Entertaining eBay Fraud of The Day

[Tracker1]

Get a load of those "docs":

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Dodge-Challenger...=US_Cars_Trucks

[427.060]

I don't know a lot about Mopars. What is the problem with the docs? The seller says it is an original 383 and the dealer did the 426 installation. I do wonder why the seller never shows a picture of the entire engine compartment.
James

[Tracker1]

Those documents have been aged with coffee grounds, not with time.

And where is the Hemi K-member notated? You can't drop a hemi in on a 383 K-frame.

[img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/bs.gif[/img]

[njsteve]

Looks like he aged the recent Galen Registry doc with the same spilled coffee. [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/naughty.gif[/img]

And by the way, there were zero 1971 Challenger R/T convertibles made. Only the base model convertible was available in 1971.

This car has been circling around the internet since at least 2004.

[black69]

come on guys, lets not be so negative. There is nothing wrong with that galen doc, they come in gray paper. My 67 hemi documentation from him, looks like that, about the same date, around 2003.
Its a nice 383 convert with docs. If you guys know more about window stickers, I could see maybe I am missing something there, but that looks ok to me.

I would only take shots at the hemi conversion, whether that is true or not. I find it odd, that they added undercoating to a california car (why?)
but the headers look real and probably could be hard to replicate.
and it makes sense it would need a rear valence change as california cars would not have the valence with exhaust cutouts. and after they do the conversion, it become illegal when it hits the street. hum...
I think the hemi would want to mate to a hemi spline? the 383 4spd would not be a hemi trans. Only 440 and hemi cars got the hemi trans.
then the K frame issue, as mentioned.

Seller is confused no doubt on the R/T factor, never made an R/T in 71 in a convert. If that seller had some better info on where that documentation came from on the conversion, he could have something unique. But there needs to be more.

I have to wonder, if the value of the 383 would offset all the added costs of putting in the hemi, like the brake booster offset, and maybe heavy duty springs, etc. The dealer would still retain that original engine.
Someone should know how much those mopar headers would go for, that would be the first thing I would check to see if that was a reasonable price, that seems high. the hood would have to be date code correct, etc.

[Tracker1]

The conversion is the crux of the whole ridiculous claim. The rest of the car? Lovely rig. The answer is in the &quot;addendum&quot; document - it quotes factory OPTION prices out of the salesman's option and accessories book for parts that would have had to be bought over-the-counter at the dealership!!...The prices would have been completely different. And 500 bucks for that job?? Even at 1971 labour rates it would have taken more to do that conversion, even if he gave them back every removed part.

And Hemis will mate with anything - it's a very amorous engine [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/smile.gif[/img]

[427.060]

It could be that the dealer gave the buyer a deal on the labor just to get the car sold. Plus, the buyer spent a good bit on parts.
James

[njsteve]

And by the way, the only known, documented set of the Scat Pack headers that were sold as part of the over-the-counter performance parts package were on my old 1970 Hemi Charger R/T-SE. They were made by Hooker Headers and they were the slip-in multi tube style and not the crazy looking set on that ragtop. And when I say documentd, I mean REALLY documented with every piece of original sales paperwork, the installation work order, the entire dealer file, and even confirmation from the original mechanic who installed them who is living 15 miles from me.

[Fast67VelleN2O]

Questionable docs or not, this car looks really cool!