Check out this auction:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=6161&item=2440079244

Let's hear everyones opinions on what is wrong with the tag. Not the car, the car is either an L65 350/250HP or a 307/200HP car and immaterial to the discussion.

I will not comment on any opinion right or wrong.

I just want to know what retard would paint his engine with all the accessories, carb, belts etc still on the engine??

I think it's a fake and here's why:

Never seen a documented 9B (Sept69, 2nd week)car. The body sequence number is way off. Matter of fact it is the highest number I have ever seen (NOR397214) and doesnt not fall in with body sequence number of the Sept 69 or August 69 build period or any period for that matter. graemlins/angry.gif

I know exactly what the trim tag rivets look like that are being sold and I guarantee you that those are the ones. I have seen the repo trim tags in person and that is definately one. graemlins/angry.gif

I agree with Mark. It is a FAKE trim tag and the car is not an original z28. graemlins/angry.gif

Very fishy. Besides all Z's came with a 12 volt rear end not a 10 volt!!! :D

I realize this thread is about the fake trim tag, but the painting thing is a hoot! Also the ad says it has a 10 VOLT rear. I better check my rear-axle voltage regulator!! :D graemlins/clonk.gif

(Sorry MAX...we must have been posting at the same time...I type slow.)

You know, it also says the shifter is missing, but so is the hole in the tunnel. Go figure.

Forgive me for taking a shot at this, because I am NOT a numbers guy, but shouldn't the tag be 124 6 7 if it is a supposed V8 car? and not 12437? I know I am probably wrong, but what the hell, thought I would give it a shot. smile.gif

Mark, I think you need to comment, so those of us know what is wrong with it, maybe after a page of 2 of guesses....I love the fact that he couldn't even remove the tire from the interior for the pic...hilarious... graemlins/sad.gif

Originally posted by BartonekDragRacing:
I just want to know what retard would paint his engine with all the accessories, carb, belts etc still on the engine?? Tread easy on this one, we've had many here in the past show off their engines and they are done the exact same way... graemlins/clonk.gif

It would be cool if we respect the wishes of the poster by staying on topic. Matk wants to know what you see incorrect about the cowl tag...

http://i7.ebayimg.com/03/i/00/d5/65/7d_3.JPG

Crossram

12467 would be a convertible. The tag doesnt designate engine, the VIN does. All tags were stamped 12437 (coupe) or 12467 (Convert)in 1969.

Also looks like he painted it on purpose to hide that it is new. The rivets really give this one away. On originals, the center would be punched out and no, thats not putty in the middle it is the rivet that you can buy.

The o's and zeros arent oblong like GM stamped them.

Ah, thanks Jonesy, see I knew I was wrong... graemlins/beers.gif

Here's the Ebay one:

http://i7.ebayimg.com/03/i/00/d5/65/7d_3.JPG


Here's mine:

http://www.stratagaz.com/1969LM1TrimTag.jpg

Hi all,
Shouldn't it also have the D80 stamping after the X77. I thought that spoilers were mandatory on Z's in April of '69.

I give up! :confused: I really don't see anything wrong with this other than the numbers which were already pointed out. True, the rivets have not been punched out and have not had sealer applied.

Both my cars are the small tag like PaulM's, so I can't compare.

My guess is that the rivet holes are too far to the edges. They should be closer together, under the "P" in PNT and almost touching the date code on the other.

Is that it?

Do I win anything? :D

Late tag - early car...?

edit: scratch that - just noticed the number being to high for the build date (should have looked at paulm's post more carefully) - numbers started over again lower on carryover 69's - like paulm's.

[ 10-31-2003, 10:53 AM: Message edited by: Vintage 68 ]

I guess I'm drawing a blank on this part of it too, Maybe someone else can chime in on what else is wrong with the trim tag, other than what has been stated. I did notice that it does not have the larger rear bumper gaurds.

The ST and TR, as well as the BDY and PNT were stamped in the tag to purposely miss the rivet holes, so that they'd all fit. And they shouldn't be as close to the numbers on the same lines as they are.
Those rivets are definitely suspect. The entire tag is wider up and down than an original.

I will not comment on any opinion right or wrong. You mean you're not going to teach us all how to identify a fake trim tag? C'mon Mark, enlighten us!!

So... if I put a X77 tag or X44 tag on my Plain Jane... I could sell it for more money? :eek:

No, I won't. I've been spoken to harshly about not giving away stuff like this on open forums by others (not necessarily on this board), probably rightly so. If I say something that helps tag swappers build better tags, thats bad for everyone. I would offer opinions on specific tags but beyond that I don't want to go down a list of things right or wrong with a tag.

I've got access to close to 1000 images of trim tags, mostly original, some terrible fakes, and other really good fake ones. The fake ones keep getting better all the time.

I'm just interested in what people look for when they think they see a questionable tag, be it a specific font or spacing inconsistancy, nice crispy new tags on a firewall that looks like it was used to dull hammers on, no paint on tags, but 1/4" on the firewall, weird rivet's, etc.

I will say that the most glaring error on this tag is the body number. Fisher reset the body number to 100000 in August of 69 coincident with the start of the 1970 model year, for all lines except the F-bodies, but of course you guys all knew that.

That makes sense, sometimes I forget that the entire world can read our posts here. I forget and think that it just "us guys" hanging around and talking....

Obviously you guys know nothing about restoring cars.There is supposed to be factory overspray on the engine. :rolleyes: :D

Reminds me of the first time I saw a Bloomington Gold Award car (Corvette). Thought the judges were blind. The car had overspray on the hood hinges, orange overspray on the alum. intake and exhaust manifolds. The a buddy told me thats the way the General made em. If it aint like the General shipped em out the door the judges take away points.

Guys... look at the VIN on the car (listed in the auction). It IS a late car... with a late trim tag. I agree, the rivets look funny, but the rest of the tag looks fine to me... With the exception of the body # reset which Mark C stated above (which I did not know).

What am I missing? :confused:

Here's a hint. Four not Five.


Dave.

What is wrong is that it is from the 9B, that's 2nd week of Sept 1969, build period.

Miraculously it is the only car in existance with a 2nd week of Sept 1969 code on it's tag.

It is very obvious that some had this tag made up. I have a database with over 800 tags and this tag doesnt even come close to falling in place with anything. I'm talking build period and body number. By Aug 1969 the body number had been reset. I would also think this would be an X77D80 car.

Those are the rivets that are sold over the counter. They have probably been placed in the holes with glue. They are the correct rivets, you can tell they were not installed by the factory.


It is also a coincidence that the rivets dont cover any of the lettering. The 09B is shifted to the right a little.

FAKE!!!!! graemlins/waving.gif

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jonesy:
[QB] What is wrong is that it is from the 9B, that's 2nd week of Sept 1969, build period.

Miraculously it is the only car in existance with a 2nd week of Sept 1969 code on it's tag.

Why would there not be any 09B cars built? I know they built 69's after September as I owned a 10D 69 Z/28 awile back.
:confused: :confused:

The vin on this car follows mine by 257, but the body # is 276863 beyond mine. my tag (http://hobbystage.net/camaro/media.cgi?site=69lemansii&folder=*&group=5&page=*&id=1067701516-002952)

The NOR number reset back to 100000 at some point in the late August-September time frame. I don't think there is anything # wise that would prove a fake. I'm not sure if all the later Z28's showed the "D80" on the trim tag or not. I see one window sticker in Jerry MacNeish's book for a late car that does not have the D80 spoiler equipment listed as an option.

The NOR number was reset at the end of July early August. I dont know why there are no 9B cars. There are other months where it skips a week.

Originally posted by 396rs/ss:
Here's a hint. Four not Five.


Dave. Ooops. I read the questions wrong and thought we were comparing the two tags. I was looking at the General Motors certification statement at the bottom of the tag. One tag reads with 4 lines while the other reads 5.

Dave.

I e-mailed the seller and he swears it is real. What a loser. Says it can't be fake. Also told me it has a Turbo 350 in it.

Sure. Right. Ok buddy! graemlins/clonk.gif graemlins/clonk.gif graemlins/sad.gif

The VIN falls in line with 09B and the 09B lines up just fine like other late tags. I still think it should have the X77D80 but I'm not 100% sure that's mandatory. It has the small rear bumper guards so that combined with no shifter hole makes it sure look like a fake.

MarkC, please clarify that the F-bodies unit I.D. #'s were not reset in Aug'69? Others say they were. I think the rivets are in the right place, but would defer to others that they are not correct, according to all my MacNeish pictures. the tag looks fairly legit. Brad

They were reset This only affected the NOR plant as they were the only plant building Camaros and Firebirds after LA shutdown in June of 69. As far as Fisher was concerened the new model year started in August and they reset the numbers at that point.

Numbers were reset again in January 1970 when the new 70 body style was finally brought into production.

[ 11-03-2003, 01:47 PM: Message edited by: Mark C ]

I'm sorry, guys. Other than the rivets and the # reset that Mark mentioned, I cannot see anything other on the tag that doesn't look legit. I have compared it to several pictures and it is a good copy.... if it truly is a copy...

I agree with Mark C. I have a 08A Z28 with the vin 124379N6706xx.

The TT is as follows:

ST69 12437 NOR101869BDY
TR711 57 57 PNT
08A X77D80

I know 100% this car is a real Z. If you saw the condition (unrestored, poor condition) you would know no one has ever messed with it.

Looking at the body sequence, I would have to say this was one of the first cars after the reset.

It does have a '69 title though.