68 RS Z 28 vert...with all the trimings...

[Mark_C]

Thats a restamped MO motor, some of the digits in the VIN is not the same as other VINs of the same time period. Same with some of the numerals in the engine code, they are more consistant with 69 characters. Damn fine job though if you don't have other stamps from the same period to compare it to it would be tough to tell.

[67rscoupe]

i had been comparing the stamping to my 67 rs motor.i could not tell any difference.by the way,i love the gashole comment!still thats one beautiful convertable.

[Mark_C]

Can't compare year to year, or even within the same year unless it is one from the same plant and it relatively close to the car your looking at since the same machine was used to stamp the VINs on engines. The VIN stamp I used to compare this one to is about 1000 cars away, and then I looked at numerous others in the same general time frame and the characters are all consistent throughout and they don't match this one. (its only a couple of digits that are different, but thats enough)

I wouldn't even attempt to call an assembly code a restamp unless I have other engines with the same assembly date and code since the assembly stamps changed every day for each specific engine type. I don't have an imageof a real MO assembled on the same date as this one, so I can only go by similarities to others in the same timeframe. This one is pretty good but is different from MO engines made around the same time. I wouldn't go to court saying the assembly code was a restamp, but could show the engine VIN stamp is one.

[jbsides]

I've been through every TC post on this subject, and someone is going to have to help me understand, I guess I must be kind of slow in the head. The whole concept of educating the masses on, "This car is a re-creation, but if this were real, here is what the documentation would look like" kind of eludes me. Why would someone go through all that trouble and expense just to help his fellow enthusiasts understand what a fake car with fake documentation looks like? I have a car I got in over my head with. Wound up being a $75KUS resto on a car worth $35KUS. Despite the fact that it is a real BB SS, there are no docs. I guess I could dummy up a POP and buildsheet like this guy, to show how it would look if I had them, despite the fact it is real. Then I could say "I have educated you."

If it looks like a duck...

JB

[Xplantdad]

That's the general consensus...he did a great job building the car....but why go through all the trouble to make it appear real?

Just the build of the car makes it cool! There's no need for the fake stamps, fake docs, etc. We already know that this goes on...so to say that he did it to prove it could be done is kind of ludicrous.

[budnate]

its more about all the correct dated stuff and whamming vins on it, think about it this way...down the road some guy buys the car and knows enough to say hey lets decode this thing, and sure as chit all the dates and casting numbers line up right, wtf???..this must be some rare car worth millions??... forever there after every new owner has to be shown old threads and educated on his ride as being built in 2007 not 1968.

it would have been fine if he didnt go so far with dated stuff on the car.

[1969z280]

This beautiful car is a 1 of Zero built. I don't think the paperwork is an issue unless you've been on another planet for the last 40 years. I'd love to own it ... because I sure wouldn't have built it ... but I'm glad he did!
Ed

[67rscoupe]

<font color="brown"> </font> so i found the other site that has all the posts on this convertable.all i can say is wow!what a nice job.alot of <font color="brown"> </font> controversy.like almost 4000 people have viewed the site just for that car.i dont know why he went to all that trouble to clone a 1 of 1 car.kind of dumb in my opinion.but i do beleive its worth over $100,000 like they said.i kinda understand what hes trying to do on educating car buffs.