1969 Camaro double COPO (ebay)
 

<A HREF="http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/aw-cgi/ebayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=593281964&r=0&t=0
" TARGET=_blank>http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/aw-cg...281964&r=0&t=0
</A>

Re: 1969 Camaro double COPO (ebay)
 

NEAT!

Re: 1969 Camaro double COPO (ebay)
 

I have seen a few bogus stamps. The corvette world started falling victim to counterfeiters a few years ago. I am not saying that the rear is bogus, but, it is something to think about.

Andrew

Re: 1969 Camaro double COPO (ebay)
 

OK guys - - I am WAY outta my league on this, but most stamp sequences that I have seen (Mopars and Olds) are done with a stamp fixture. When you do that, you get even spacing, and ALSO it is straight all the way across. I'm by no means a Chevy expert, but that doesn't look like it was stamped all at once. It almost looks like each letter was stamped individually ??? Am I off ??

Marlin - when you say the Nova's aren't that neat, is it because they too are not straight, or is it because they are typically a very *light* stamp, and harder to read ???

http://www.tir.com/~shattuck/be.jpg

[Edited by Casey Marks (07-16-2001 at 02:54 PM).]

Re: 1969 Camaro double COPO (ebay)
 

Looks too neat and too crisp compared to my BE. Mine has grind marks where it looks to be stamped before and then restamped with the BE twice. It appears this was done at factory and I always wondered if another rear was converted to a BE. All internals are BE, date codes match, and this was discovered in 1984, before counterfeiting became common.

Re: 1969 Camaro double COPO (ebay)
 

If you carefully read the description it says the drivetrain was missing and the correct numbered, but non-original pieces were later acquired. The stampings on the rear look pretty crisp to me compared to a few others I have seen, but I sure haven't seen them all to say one way or the other. Could be a neat car with some $$'s and time and it's documented too.

Re: 1969 Camaro double COPO (ebay)
 

I can only compare it the '70 COPO Novas that I have seen, and it is much neater, crisper, and deeper than the Novas. The Novas have a three letter code, CBW, and the 'C' is much farther away from the 'B' & 'W', might be an afterthought, single letter stamp. My 'G' for Detroit plant is not in line with the date code, and the 1 or 2 for the shift number is much farther away. Finally, the 'E' for Eaton posi traction is much lower than the one in the EBAY pic.

I am no expert either, but that BE stamping pic would make me start looking closer at the center section casting date, ect....

Will try to post COPO Nova pic tomorrow.
Marlin

Re: 1969 Camaro double COPO (ebay)
 

Casey:

Don't look at it as "out of your league" (which I don't believe you are), look at it as something you just haven't learned yet. It's good to hear how the "others" were building cars from time to time, as some of the techniques possbily cross over. By the way, that Camaro looks like a perfect candidate for the now defunct NSCA Factory Stock class, where they were allowed to run drag radials! Actually, I kind of "dig" the mini-tubs! I wonder just how big of meats you could get under there? https://www.yenko.net/ubb/smilies/images/icons/wink.gif

As for the stamping, I have ZERO idea of what it's supposed to look like, but it looks to me like the letters are in line for the most part, but they are all "cocked" a little differently. OK guys, is this what it is supposed to look like?

[Edited by Chevy454 (07-16-2001 at 04:47 PM).]

Re: 1969 Camaro double COPO (ebay)
 

Marlin:

You are correct about the width and depth of the letters. The stampings I have saw are no where near that easy to read, no matter how clean the tubes are! They have not been that deep, either, as the ones I have saw looked like with a little rubbing (or light grinding) they would vanish.

It's still a really neat car, though, no matter what! So, anyone here thinking about pulling the trigger? https://www.yenko.net/ubb/smilies/images/icons/smile.gif

Re: 1969 Camaro double COPO (ebay)
 

The pop shows rear axle code as BV0519G. Interesting.