Fake Trim Tag?

**Hotrodpaul** · #1 07-22-2006, 03:21 PM

Nice looking Z28. What do you think of the trim tag, real or fake?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1969-Z28-...1QQcmdZViewItem

Paul

lzdick · #2 07-22-2006, 04:32 PM

Paul,
I do not see anything questionable about the trim tag. I would very much want to see the VIN stamping in the rough casting (near the oil filter) and the hidden VIN locations on the firewall). Appears to be a very nice car. The color has what appears to be a brownish cast to it... it may be the photo or the reflection off of the macadam road. The Z/28 stripe on the trunk deck is a pet peeve of mine. It should end UNDER the spoiler and not be seen on the lip of the trunk deck and NOT go under the vinyl top. IMO, for the $$ asked, the paint issues concern me the most.

Keep us posted if you are a 'player' on this car.

Rich

**Steve Shauger** · #3 07-22-2006, 05:33 PM

Definitely fake IMO.

resto4u · #4 07-22-2006, 06:09 PM

fake tag, yes. car looks really nice though.

**COPO** · #5 07-22-2006, 06:14 PM

Looks like a repo tag, but the car still might be a legit Z/28.

**firstgenaddict** · #6 07-22-2006, 06:23 PM

Did they use the 388 block this late? I thought that the switch to 0010 occured in late March.

lzdick · #7 07-22-2006, 07:22 PM

According to Jerry M's book...

3932386 May 1968-December 1968

3956618 December 1968-April 1969

3970010 April 1969-September 1969

3932388 December 1968-September 1969. Fairly rare casting. The casting date is located next to the casting number, behind the LEFT cylinder head.

It appears that several of you know this to be a fake trim tag. Is it the 'fatter' text/characters that gives it away? I guess I'm not very good at identifying these tags. I keep comparing it to photos in Jerry M's book and the characters appear to be the only difference I can detect with my failing vision.

Rich

Jeff H · #8 07-22-2006, 07:38 PM

Repo tag for sure. I can't see the 041 heads being original either. The exhaust manifolds look wrong as well. Nice looking car but I would want a professional inspection done based on the trim tag and other items. And that d@m "Caution Fan" sticker!

**Rick H** · #9 07-22-2006, 08:28 PM

Non-bleeder repop master cylinder, lack of deep groove alternator pulley, wrong exhaust manifolds, and list goes on and on and on.

Beautiful looking car but....

Rick H.

**Lynn** · #10 07-22-2006, 08:57 PM

I have really tried to stay away from car bashing, as I don't believe that is what this site is all about, but do have some serious questions about this car, only because of how it is being represented. Others have already mentioned manifolds, stripes, MC, alt pulley etc. I know Colvin's book lists the 041 head as being POSSIBLE on a 302, just have never seen or heard of an original car that actually has them. Just like Jerry M's book lists the 170 water pump as being possible on a 302, but don't believe anyone has ever found one on an ORIGINAL car. I guess it bothers me when there are so many incorrect details, yet all of the paint marks and supposed chalk marks are put in place.

Claims to have an original build sheet. Would like to see that on a Norwood car. He could have shown at least a partial photo. Maybe my eyes are just that bad, but in the photo just above the trim tag, isn't the gap between the quarter panel and the tail panel filled in with bondo on this car? What is up with that?

Seller was asked for the casting date on the block, and avoided the answer by saying it is in the description. Are my eyes that bad? I can't find the casting date. Wouldn't it have been easier for the seller to just state the date? Why so evasive?

If the tag is a fake, it is certainly one of the better ones. Would like to hear from Mark C. or Kurt on this one.

Dedicated to the Promotion and Preservation of American Muscle Cars, Dealer built Supercars and COPO cars.