1969 Camaro Special Order Paint Process

[rts]

Well said!!!
I think that said every thing needed to be said, so now hopefully we can get back to the learning and the real reason I cant stop looking at this site!!

[70 copo]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lynn</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DW31S</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Guys and gals, let's stop the mud slinging and childish rants and get back to the real reason we are united here..... it is so counterproductive to cast negative slurs to one another......this is supposed to be fun!!! </div></div>

Exactly.

Everyone just needs to take a step back here.

We need all the different sources of information, and objective looks at each source.

I greatly appreciate the input from retired workers. Likewise, the recollection of an owner AND the observation of MANY cars over the years is valuable; as is GM documentation. They are all pieces of the puzzle.

Clem can’t understand why notarized statements of events from 46 years ago doesn’t result in a “closed case”. Sadly, it doesn’t. Not because of Clem, Clem’s integrity, or any thing else having to do with someone’s honesty. Memories fade. I can’t tell you how many times I have thought something happened a certain way and was corrected by a brother, a high school friend, or whatever. I AM NOT SAYING CATEGORICALLY THAT CLEM IS WRONG.

I have seen notarized statements from owners and dealers that turned out to be absolutely false. I can’t think of ONE where I believed the person making the statement was intentionally lying. They simply made mistakes. So, we have become skeptical of the notarized statements. Does that mean all of them are useless? Not at all. They are a piece of the puzzle.

Lastly, check the ego at the door. It gets in the way. We all have something to learn. When the obvious point of a post is to prove you are right, or how much you know, you aren’t likely going to be contributing in any meaningful way.

I spend more time on this site than any other car site. Why? Because I learn from some of the best. Because NORMALLY, we can agree to disagree, or at least disagree civilly. </div></div>


Lynn,

At the risk of portraying you as someone who is trying to have it both ways, I am a bit confused.

At what point is enough eyewitness testimony enough? Just wondering since the biggest hurdle these days seems to be in reaching technical agreement on a revision to a topic when another group has a hard and fast position already established.

In this case it seems no amount of first hand evidence will convince everyone... Which then logically follows: Is there a better way to communicate new information and discoveries to the hobby in general?

[clem]

a lesson to be learned here is run the VIN thru goggle when you are looking to buy a car. if brad had done this first this whole episode would be moot as my post of the VIN was there.

[clem]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 70 copo</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lynn</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DW31S</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Guys and gals, let's stop the mud slinging and childish rants and get back to the real reason we are united here..... it is so counterproductive to cast negative slurs to one another......this is supposed to be fun!!! </div></div>

Exactly.

Everyone just needs to take a step back here.

We need all the different sources of information, and objective looks at each source.

I greatly appreciate the input from retired workers. Likewise, the recollection of an owner AND the observation of MANY cars over the years is valuable; as is GM documentation. They are all pieces of the puzzle.

Clem can’t understand why notarized statements of events from 46 years ago doesn’t result in a “closed case”. Sadly, it doesn’t. Not because of Clem, Clem’s integrity, or any thing else having to do with someone’s honesty. Memories fade. I can’t tell you how many times I have thought something happened a certain way and was corrected by a brother, a high school friend, or whatever. I AM NOT SAYING CATEGORICALLY THAT CLEM IS WRONG.

I have seen notarized statements from owners and dealers that turned out to be absolutely false. I can’t think of ONE where I believed the person making the statement was intentionally lying. They simply made mistakes. So, we have become skeptical of the notarized statements. Does that mean all of them are useless? Not at all. They are a piece of the puzzle.

Lastly, check the ego at the door. It gets in the way. We all have something to learn. When the obvious point of a post is to prove you are right, or how much you know, you aren’t likely going to be contributing in any meaningful way.

I spend more time on this site than any other car site. Why? Because I learn from some of the best. Because NORMALLY, we can agree to disagree, or at least disagree civilly. </div></div>


Lynn,

At the risk of portraying you as someone who is trying to have it both ways, I am a bit confused.

At what point is enough eyewitness testimony enough? Just wondering since the biggest hurdle these days seems to be in reaching technical agreement on a revision to a topic when another group has a hard and fast position already established.

In this case it seems no amount of first hand evidence will convince everyone... Which then logically follows: Is there a better way to communicate new information and discoveries to the hobby in general? </div></div>it is the same on all these car website. if the truth goes against common beliefs you will have a battle on your hands if there is $$$ involved.

[tom406]

Thank you for the original posting on the special order paint process as told by the workers. Awesome info that will soon be unavailable to the hobby.

I never would have guessed that with all my relatives baiting me on Facebook with opinions on trophy hunting, $15 minimum wage, and abortion that the most volatile subject in my social media would be a purple Camaro, lol [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/cry.gif[/img]

[Tenney]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: clem</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tenney</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: clem</div><div class="ubbcode-body">back in the day,1960s i drag raced alky burning Rupps.</div></div>

440? </div></div>440 nitro </div></div>

Nice!

[Rick99]

Phil,

Do you know if there was there much difference in the way special paint cars were done in Van Nuys compared to Norwood?

[70 copo]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rick99</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Phil,

Do you know if there was there much difference in the way special paint cars were done in Van Nuys compared to Norwood? </div></div>

Sorry no direct knowledge of LOS.

Anything I could offer would be speculation similar to 99% of the people posting here with opinions. I try to stick to things that I can conclusively verify with people who were on the lines or in the offices at Norwood.

I am only the messenger-who has the guts to buck the system with the truth.

[Lynn]

Phil:
I absolutely want it both ways. In fact, I want it (at least) five ways.
1. Fist hand accounts by Fisher and GM workers.
2. First hand accounts by original owners.
3. Facts as set out by unbiased researchers.
4. GM documentation on what was available or possible.
5. Contemporary photographs, such as car mags, owners pics from weddings, etc.

In addition, the CONCLUSIONS of experts who have researched thousands of cars are helpful. Doesn't mean they are always right.

I want all the evidence. No one source is infallible. I can remember in great detail the first time I saw a girl naked. But, ask me what day it was. I don't have a clue. Ask me what she was wearing 20 min. before. No idea. Now, suppose that girlfriend kept a diary, and had a dated entry of the event. Now we have another piece of the puzzle. Suppose also, that the date happened to be her brother's birthday, and there were family photos from the birthday. Now we have a third piece.

James admitted that what he had always thought was chipped in stone, was not. The revelation from the workers on the paint process for special paint cars changed his mind.

I have no idea what you mean by the following question: &quot;Is there a better way to communicate new information and discoveries to the hobby in general?&quot; Just present it. If someone doesn't want to believe it, it wouldn't matter if Moses brought it down from the mountain etched in stone. That is their problem, not yours and mine.

Just to be clear; the very first pic I saw a couple years ago of the paint under the door panel on Clem's car, I thought to myself (before I even read the thread) &quot;Wow, that car was Evening Orchid from the factory.&quot; Could I be wrong? Absolutely. Do I care if someone else disagrees with me? Not one bit.

I appreciate what you have done for this hobby. On the other hand, I appreciate what others have done coming from a different perspective. Doesn't mean one is right and one is wrong. MOST OF THE TIME, it is simply two ways of arriving at the same conclusions. For those times when they don't reach the same conclusions, I want as many facts as possible.

[Schonyenko2]

Info: no opinion. When I went to body paint tech school in 1971 we were told that GM used 4 paint jobbers Dupont Acme, R&amp;M, and Ditzler. All laquer. All the same, but slightly different. So sometimes you had factory variences. Also that made panel painting difficult without blending into the next panel.

The lighter colors like EO or Cortez silver deteriorated quickly due to UV rays. Color fade, bleaching out, cracking was very common for any of those shades especially if they spent time in direct sunlight.

It's an interesting car. The tech side discussion has been interesting.

Having worked in a factory during that time we're probably lucky the cars looked as good as they did. Lotta those guys &quot;smoked&quot; lunch.