never heard of such a thing.

It is very very unusual, but I am always willing to listen and learn.

Like I said before, that Z is gorgeous.
If I had room for another, I would seriously be considering it. And that price seems like a deal.

Good luck with the sale.

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

[YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY]

80% of Deuces built in 06B have their rears dated later than the scheduled build date on their trim tag http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif It happens!

[Pacecarjeff]

If you say it happened, I will believe it.
Just can't imagine GM building a car, then letting it sit around waiting for the rest of the parts to show up the following week.

Just doesn't make sense.
There must have been a lot of 1/2 built bodies sitting around waiting in June 67.

What about the rest of the engine componets - how are they dated? Alt, Carb, dist.
http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

[Rick H]

[ QUOTE ]
I just hate to see people infer that the engine is a restamp without having the experience with '67 Z's to make that judgement or having seen the car in person.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never used the word "restamp". I am just questioning how a car built in one week can have a motor built the following week. Plus just because it's a Z/28 in my mind doesn't matter. It was ordered just like all the other Camaros and rolled down the same assembly line.

Plus you can speculate all you want but the truth of the matter is that unless there is substantial paperwork to support the later motor the car will always be suspect. It's just a fact.

Other then that the car is extremely nice.

Rick H.

[Jeff H]

[ QUOTE ]
If you say it happened, I will believe it.
Just can't imagine GM building a car, then letting it sit around waiting for the rest of the parts to show up the following week.

Just doesn't make sense.
There must have been a lot of 1/2 built bodies sitting around waiting in June 67.

What about the rest of the engine componets - how are they dated? Alt, Carb, dist.
http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Jeff, you're reading it wrong. The trim tags were stamped wrong so it looks like they were being built the last week of June when they really weren't started until the first week in July. Somebody probably forgot to change the stamps for the trim tag. Look at the 69 Camaros with 06A (almost all of June was stamped 06A but most cars were built later in the month) and the 69 Camaros with 04L on the trim tag. CRG should have better examples of these situations, but I don't think it's an issue of the car being built and then sitting and waiting for components.

[Zedder]

"Plus you can speculate all you want but the truth of the matter is that unless there is substantial paperwork to support the later motor the car will always be suspect. It's just a fact."

Actually, it's not suspect to anyone that I know that "knows" '67 Z-28's, but I can understand those without significant knowledge regarding these cars having questions.

[William]

The '67 Z/28 I was involved with years ago had a V0706MO engine stamp, 06E body.

Protect-o-plate, 2 owners, absolutely original drivetrain.

[Rick H]

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, it's not suspect to anyone that I know that "knows" '67 Z-28's, but I can understand those without significant knowledge regarding these cars having questions.



[/ QUOTE ]

So, you're saying that I and a few others don't have enough knowledge to question these car? Hmmmmmm. Alrighty then.

Rick H.

[YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY]

Or.... If you had more knowledge, you wouldn't be questioning.....

[Kim_Howie]

I'm going to get the popcornnnn. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/naughty.gif

[Rick H]

[ QUOTE ]
Or.... If you had more knowledge, you wouldn't be questioning.....

[/ QUOTE ]

Back at ya!

Rick H.

[Don_Lightfoot]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm going to get the popcornnnn. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/naughty.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
I'll take mine with butter if you please.

Good idea for people to save this entire thread for future reference. I know nothing about the Jun/Jul scenarios being explained here and those explanations seem to come across quite valid. However, five years from now, if I was looking at this car, and willing to pay "matching number" dollars for it, the conflicting dates would certainly throw up a red flag. Nothing much you can do except have evidence on file similar to what this thread is bringing out and hopefully potential purchasers will not dispute it.

[YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Or.... If you had more knowledge, you wouldn't be questioning.....

[/ QUOTE ]

Back at ya!

Rick H.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not the one doing the questioning, http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif

[Stefano]

Thanks great info, I know I learned a few things from this thread.

[67L78conv]

Just one more to chime in. It is always safer to question than to assume to much.

In the case of this car and a few others that I have on record it looks very much like there was a shortage of a particular part, could be the MO engine, that held this car on the line longer than it should have been. Based on the body number sequence to the vin number this car and at least one other I have record of were both held for a number of days counting the weekend. This hold over number is based on several cars on record that are within 20 build numbers away, taking their final vin numbers and subtracting from this cars vin number, divide.... This is not a common thing but well documented on high performance and rare option cars from several years where parts were short and the car had to be held up until they were in. The hold over of 69 Copo's where they sat waiting for a BE rear is a well known example. I've got enough cars in my own registry that I have to see and agree with Jon, not that I was questioning, 6E/7A are odd weeks with a number of peculiar things showing up.

[JHS]

As I said, I am no expert and representing the car as it was to me. The engine cast date is F297.As for what Jerry states in his certification "This Z28 Camaro coupe and drivetrain have been certified as real and authentic." Will this statement be parsed to mean that the car and drive train have been certified, seperately, as correct but not necessarily "born with" each other? I would hope that no licensed appraiser specializing in these cars would be that ambigious or evasive. I appreciate the discussion and have learned a lot. I am sticking with my belief that the car is real and if no one buys it then I guess I will just be "stuck" with a car that they only made 602 of and, as I was told, only approx. 169 are documented as still on the road; for all of the vultures circling, that is just a number I heard and I did not have sex with that woman...

[427king]

[ QUOTE ]
they only made 602 of and, as I was told, only approx. 169 are documented as still on the road

[/ QUOTE ]
Based on the usual lack of docs for 67 camaros in general [buildsheets etc] id say 170 documented on the road out of 602 made seems like a rather large percentage,especially given that the vast majority of those cars werent grocery getters. Im curious as to what criteria was used to document the other 169.......If my numbers are accurate they made around 225[roughly] 427 COPO Chevelles,which had the luxury of having 1 2 or 3 buildsheets in each car and cars from canada, and there are only around 20 or so documented last i heard. Furthermore the vins of the yenko chevelles are known, and they havent found 30% of those.

[Jonesy]

Last I heard there was about 195 of 602 found to date.

[Kurt S]

I've had several people ask me to comment. I'll keep it simple since Jon and Bill covered most of it.
Dates all line up fine. Car was built / finished ~7/06/67, if that helps clear it up.
And, IMO, block stamp is fine.

[JHS]

[ QUOTE ]
I've had several people ask me to comment. I'll keep it simple since Jon and Bill covered most of it.
Dates all line up fine. Car was built / finished ~7/06/67, if that helps clear it up.
And, IMO, block stamp is fine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the confirmation. I do believe the car to be original and the engine stamping correct along with all the other components. I have held my comments to a minimum as I do not want to end up in the same situation as 427RCODE in a recent thread. Skepticism is fine and there is nothing more I can say or do to change anyone's mind (ZEDDER, your pm box is full). I have every confidence that this car is correct and has the born-with drivetrain, thus my comment about being "stuck" with it if I do not sell it; I put it in quotes to indicate that I will be glad to keep it as it is, in my and other people's opinion, a matching numbers car, it just does not fit in to my collection of BB cars. Nuff said...

[Pacecarjeff]

If I could offer a suggestion...
Can someone from the CRG write Joe a letter? http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

No guarantees, just something simple like:
"Dear sir, According to our research... Here is what happened in June of 1967".
If this is truly a verified, and documented anomaly -
then someone needs to put it down in writing. (not a former owner- no offense)

I would imagine, that EVERY single time that this car hits the market,
these same exact questions are going to be asked.
100 years from now when we are all gone,
someone is still going to ask the same questions again, and again.
Unless maybe they find those shipping documents by then. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
Just my opinion, but that would certainly help this beautiful car in the future. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif
With this stuff docummented, this Z can always reach it's full potential.

To be perfectly honest, even if this car HAD a replacement engine, (which it doesn't seem to have).
I think it still is worth the asking price.

[JHS]

A letter from CRG would be great, how would I proceed? I hired MacNeish to certify the car in an attempt to make up for the lack of documentation. When I asked him about the engine assembly date being after the 06E cowl tag date, he said he expected to see that apparent discrepency and did not give it a second thought, so I did not either. I guess I just wasted my money having him certify the car??? I am not going to manufacture paperwork so all I could do is post pics and tell it like I know it. I mentioned the former owner because I believe what he told me to be true as he is a stand up guy and most of you know him and his reputation. Now, I promise I will bow out...

[Zedder]

Sorry Joe, I just emptied my PM Box http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif I think the CRG guys who have spoken up have eliminated any doubts that most would have about this car and given Jerry's "professional" opinion also, I wouldn't lose any sleep about the car's pedigree. Frankly, anyone who is serious about a '67 Z usually contacts one of a handful of guys who follow these cars closely and asks for an opinion. Those in the know would not hesitate to endorse the car based on the dates, engine pad and trim tag - I wouldn't have bought it myself it this wasn't the case. My opinion as to why the car isn't selling quickly is simply that the market for anything about $65K or more is very soft right now compared to this time last year. Look at Quick Bow-Tie's '70 L78 Chevelle that only went for $69K. I was very interested in that car and would have probably paid $75K for it last year, but I bowed out at $65K for fear that a correction was happening and I didn't want to be upside down. Obviously, "the market" had similar concerns given what it sold for. Cars over $65K will sell, but they will take longer to find the "right" buyer - especially as we go into the winter. I'd put the car on ebay with a copy of Jerry's report and get it more exposure. I'd also put it on Team Camaro. Good luck with the sale!

[TDW]

I don't think you wasted any money with MacNeish. I think his certs carry a lot of wieght with a car.

[Stefano]

I didn't take any pics of the pad stamp on the Blue low mile '67 Z which sold at Mecum. Did anyone else?

[Zedder]

When I was going to buy that 7K mile car in 2002 or 2003, the original motor was not in the car but the owner (an engine builder) claimed to have the original motor in a bag. I requested video and pics of the car which I got, but again without anything on the original motor. I again asked specifically for shots of the engine pad...and the car was sold to someone else. The car was a drag car since new.

[Rick H]

[ QUOTE ]
the original motor was not in the car but the owner (an engine builder) claimed to have the original motor in a bag.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe it was on 06E car and he had Santa Claus bring him the engine for Christmas. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eek.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Rick H.

p.s. for you guys with no sense of humor, that's a joke.

[Kurt S]

[ QUOTE ]
If I could offer a suggestion...
Can someone from the CRG write Joe a letter? http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif


[/ QUOTE ]
That's not something that CRG does or wants to do. That's a slippery slope....
If the owner or buyer wants a certified opinion they should contact a professional like Jerry.

[Pacecarjeff]

[ QUOTE ]

That's not something that CRG does or wants to do. That's a slippery slope....
If the owner or buyer wants a certified opinion they should contact a professional like Jerry.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I would imagine it would be.
Has this anomaly been documented on the CRG site?
Maybe a blurb somewhere, telling the story about the June 67 cars -
seems like there should be a bunch of examples.

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

[Jerry@CHP]

Hey Guys,

Just wanted to chime in here. Jon, Kurt and Bill have basically covered all of the issues with this 1967 Z28. This car is real and the stampings are real and original to the car. I have many other original engine stampings that match this one.

Jon and I have been working together now for about 18 years. I started the 1967 Z28 registry in 1988 and Jon Mello joined in to help me with the registry that same year. Over the past 18 years, we have learned a lot and know about many of the production trends with these cars. Many of the cars built in an "E" month, 06E, 03E, etc are usually built during the first week of the next month. In the past, I have done seminars on this topic at the Camaro Nationals explaining this trend in great detail.

During the early 1990's GM of Canada supplied me with most of the 1967 Canadian paperwork for our research. It was during this time that we noticed vin numbers with an 06E trim tag build date were actually assembled during the first week of the next month. GM of Canada gives you the actual assembly date of the vehicle. This information was very important to our research and has helped us break the codes on many drive train issues.

The car that Joe has for sale is a steal at this price. It's a very nice car that needed some minor TLC, and to my knowledge, Joe has taken care of many of these issues.

Thanks,

Jerry@CHP

[427king]

Im posting here because the motor questions came up in this thread,im not speaking of this 67Z in particular. My question is for ANY car that is inspected and "certified" by anyone that offers that service. I cant see anyone stating as fact, the originality of a motor with 100% certainty,whether the car has factory paperwork or not.There are many factory unstamped motors w perfect factory broach marks out there in the market,and anything can be properly duplicated to match any car out there. Saying a motor in someones qualified opinion is consistant with others that have been inspected,broach marks appear correct, etc is fine and is normally the type of language used in most inpection processes whether it be cars or baseball signatures,etc. Stating that a motor is guaranteed the original for the car in my opinion is not being realistic.

[69motion]

Chuck i agree i own a few unstamped orig 512 351 blocks ect done right no one could tell

[Zedder]

427King...I have to ask...based on your last post, how do you guarantee the motors you sell are not restamped like in this ad? "Factory MN motors for sale, all are rebuilt,3 have fresh ZERO miles one has 100 miles or so.All are intake to pan w dated 840s. All are original pad stampings. Have the following TO128MN TO512MN TO521MN TO528MN....Remember there are NO restamped ,reground motors here.$18500.00 youre choice,offers accepted ". Please understand I am not accusing you of restamping and my guess is that you have seen enough motors to know a real stamping when you see one, it just seems to contradict the comments you just made concerning appraisers???

I used to own the Z in this post and based on the number of real Z stampings that I have seen and the info that has been shared regarding these cars, I confidently sold it as having the original motor and have no second thoughts about it.

[Rick H]

Oh boy. Anybody got any popcorn left? Kim?

Rick H.

[Zedder]

There is no need for popcorn. I simply wonder how he feels comfortable making guarantees given everything that has been discussed here. He may just feel comfortable enough with his own knowledge and be prepared to refund monies for anything that slips by him some how. No big deal really as I have never heard anyone say that they have bought a restamped part from him and he has sold more hi-po chevy parts than anyone that I know! So there is no need to take offence or to sit and wait for a train wreck http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[427king]

Thats a good point,i believe i should word the ads a little bit differently as stated above. As far as how do i guarantee them, i offer a full 100% refund if anyone disagrees with my description ,no questions asked. I also document where and who the motors came from for the next owner, and they are assured that is how i bought the motor[s]. If an appraiser is wrong in his "certification",is he responsible for the 400.00 he charged, or the 50K he cost the new buyer if it is proven the motor was restamped in 1978 for example in the above example???

[Zedder]

Thanks 427King...that is exactly what I expected and wrote the above post before reading your response. I feel the same way about the Z that I sold, if joe wants his money back I am happy to give it to him...and he has already told me that he is completely happy with the car.

[427king]

If you make a mistake in your representation of the car,you buy it back. If i make an error in my judgement, i buy it back. The difference for the "appraiser" however is that he normally charges a few hundred dollars and if his opinion is wrong he cant just offer a refund of the appraisal price, that may cost someone many 10000s if he falsely[unknowingly] documented a car. Thats why he really cant offer 100% guarantees. Remember that by saying a stamping is the original while the motor is IN A CAR , you are essentially saying the CAR is real as well .

[JHS]

Since I have no takers, does anyone know where I can get the correct fan assembly (5 blade, 4 rivet, 3.25in bolt pattern) and correct water pump for my anomoly? These items should finish up my MacNeish punch list.

I appreciate everyone's input and questions, learned quite a bit about the 67 Z as well as the thought patterns of some of the sYc members.

[Belair62]

Shoot first...ask questions later ??? http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

[Pacecarjeff]

[ QUOTE ]
Since I have no takers, does anyone know where I can get the correct fan assembly (5 blade, 4 rivet, 3.25in bolt pattern) and correct water pump for my anomoly? These items should finish up my MacNeish punch list.

I appreciate everyone's input and questions, learned quite a bit about the 67 Z as well as the thought patterns of some of the sYc members.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am sure some one will step up soon.
Give it some time - I might even be able to be convinced. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Why spend more on it, if you are trying to sell it?
Then you will have to ask $93K.

Or - are you taking it off the market?
IMO, Let the new owner find those things. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

[JHS]

[ QUOTE ]
... Why spend more on it, if you are trying to sell it?
Then you will have to ask $93K.

Or - are you taking it off the market?
IMO, Let the new owner find those things. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

I am too anal when it comes to these sort of things; if I can find the part I need, I will buy it, can only add value to the car. As I do not NEED to sell it I will continue to attempt to "add value", no matter what car I have, isn't that the whole point of the hobby? Only a flipper would remain satisfied with something less than correct, within reason of course and, no, I am not taking a stab at anyone that flips cars.

[enio45]

Okkkk, Charlie...do you have another fan??

[af1fe]

Joe,
Well said. What an adventure the road trip up to your house with Jerry was. Nothing like getting stuck in Atlanta traffic at rush hour with the outside temperature at 95 degrees! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[JHS]

[ QUOTE ]
Joe,
Well said. What an adventure the road trip up to your house with Jerry was. Nothing like getting stuck in Atlanta traffic at rush hour with the outside temperature at 95 degrees! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Enjoyed meeting both you and Jerry and, yes, the ATL traffic i something to avoid at all costs!!