E-Bay '69 Yenko Disguised As a Z-28 Clone!

[bergy]

Marlin - I'm generally a pretty patient guy. I can't understand why you and others insist that a full rebody is well documentd by prominent people. If that's the case - why doesn't some prominent person present the case? I'm dealing in facts - the vin on the cowl is from a totaled car. This car has perfect frame rails and it is not a restored underbody. How do the prominent people explain that? I'm just a hobbiest who enjoys documenting and restoring these wonderful pieces of history. Can we just agree to leave our minds open until the research is complete? If the prominent people want to close the books on this one - please have them present real data - not platitudes.

[sYc]

Laying all emotion and opinions a side, need to look at this from the legal standpoint.

A car’s legal VIN number is what is stamped in the metal, not the VIN plate, thus you have a legit ’69 Camaro Z-clone without a title..

The stampings carry all of the weight with law enforcement, and were stamped for a very good reason, because VIN plates can be easily removed.

If the VIN does not come up in the police data base, might be able to a title for the clone Z.

Next you have a VIN plate with a title that belongs to another car, not the clone Z. At any point in time, if someone comes up with the original body with VIN stampings, they can claim the VIN tag and title because legally they own the car that the VIN tag belongs to. That is what would concern me, spending money to restore the car then lose the tag.

Most times, when a car is rebodied, the person doing the rebody owns both the donor car and the recipient car, where the only issue is the rebody, not ownership.

[bergy]

Tom - that must mean the the ZL1 (that has been discussed on this site) that has no stamp in the metal is not a legal car! I don't agree - someone did a great deal of research and proved that the body with the cut up cowl was the ZL1 car. Again, you are assuming that the "original body" is out there some where. Why do you reject the possibility of this body being the original body with a replaced cowl section without having any knowledge of this car. No one disputes the fact that the cowl stamp car was a total loss in 1982. Please understand that, if I just want a Yenko, I can certainly go out and buy one. The realy fun part of this hobby for me is the intrigue of the research. Many of you walked through that experience with me on this site (the burnish brown RS COPO). There were even some people on this site who helped me a great deal in the search. That's great community. We should cheer each other on - not reach conclusions before that facts are all in. I'm just a simple hobbiest - this isn't my living and I very seldom sell any of my cars. I don't make money on cars. I enjoy the meticulous search to find old owners and the stories of these great cars. I've done it enough times to know that conclusions shouldn't be made until all of the facts (in the form of sworn statements from previous owners) are in. I have a complete, sworn history of the burnish brown car including the experiences that each owner had with the car. That's my passion. As far as I know, none of the "experts" have even spoken to the Yenko owners of 30 and 40 years ago. That's what I love and it's what I will do for this car.
Just think of this Tom - if I went out to my garage and removed the passenger fender and looked under the heater box, and found the Yenko vin stamped in that area - would it make any difference?

[sYc]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bergy</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Just think of this Tom - if I went out to my garage and removed the passenger fender and looked under the heater box, and found the Yenko vin stamped in that area - would it make any difference? </div></div>

IMO, would make a very big difference.

I am not assuming anything, as I have no idea if the original body is out there or not, I just wanted to add the legal aspects of the case, which are based on previous such cases.

[bergy]

Thanks for having an open mind Tom - most people would probably go right out in the garage and tear the fender off! Frankly, it makes little difference to me without ownership history and sworn statements as to what happened with this car. Restorers can do amazing things when starting with very little (sometimes nothing!). If I can't get ownership history and the sworn explanation of what a car has been through - I'm not interested. People can make up paperwork, create cars out of nothing, etc., but when past owners put their reputation (and liability) on the line by making sworn statements - it's pretty compelling. Heck, there are people who would look at a Yenko vin stamp in the heater area and just say &quot;so? - it's just a bunch of bolt on parts and conflicting stamps&quot;. Documenting what happened is everything to me on this car.

[YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sYc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Laying all emotion and opinions a side, need to look at this from the legal standpoint.

A car’s legal VIN number is what is stamped in the metal, not the VIN plate, thus you have a legit ’69 Camaro Z-clone without a title..

The stampings carry all of the weight with law enforcement, and were stamped for a very good reason, because VIN plates can be easily removed.

If the VIN does not come up in the police data base, might be able to a title for the clone Z.

Next you have a VIN plate with a title that belongs to another car, not the clone Z. <span style="font-weight: bold">At any point in time, if someone comes up with the original body with VIN stampings, they can claim the VIN tag and title because legally they own the car that the VIN tag belongs to.</span> That is what would concern me, spending money to restore the car then lose the tag.

Most times, when a car is rebodied, the person doing the rebody owns both the donor car and the recipient car, where the only issue is the rebody, not ownership.
</div></div>

This is very true, and literally happened right here in PA just a few short years ago. A guy now has a nice looking Yenko Camaro, (albeit a rebody), with a repop TT, a restamped firewall, and no VIN plate because the guy with the original body trumped!

Bergy, I'm not trying to try your patience, nor do I consider you a rookie in this hobby - you've been around a while! But, the way you packaged your purchase and plans brings de ja vu to many of us. The recollection that the firewall in the car is from another car wrecked by a logging truck is interesting, but does nothing to prove/disprove this car as a rebody. When someone is offered a Yenko in an envelope, and then it shows up a few years later as a full blown car - without the TT and the firewall stampings, it screams rebody (and a lousy one at that!).

If you think there is a story in that car, break it down, blast the body, look for the rebody vs. original body and go from there. I would love to be wrong on this one, even it is a definite rebody - I'd still save the thing, just need to call it like it is.

[bergy]

We're starting to talk past each other Marlin. I've said over and over that documented, sworn, ownership history is everything to me. We have all seen the unfortunate progression of ever improving fakes in our beloved hobby (documents and entire cars faked). Improvements in technique will continue, but continuous ownership history that is sworn and verifiable is difficult or impossible to fake. Just a rookie suggestion, but you folks may want to start a public Yenko record that mimics the Shelby Registry. I can look up my Cobra in the registry and see the complete ownership history. If a car doesn't have ownership history in the registry (or just &quot;appears&quot, no one is interested in it. The public registry really enhances the value of good cars. There are some pretty prominant people in the Shelby Registry who don't seem to worry much about the privacy issue.

[Steve Shauger]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bergy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Steve - I'm not sure how you are concluding that the &quot;rebody history is verifiable and well documented&quot;. Where exactly is that documentation? As far as I know, the only issue ever documented is that the wrong body stamp is definitely on the cowl (I haven't removed the fender and heater box yet). It is also verifiable that the vin stamp on the cowl belongs to a car the was totaled from the rear by a logging truck in 1981 (sworn statement from owner). Who rebodies a car onto a totaled body? </div></div>

Why not quote my whole statement &quot;I would suggest that rather than attempting to legitimize the car, research the history, and obtain affidavits from those responsible for the &quot;cowl only scenario&quot; as you suggest. Possibly they have picture of the whole process. I would then present those facts if available and start the discussion from there. I think we are beating a dead horse at this point, unless new information is obtained&quot;.

If it were me I would have ripped the fender off, verified the VIN before I bought it. Its quite simple and it would put this issue to bed. Lets get it done and good luck.

[Schonyenko2]

Shouldn't there be a hidden VIN on the top side of the cowl besides the one under the heater box?
I have no dog in the fight. I hope you have what you believe you have.
It would be interesting to see some pics of how the area was put in. If you know what your looking at/for, you can get a pretty good idea if it was done due to a collision, or another reason.

[Charley Lillard]

Who woke up Schone ? The one on the top of the cowl is different than the Yenko Vin tag that the car has.