Camaro History On Display Tomorrow Evening

[70 copo]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TAR6569</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Charley Lillard</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm not sure why or if GM is scratching their heads. It's a neat car but I personally can think of alot of Camaro's I would rather own. With it's appearance at the Barrett-Jackson showroom it has the feel of a marketing effort. Will we see it at a future Barrett-Jackson auction ? </div></div>

I'm confused too. When was this car bashed, the research about it bashed or it's credibility attacked? Asking questions about the car and it's history is bashing it? I think it is a way to learn more about it. As a result of some of the questions asked, the website about the car now has some new and interesting information, which people can learn about. Also, how has the hobby been quiet about the car? The car has been displayed at several shows and people have come to see it. I agree with Charley in that it's a 6cyl so how many people are going to be extremely interested in it? I would think only those that are truly interested in the research aspect of the hobby. As a fullsize guy, if someone found a 65 Biscayne four door 6cyl with vin #1, I'd be all over it but most people would pass it by even if it was #1. It's a 6cyl four door so it's a minimal interest vehicle for most people. And I'd be extremely happy to have many questions asked about the car as have been asked about the #1 Camaro. It shows there is an interest in learning more about the process and I enjoy researching that kind of stuff.

If the people at GM are sharp and have been following the discussions about this car as you say, then they will see that no one has set out to diminish this car in any way. </div></div>

Warren

Chumming the water with bait for the CRG is getting a bit old. You are the same guy that jumped feet first into another thread about this car at team camaro where you misinterpreted data on production I had supplied you and made a claim that my book was wrong which I promptly and completely refuted.
These types of replies where the topic gets obviously partisan need to go to a PM first. When they do not this is how they end up. Messy.

[Charley Lillard]

Play nice everyone.

[iluv69s]

Well said Warren. But if I recall, there was definitely doubt, atleast in the beginning, about the car being the actual first car..don't know if that is negativity??? This is a very skeptical crowd..myself included..for good reason at this point.

But at least in my mind, this is THE first camaro and a neat peice of history..and I am grateful it and it's history have been saved and displayed for the world to appreciate !!

[TAR6569]

My post was not meant to bring the CRG into the discussion.

&quot;Would the result have been the same if I started to name all the forums where the car was bashed where the research was bashed where credibility was attacked?&quot;

You mentioned in your post above, the car/research/credibility being bashed/attacked in other forums and in my opinion, it was not. Just my opinion here from what I observed. I would hope GM does not see it that way and I'm not sure why they would. The discussion pertaining <span style="text-decoration: underline">specifically</span> to questions about the #1 Pilot Camaro has resulted in new and helpful information being posted to the website.

And we cleared up that part about the production figures/book a few months ago. It was the way it was worded that made it a little confusing. As you mentioned, &quot;we were both correct kind of...&quot; I'm good on that front.

[TAR6569]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: iluv69s</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well said Warren. But if I recall, there was definitely doubt, atleast in the beginning, about the car being the actual first car..don't know if that is negativity??? This is a very skeptical crowd..myself included..for good reason at this point.

But at least in my mind, this is THE first camaro and a neat peice of history..and I am grateful it and it's history have been saved and displayed for the world to appreciate !! </div></div>

Thanks! Yeah, I remember people were wondering if it was the first built when it popped up on ebay and was subsequently bought to be restored. It is/was definitely a legit question. It's the FIRST Camaro by vin so naturally there are going be lots of questions (and a skeptical crowd). But that's what this hobby is all about. You ask the questions, they get researched and the results/answers get shared with the hobby so everyone learns something new. That's why I started a fullsize Chevy website. I love answering research questions about the fullsize cars. There is no stupid question in my book. And actually, I do get questions in a skeptical sense from people wondering if certain claims someone is making (about a fullsize car) are indeed true. I don't always have the answers but try my best to research the question for an answer. There is still a lot to be learned about these cars and I'm all for people learning something new. I'm looking forward to what will be discovered in the coming years.

And I agree, it's a 67 Camaro with vin #1! I'm very happy it was restored. I love the low vin, early production cars. I have the paperwork to a 67 Caprice from Southgate, 7C100001. Vin #1! The owner of the dealership that got it, knew it was a special car. (I have the notes to him from the zone office) I wish I could find that car and own it!

Warren

[Kurt S]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 70 copo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Would the result have been the same if I started to name all the forums where the car was bashed where the research was bashed where credibility was attacked? </div></div>

Warren asked a good question about what you brought up. Instead of answering it, you attack the person. ??

Please post links to &quot;where the car was bashed where the research was bashed where credibility was attacked?&quot;
I've seen some discussions, as others have noted, but no bashing.
Please post these links, we'd all like to see them and evaluate them ourselves.

[70 copo]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Kurt S</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 70 copo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Would the result have been the same if I started to name all the forums where the car was bashed where the research was bashed where credibility was attacked? </div></div>

Warren asked a good question about what you brought up. Instead of answering it, you attack the person. ??

Please post links to &quot;where the car was bashed where the research was bashed where credibility was attacked?&quot;
I've seen some discussions, as others have noted, but no bashing.
Please post these links, we'd all like to see them and evaluate them ourselves. </div></div>

Kurt,

Take this to a PM or an email please....I am confident Charley would not approve of this direction the thread is taking. We were already warned a page back to play nice and I will abide.

I do see the one sided continuing banter-as verification of the issue that I just described.

[Kurt S]

So posting links to other posts about this car would somehow be offensive?
How?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 70 copo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am confident Charley would not approve of this direction the thread is taking. </div></div>
Let's just do it the easy way.
Charley,
Do you have a problem if Phil posts links to other forums?

[70 copo]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Kurt S</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So posting links to other posts about this car would somehow be offensive?
How?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 70 copo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am confident Charley would not approve of this direction the thread is taking. </div></div>
Let's just do it the easy way.
Charley,
Do you have a problem if Phil posts links to other forums? </div></div>

For the record I am not in support of the continuation of supporting or continuing a feud as there is no win in it for any one - and it diminishes the premium standing of this forum.

Kurt believe me- we can get this done on PMs or on Email if your motive is to &quot;understand&quot; but I strongly suspect that all you want is conflict.

[Steve Shauger]

This thread has gone on long enough. I see nothing good coming out moving forward, so it is now locked.