View Full Version : Bogus 69 X33D80 at Carlisle?


Eric Kammerer
Sep 30th, 05, 05:03 PM
Blue, from somewhere in Central PA (717) area code. Car had an asking of "only" $21,900.

Late 50s early 60 small block (small pad, no numbers), power steering car. Wrong stripes, just not pretty.


VIN 124379N666677

ST 69 12437 NOR660729 BDY
TR 711 71 B PNT
07A X33D80

Don't know if the photo will show well, but looks like a bad repro tag to me (definitely ugly rivets)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v239/ekammerer/117_1758.jpg

Jonesy
Sep 30th, 05, 05:09 PM
Tag looks good (real) to me and matches the VIN. I havent seen many 07A cars out there. Must have had the tag off and replaced it with those rivets. Its a real X33D80 car.

Eric Kammerer
Sep 30th, 05, 05:19 PM
Okay, I guess. The 9 in 69 and 9 in the BDY number didn't seem to match. Stamping was also VERY flat, like it had been under a steam roller.

I guess if it's real, it's a deal at $23K (I confused it wtih another earlier). It does need paint (in primer where the vinyl top molding mounted). Anybody that wants to call, the number was (717) 332-0683.

Jeff H
Sep 30th, 05, 05:24 PM
Tag looks real but it must have been hit with a sander or something that flattened out the numbers some. But the rivets mean it was off the car at some point and might not be original to that particular car.

Bob Brissie
Sep 30th, 05, 05:34 PM
Tag is real for sure.... but original to the car? Hmmmmm.... hard to tell. Neat color combo though.

Tonyx33
Sep 30th, 05, 07:14 PM
Looks like the #'s on my tag I had the underside and firewall sandblasted
and had 3 layers of duct tape on the tag he got a little wild blasting the
tape stayed on but the #'s were flatten out a little.That souldn't have
happen to this one if the tag was off the car and it looks like it has been.

36j1967
Sep 30th, 05, 08:01 PM
Looks like the #'s on my tag I had the underside and firewall sandblasted
and had 3 layers of duct tape on the tag he got a little wild blasting the
tape stayed on but the #'s were flatten out a little.That souldn't have
happen to this one if the tag was off the car and it looks like it has been.

I agree with the sandblasting theory but I would bet the cowl tag was removed to blast the rust from behind it and the tag was also hit seperate (heavy pitting) and reattached. Not much else you can do except acid dipping or blasting a rusty body. The pickin's are getting pretty thin these days!

Jonesy
Sep 30th, 05, 09:32 PM
The VIN matches the tag. July 69 was a slow month at Norwood with only about 4000-5000 cars made. I have only seen 8 cars with this month build. I have a pretty big database of cars with most months in the Hundreds.

RamAirDave
Sep 30th, 05, 09:37 PM
Good tag, bad rivets. And I dont like how you can see a different color black outline just outside of the upper LH corner of the tag. Makes it look like the the "other" tag was removed after the firewall was painted, and its clear that the tag was put on after the wall was painted. Might just be the pic, though, since the previous tag wouldve been the same dimensions, in theory. Clearly, just purely speculation.

Very similar to a Z Im building now, being 07A, X33D80. The body # on the tag above is about 3500 earlier, and the VIN about 600 earlier.

We had the car soda blasted, and the tag looked like it sustained damage, similar to the one above, looking faint and flattened. Of course we were a bit worried about that. But once the firewall/tag was painted, the tag looked just fine.

dave