I am being told by a dealer that when buying a non documented 1969 Z28, built in LA, Van Nuys plant with no codes. that the value of the car is affected minimally if the rearend is a BS code 3:31 rather than the BU code 3:73. My contention is that if the BS code 3:31 now in the car is consistent with build date of the car it is also probably the original, and this car was probably a SS 350 as opposed to being a "real" Z28. His reply is that over the years the rearend was probably switched. If that were the case then I say the value of the car has been dimished because that was one of the only ways to verify authenticity minus any documentation. The engine was replaced, all badges were replaced, cowl hood is a new aftermarket, and spoilers were added on, grill is new and black instead of argent. If you were looking for a "real" 1969 Z28 would you shy away from this one? He was asking $58,000 for this car and I know in my gut it's a "clone". He says his "experts" say it is real. I have some backround with this car, and I am currently in litigation over it with the man who originally sold it to me as a "real" 69 Z28 two years ago. As I said the dealer I traded the car to immediately listed it on his web site as an original car, frame off restored, with a 3:73 rearend, for $58,000. I contacted him immediately and advised him of the discrepancies in his ad, especially the rearend ratio. I reminded him the rearend was a 3:31 not the 3:73 which you would expect to find in a true 69 Z28. He says in his deposition he sold the car at auction for $32,000. He then goes on to state the value was not affected by the car having the incorrect rearend. To me, and I am not an expert, what would make him go from asking $58,000, to selling for $32,000? Under closer inspection would prospective buyers be scared off by a car with wrong gear ratio? I think so. I do need your help. If you think I am right about how much having the 3:31 rearend in a Z28 would affect its value, I need to hear from you. If you think it would not make a difference I'd like to hear from you as well. Sorry to take up so much space. Thanks to Team Camaro! Ed

Is the rear a 10 or a 12 bolt ? All Z28's had 12 bolts. I think most ratio's were available (special order), however a Z28 would be a dog with the 3.31's.

It bothers me more that the axle in the car now is date matched to the car. Makes it seem more unlikely that it has been swapped. One reason that the axle code is so important is that it is the least likely part of the drivetrain to have been replaced over the years.

You yourself have noticed enough red flags about the car already. The whole ordeal seems to be a bit fishy.

As far as his "experts", they may know their stuff. But the un-biased "experts" here are the ones I would trust.

This thread should probably moved into the Tag Team section to dig further into the subject.

dave

BS code 3:31 rather than the BU code 3:73. My contention is that if the BS code 3:31 now in the car is consistent with build date of the car it is also probably the original, and this car was probably a SS 350 as opposed to being a "real" Z28.

Standard in the 69Z was a 3:73 rear end. A 3:31 was never installed at the factory in a true Z. How much it affects the car $$'s is hard to tell.

Is the rear a 10 or a 12 bolt ? All Z28's had 12 bolts. I think most ratio's were available (special order), however a Z28 would be a dog with the 3.31's.

Has to be a 12-bolt . In the 69 Z, a 4:10 was the only standard upgrade. 4:56's & 4:88's could be had thru the dealer installation or a special COPO order.

I'm with you Ed, it's a clone. Not to say it was'nt a reel Z when it was built but with a lot of the correct parts gone I don't see where it has the value.

Sounds like a SS 350 car. The BS rear would definately affect it's value.

It was a 12 bolt, but a 3:31. I had asked before I bought the car what gears it had in it and I was told it had 3:73. It was at that point I was willing to accept the seller's contention it was a real Z28. Once I found out different I was forced to take legal action as seller was unresponsive. Fortunately for me I kept all email correspondences. Also he bought same car a couple of months earlier for $24,000, and sold to me for $32,000. He claims no way is it a clone. I am not an expert, I am a 56 year old who worked a lot of overtime over the years to buy this car. It was supposed to be an investment as well as for my enjoyment. I was trusting of this individual, but my trust was misplaced. When I was a young man in Viet Nam I dreamed of owning a 1969 Z28. It took over 30 years to get one, only to get taken. Now with the outrageous price escalation in the past two years I don't think one will be in my future. My advise to anyone looking to buy one of these high priced cars is to pay to have it checked out. Two years later and close to $4,000.00 in legal fees I am further away now than when I was 22. At the very least if it is a Camaro you are looking for, buy Jerry MacNeish's book The Definitive Camaro Fact Book for your year. I wish I had! Thanks for the great support guys. You are the best. Thanks Ed

Not sure how to move this thread the Tag Team section as someone suggested. Thanks again! Ed

Rob,

Standard in the 69Z was a 3:73 rear end. A 3:31 was never installed at the factory in a true Z.

Partially correct. The standard alxe was indeed the 3.73, however, 3.31 and 3.07 rear ends were available as a special order.

from all the flags, i'd say it WAS a SS350 originally

they have been cloning (clowning) the since the car was new in 69

MANY SS's ended up a "Z28" with stripes and emblems

I have not come across anywhere in the last two years where it shows a 69 Z28 coming from the factory with less than the 3:73 rearend. Mr MacNeish's book lists many, many copies of original invoices. Again not one with anything other than the 3:73 or 4:10. So my question then is if you were a novice such as myself and you were buying a "real" Z28, minus any documentation in which seller told you car had a 3:73 rearend and it did not would you feel reassured car was real? Again as a Camaro novice, I was going with the only facts I knew as a young man. I knew 1969 Z28 was designed with the 302 small block. It came with a 4-speed only, a hardtop only, and the only rear end "I" was ever aware of was the 3:73. So with that in mind, and I repeat "no", documentation, those were "my" benchmarks. Having been assured those were all the facts with the car being sold to me, I went ahead with the purchase. If I had been told everything else was in line, and the rearend was a 3:31, I would have walked away from the deal. Even if he did have documentation that it did come from the factory with the 3:31. As an earlier posted noted "it would have been a dog to drive". I guess my thought is I should have had a reasonable expectation to get what I was told I was buying, a 69 Camaro with a 3:73 rearend. Anymore even with documentation you have to be skeptical. On Ebay there are sellers over everything from aged documents to replacement vin and trim tags. I just think that is plain wrong, and should be illegal. Now that the prices on these cars and others is out of sight, this has become a fertile ground for crooks to seperate us from our hard earned money. Some on this site may remember some of my first posts dealt with me buying what I believe was bogus Z28 back in Sep of 2004. I mention in that year my 20 year old daughter was in a near fatal car accident and required around the clock car at home as we declined to place her in a home. At the same time my 26 year old son rejected a kidney I had donated to him in 1996. They both required frequent hospitalizations that summer and fall. There were days they had surgeries scheduled on the same day at different hospitals. With all this going on, and the seller of the 69 "Z28" knowing this he still found it necessary to lie to me. So being a man of my word, I am keeping mine to stand up to this guy. Hopefully it may benifit someone else done the line. I am just a hard working guy who gets up every day and goes to work. The guy that sold me the car owns a 40 foot yacht, an airplane and other cars. I do not begrudge him his toys, just do not ask me to subsidize him. Honesty is the best policy. Thanks for the should guys. Ed

Several documented Z's with 3.55's and about half that # with 3.31's. One with 3.07!
So they exist. IMO, that's not enough of a basis to say the car is not a Z.

You need to have Jerry Mac look at the car if you're going forward with a lawsuit.

Also note that the 3.73 axle was available with the SS350, several of those are documented. So the ratio doesn't provide proof.....

I think you are missing my point. I wanted a 3:73 rearend. I was told rearend in the car in question was in fact a 3:73. It was not. Again the 3:73 was "my" benchmark in the absence of any documentation. I was not interested in a "real" Z28 with another ratio other than 3:73. I bought a car with a 3:73, but got a car with a 3:31. Again the dealer I traded this car to towards a 70 Chevelle initially listed the car for $58,000.00 on his web site. It sold at auction for $32,000.00 by his own admission. Does that say anything about the authenticity? By the way his experts are his employees at his used car dearship in Arkansas. I only wish I knew of Jerry MacNeish two years ago. Thanks again Ed My court date is August 30th, wish me luck, and keep the comments coming.

Not a '69 Z, but I ordered my '67 350SS/RS with the stock box unchecked 3.31! Go from there!

I started to clone my car to a Z but it is too early a car at Dec., '66!!

I also started to numbers match my long gone 350 motor, but it wouldn't be STOCK in my EYES!!!

So I went what I wanted and that is what I now have, a restified 496 BB car.

pdq67

PS., and I ordered an SS car and added RS to the option list so I call my car an SS/RS!!

Would I be correct in saying that a person is more likely to find an original 1969 Z28 with a 3:73 or 4:10 rearend, if it was all original? Thanks Ed

Did he tell you it was a 3:73 or put it in writing? Seems if only told it could be your word against his. As to the $58000.00 deal that just sounds like fishing, sort of like buy it now on ebay. If someone would have paid that I am sure he would have been really happy, but must have been happy with $32000.00 also. I see no significance in him paying $24000.00 and selling it for $32000.00. Someone had to sell it for $24000.00 and someone had to buy it for $32000.00. That is called profit and what he is in business for. I do agree with everyone else, you need to get Jerry or someone else equally knowledgeable about the car look at it before you go forward. Seems he doesn't have to prove it is a real Z, and new or added parts would not really make it a fake or clone, just not as delivered by GM. Sounds to me you have to prove it is not a real Z. Without documentation how do you prove it is, or isn't?

You're stuck in a lawsuit over a car that you don't even own anymore???:eek: If you traded the car on a Chevelle then let it go. I don't get the 3.73 hang up. You should have felt the gears when you drove it before you bought it. It didn't have the original engine either. You could have put 3.73s in it for about $200.00
I get the feeling that I am missing the point of this post. it wasn't a numbers match car and there doesn't seem to be proof that it wasn't a Z.:confused:

The point is I asked him if it had 3:73 gears in the rearend, and he said yes. Verbally and in writing(email). I guess I do not understand why I can't ask that question and expect an honest answer. Correct me if I am wrong, but shouldn't I have the right to get what I am paying for? If you were buying a undocumented 1969 Z28, would you be inclined to pay more or less if the car had a 3:73 rearend? Also the seller of the "Z" told me he would make things right, but then stopped communicating with me. I lost money on trading the car to the Arkansas dealer, that is why I am suing the original seller of the "Z". I had originally asked for $5000.00. I do not think that was outlandish. He declined so no, I was not going to just get over it. Also I am not as mechanically gifted as most of you. I did not detect the difference, because I did not drive it that much before finding out the difference. I also am not able to change gears. I didn't think I had to. I paid $32,000.00 for what was represented to me as a genuine 1969 Z28, with a 3:73 rearend. Two years ago that was a fair price. I did not get the car that "I" was told I would be. Seller knew I had no interest in a car with a different rearend. It is just that simple. I did tell the seller first I would live with the car if he would get me a BU coded rearend, I even told him of one on Ebay. That never happened so here we are. Also had the seller of the Camaro told me the rearend was a 3:31 I would not be writing this tonight. In about 90% of the ads for real 1969 Camaro Z28's for sale online, they mention "has original 3:73 rearend". Obviously it is a selling point. Thanks Ed

I have not come across anywhere in the last two years where it shows a 69 Z28 coming from the factory with less than the 3:73 rearend. Mr MacNeish's book lists many, many copies of original invoices. Again not one with anything other than the 3:73 or 4:10. So my question then is if you were a novice such as myself and you were buying a "real" Z28, minus any documentation in which seller told you car had a 3:73 rearend and it did not would you feel reassured car was real?

Well, you asked **this** question and I answered it.
Reading your recent posts, I really don't know your question. Axle ratio does not indicate the engine reliably. But your issue seems to be a misrepresentation of a detail of a car. I don't think we can help you here.

As to a lawsuit over a 3.31 axle vs a 3.73 axle, good luck......

Being an LA car, did you ever drop the gas tank to check for the chassis broadcast copy? Somewhat common on LA/Van Nuys '69 cars.

Yes.

pdq67

So you sold the car because it didn't have the axle ratio you wanted? At most a judge MIGHT rule in your favor for the cost of replacing a gear set. Good luck since you don't own the car any longer.

Rob,
Partially correct. The standard alxe was indeed the 3.73, however, 3.31 and 3.07 rear ends were available as a special order.
Several documented Z's with 3.55's and about half that # with 3.31's. One with 3.07!
So they exist. IMO, that's not enough of a basis to say the car is not a Z.

You need to have Jerry Mac look at the car if you're going forward with a lawsuit.

Also note that the 3.73 axle was available with the SS350, several of those are documented. So the ratio doesn't provide proof.....

Ed & Kurt, Oops! :o Thanks for setting me straight. :thumbsup: I guess I misunderstood Jerry's book about the axle ratios. Still learning.

It would seem that any axle less than a 3:73 (3:55,3:31) would be a problem on the street and would lug the 302. Did the trans selection M-20 or M-21/M-22 affect the avail rear axle options?

Rob

Kurt, Did you get the info I sent you a couple of weeks ago? Rob

Ed & Kurt, Oops! :o Thanks for setting me straight. :thumbsup: I guess I misunderstood Jerry's book about the axle ratios. Still learning.

It would seem that any axle less than a 3:73 (3:55,3:31) would be a problem on the street and would lug the 302. Did the trans selection M-20 or M-21/M-22 affect the avail rear axle options?

Rob

Kurt, Did you get the info I sent you a couple of weeks ago? Rob

Rob, Z28Doug has an original Z with 3.55 open rear.

In looking at the 69 Z28s on the Team Camaro classifieds, and ebay, most state that the rearend is the "correct" or "original" 3:73. Again that is all I requested of the seller, to replace rearend. He said he would but never did. I have all of this in writing. He could have taken care of the problem and I would have accepted that. He left me no option. I told him I would have to see an attorney if he did not contact me. He didn't. What would you do? I traded the car to a dealer for a car and took a loss. His attorney has offered me $2500.00 to settle the case. I would have jumped at that offer when this began, Now two years later I have paid close to $4000.00 in legal fees. I did say I was a man of principal, maybe to a fault. I have offered to settle for $5500.00. Thanks Ed

Rob, Z28Doug has an original Z with 3.55 open rear.

Gary,

I do currently have 3:55's in my car. That is the way it was when I bought it.
My rear is coded BO which is 3:73 open, BO is also on my chassis build sheet and protectoplate.
It's on my "to do" list to get the originals back in. I got the original 3:73 gears in the deal when I bought the car.

In conversations with the guy that owned it from 1972 to 2001 he said while he was going to college he changed the gears to try and get a litlle better gas mileage during his commute to school.

The 3:55's do not mix well with the 302 around town at all. It's cool on the freeway but you can't get out of 2nd gear in town without bogging down.
Starting from a dead stop in first gear feels like your starting in 2nd gear. I don't recommend it.
Doug

Doug, thanks for the info. That is exactly what I was hoping for. Someone who knows that the gears in the rearend "do" affect the 302 engine adversly. At least you knew what gears you were getting, and did not have any surprises. Sounds like a neat car. Thanks Ed

Hi Doug. I guess my memory is not quite right. Since I didn't have matching transmission I went with the M20. The 3.73's and the M20 work very well together.

the M20 (wide ratio) has a 2.52 1st gear ratio
the M21 (close ratio) and M-22 (HD close ratio) both use a 2.20 1st gear ratio, NOT a better choice for the no torque 302 (unless greater than 3.73)

the lower 1st gear of the M20 will give you "better" (easier to move) gearing to make up for the lack of bottom end torque the 302 is famous for

the super T-10 of the late 70's had an even steeper 1st gear, somewhere around the 3.00 ratio (can't remember the ratio exactly)

Ed,

I got your PM and have to answer it here since I can't attach pictures through the PM page...

Here's page 2 of the 1969 Camaro Power Team Chart for you to look at. As you can see (bottom of the page), the 69 Z28 (302) came "Standard" with the 3.73 rear axle, or you could order the 3.55 axle if you wanted the "Economy" ratio. The 4.10 was available (as were others that aren't shown on the chart) as the "Performance" ratio. Finally, there were two "Special Order" ratios available, the 3.07 and the 3.31.

As for your other question, I wouldn't walk away from an actual "FACTORY" Z28 just because it didn't have the 3.73 axle. On the contrary, ANY REAL Z28, no matter what the transmission (M20, M21 or M22), rear axle ratio, Interior (Deluse or Standard) or Options installed would be in my garage if the price were right. Unfortunately, we no longer have the ability to walk into the dealer and special order a 69 Z as we want it. In these days, uless you happen to stumble onto your "perfect" car, if you want a Z28, beggars can't be choosers. I recommend you find something as close as possible to what you want and trade up (or down) if you find your dream car.

But that's just my opinion...

Ed

http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h52/bertfam/powerteam.jpg

I think I may have just hit the jackpot. Checking out another thread on distinguishing a 68 big block car, one reply made reference to the number of springs. It said the SS cars had 5 springs, and Z28 had four. If that is correct for a 69 Z28 also then I'm certain the car I had questions about is a clone. It had the 3:31 rear end and 5 leaf springs, not four. Thanks for all your help.

JohnZ runs a 3:55 in his Z...I think he said it had a 3:73 from the factory, but the 3:55 is better for all around driving. I think that is what I will probably run in my Z.

I think I may have just hit the jackpot. Checking out another thread on distinguishing a 68 big block car, one reply made reference to the number of springs. It said the SS cars had 5 springs, and Z28 had four. If that is correct for a 69 Z28 also then I'm certain the car I had questions about is a clone. It had the 3:31 rear end and 5 leaf springs, not four. Thanks for all your help.

That's not correct. Please read the info on the CRG site, specifically http://www.camaros.org/diffs69.shtml, note 13.

Thanks for the info. Ed

Hmm I don't really mean to be insensitive about this, I'm sure your under a lot of stress about this whole deal.

But if you weren't 100% sure about what you were buying, why did you purchase the vehicle? I can understand the guy might have been your "friend" or something along those lines. But you said it yourself, you had a feeling it was a clone. It would have taken 5 minutes to jack the rear end up, and count the driveshaft revolutions of 1 full tire rotation.

Also I don't think selling the vehicle was in your best interest. The judge might ask "if you knew it was mis-represented, why didn't you contact the police? " Maybe it was stolen, etc.


Unless the vehicle was "grossly mis-represented" IE he sold you a "Z-28" with a 6 cyclinder vin, I doubt the judge will award you much. It's basically your word vs. his, since the proof (the car) is not in your possession anymore.

I hope you the best of luck, and hopefully others reading this will take note and spend extra time researching their purchases.

I know I am not the first and I won't be the last to get taken on what I thought was a 69 Z28. As I said way back, when I first started asking questions, I decided I wanted a "real" 69 Z28 two years ago this month. I had a 63 Corvette which I had owned for eight years. After my daughter had her accident in April of that year, and my son lost the kidney I had donated to him 8 years that summer, I thought I was having a nervous breakdown. For whatever reason, I decided to list my car on ebay, and search of a "real" Z28. I stated that in my listing, "no clones". I was contacted by a guy from Arkansas who had one to sell. I am probably what you call an "armchair" car guy. I love cars. I have always been a Chevy guy through and through. I have never rebuilt an engine, but would have loved to. I can can do a brake job, change pumps, alternators, starters, and things like that. I pride myself in keeping whatever car I own, meticulous. I knew some facts about some cars, but not alot about any one. When the guy from Arkansas called me, one of the first questions I asked him was about drive train. He told me engine was "correct DZ block, but wrong date, and with "incorrect" heads. It had a Muncie trans, and a 3:73 rear end. Again it was a LOS car, with "zero" paperwork. I was willing to accept these items. Afterall I was not pay matching numbers money, but still good money. When he brought the car up to me I had no reason to doubt him. I wouldn't have had a clue about jacking the car up, and counting the revoultions of the wheel. Actually when the guy emailed me all the numbers of the various componets he had BS down for the rear end. It was only a few weeks later after posting those #'s on a site, that someone chimed in that most numbers seemed okay, but that the car would "be a dog to drive with 3:31 gears". I didn't know what he was talking about. I never mentioned anywhere the gears were 3:31. I soon became aware that the BS code was the giveaway. I emailed the seller, and asked him if he remembered what gears were in the car. His reply, in print, 3:73. I then informed him the car had a BS code which meant 3:31. I reminded him that he told me the car had 3:73. and that is what I wanted. I did know the 69 Z28 came with a 302 engine, 4-speed, and a standard rear end with 3:73 gears. That is all I demanded. Without any documentation, those were "my" bench marks. Seller's response, " I was positive it was a BU rear end. I must have made a mistake." Although he wrote me in his emails the rear end code was BS, he says he thought for sure it was a BU. He then goes on to say if he told me it had a 3:73, "he would make it right". I did not expect him to take the car back, but I did expect him to live up to his word. I am funny about that. He was going to get another rear end and have it sent to me. That never materialized. He stopped communicating with me. Had at any point he ever told me the car had the 3:31 rear end I would have moved on to another car. Once I had the problem with the rear end I started looking at all the other things in the books. Lots of little things then added up to a clone car, I won't list again. The "Dealer" to whom I traded the car,(it made me sick to see it in my garage every day, listed the car as a Z28, frame off restored car, with 32,000 original miles, a 4-speed and 3:73 rear end. The price was $58,000.00 I emailed him he should change his ad because it was defintely not a frameoff restored car, the mileage was "not" original, the rearend was a 3:31, not 3:73, and I did not think the car was a real Z28. He did change the ad to read 3:31 rear end. His asking price was $58,000.00, he finally sold the car at auction for $32,000.00. Same dealer said "you can tell it was a real Z28 by the Trim tag". I was supposed to go to court tomoorow, and just found out it has been continued to Jan 30th, 2007. I know alot of you guys think I am anal for pursuing thism and maybe I am. I am 57 years old, and I earned every penny I paid for that car. All of the "should have dones", won't help me know. This guy offers me $2500.00 to drop the case now, two years later. If he would have offered that when this started, I would have jumped at it. Now I have twice that in legal expenses. There hasn't been a day since that car showed up in my driveway that I haven't thought about it. Not everyone is gifted with your knowledge, or even knows about websites like these. I have said it before you guys are the best, The service you provide is priceless. I tried to close the barn door after the horses were gone. I had better end this, or I will spill over to the Chevelle forums. Thanks guys.

take the pumpkin off and look for numbers or jack the ass and count rotations from drive shaft to rear then do the math . That will give you the ratio. " this person is not looking for authentisity" of a Z , he is looking to make sure the drive train is what is supposed to be.

If its not the drive you want go to EATON and get a new carrier and replace what you have.

I have since traded this car off, and got considerably less than the value I had in it.

sorry I reread your thread and you are pissed that it may not be a Z. sorry you fell into the ebay clone it and sell it section. atleast your man enough to admit you got screwed. I will donate 200 dollars towards your lawers fee just email me at chevy67@epix.net. I AM SICK OF CLONES EXSPECIALLY THOSE THAT DONT SAY THEY ARE!!!!. maybee we can start a lil HELP THE MISSINFORMED group here ? Some of you guys out there have a ton of cash or know lawers or god forbid are lawers, give this guy a hand!!! I'm willing! I'm serious :Give me an email! I will contribute to the fund !!!

Thanks for the offer, but it was my lack of knowledge that did me in. I knew just enough to be dangerous as they say. I once mentioned that it was while I was a young man in Viet Nam, dreaming of being back in the "world" as we referred to the states, that I longed for the day I might own a 69 Z28. All I knew then was the car was way cool, had a 302, 4-speed, and 3:73 rear end. Unfortunately for me that is all I knew about a 69 Z28 two years ago this month when I got into this mess. What really bothers me are those guys and gals who are laying down their hard earned bucks every day, and being swindled. There are way too many people like myself, who are naive. We believe most people are honest. However "Buyer Beware" has been around since the wheel was invented. Someone replied that they thought the seller should have to prove the car is as represented, not the buyer. Needless to say I couldn't agree more. Another reply mentioned that the rear end is one of the last things that some "cloners" address. Mainly because it is hard to get to, and not easily seen. That is why I asked the gears. That was all I deemed necessary to prove it to me, no one else. There is no doubt in my mind this car is a clone. Had I not caught the rear end tip off, and started looking very closely, I would have been none the wiser. Then whenever I went to sell it, I would have been the one getting nailed to the wall for trying to sell a "clone". I may not have done everything right initially, but I'm trying to now. Like I mentioned the dealer I traded the car to, I refused to sell it to an individual, listed it as a "real" Z28 for $58,000.00. He maintained it was real because of the info on Trim tag! How is that possible? He did change his listing to reflect it had a BS code rear end instead of the standard BU, only after I warned him. I also stated he finally sold it an an auction for $32,000.00. Maybe it is just me, but that seems to be a hefty discount. Could it have been this car was exposed as a clone? I do know another dealer bought it, so I'm sure you will answering these same questions for some other unsuspecting mark. Oh! for all the replies about it was "possible" to get the 3:31, 3:07 and other unique rear ends in the Z, I say. I wanted the "standard" BU(I know now), 3:73 rear end. Once again I apologize for all the blabbering. I may not be the most knowledgeable car guy, but at least I am passionate. In the future I would never believe a car to a a "genuine" this, or a "real" that. Too many fakes, clones, tributes, with bogus Trim tags, vins, and heaven knows "aged" paperwork on Ebay. Crooks are going to go where the money is, and guys this is where it is. Find a car you like, buy it for enjoyment, get back to why we are all here in the first place. To have fun with this hobby. Thanks Ed

I just read this thread and am a little surprised. I have a X33-D80 Z28 dated crossram 302 car that has a BL code ( 3:07 non posi ). I figure the car was ordered for road racing. Lets face it guys. The Z28 302 was designed for transam racing specifically. Transam cars do not have 3:73 gears. You dont reach speeds of 150+ with gears that high. Someone has changed my gears to 4:11 now but it was very likely that any Z28 could have any ratio ordered. Lawsuits suck and the attorneys make the money not you. 5 springs, 4 springs, who cares? The car is 37 years old and been through the works and then some. I have seen these cars with chevelle rears in them with welded spring pads and still be original Z28's. The cars cost 900 dollars used in 1979. Dont go nuts over this. Just my two cents

The cars cost 900 dollars used in 1979. Dont go nuts over this. Just my two cents

Lotsa poeple have every reason to go nuts over cars that cost $900 in 1979 and are now worth close to or over 6 figures.

Lotsa poeple have every reason to go nuts over cars that cost $900 in 1979 and are now worth close to or over 6 figures.

I have more than one six figure muscle car. It appears that finding date coded 302's with your favorite date for your car are readily available for you to put you vin on the front pad. If you do not have owner original docs, real build sheet or real tank sheet, any matching number Z28 could be a clone. Or could it? If you do the above and it cannot be proven then I guess you have yourself a real deal Z. I own a 69 yenko with a can am all aluminum 427 with the yenko name cast into it. Yenko had a few of these made. This car is more rare than the zl1 copo cars and is in mint condition. I also have a 69 L88 vert corvette. 67,68 and 69 Z28 camaros are not worth six figures, by the way. If you pay over 60k for one of the finest of these models then you are in for a staggering surprise when you try to sell it. Nada old car book is not the authority on these cars. Dont buy a car and expect it to be a great investment. Buy it to enjoy your dream. Life is too short to go nuts over a rear end ratio. Sorry

I have stated my position more than once in this thread. I asked for and was told by seller if car had 3:73 rear end. It did not. Car had no paperwork, and no trim tag info. Other items turned out to support the fact car was a fake. I am not fortunate enought to own multiple six digit cars. I own one, that is worth considerably less than that. I guess if your Yenko or other high priced car turned out to be a fake you would just say, "Oh well, my bad", and buy another. What I am doing in my own small way is standing up for those on this site who have been, or could be taken by some unscrouplus seller. Maybe someone thinking of passing a car off as something it isn't will think twice after reading this thread. Beleive me I can not afford to be doing this, but I am. I am old fashioned, I still beleive honesty is the best policy. One only needs to look at all the fake items now for sale on Ebay, to realize the crooks out there are in heaven right now. There seems to be no penalties for taking a persons hard earned money. A person can get in more trouble for shoplifting, than for stealing $20,000.00 more than a car is worth. Something is wrong with that!

I have been defrauded on muscle cars before and it stings really bad. I think some buyers just take the sellers word on one car and represent it to the next buyer without doing the homework themselves. That does not mean they are a crook. Maybe this guy knew the difference and maybe he did not. I would hate to be the judge on this one. I work very hard for my money so I do not like these stories when I here them. I also think that attorneys with few exception love this kind of thing $$$$. Good luck with getting your piece of mind in this ordeal.

Ed, your right with your assumption that the standard rear end mostly likely to be found in a 69Z would be a 3:73, but only if the 51% majority of the 20k Zs built were factory standardly completed and sent to dealers, and not special ordered built cars, which would require a research to prove or disprove. Actually, a real 69z could have a 2:56 NON posi 12 bolt. All that was required for a real 69Z was a 12bolt rear end, even a NON POSI one.
As for the guy with the legal issues over a 3:31 wanting a 3:73, is the reason you believe the gears were wrong cause of the axle code, or did you view the gears in the pumpkin and see that they were 3:31 and not upgraded to a 3:73 gear ratio? Maybe he sold you an original 331 rear axle with upgraded 373 gears?? As far as value, its always in the eye of the buyer and how much he wants to spend!! Though, for most of the car enthusiast the higher gears in a rear end seem to bring more value. As for 4:10 gears and M22s, they are over rated, and very few real Zs had these options. Remember, only special ordered Zs, mostly by drag racers in the 60s, purchased their cars with those options, a very low percent. If you dont have docs to back your car up, then find the first owner and see if he was a drag racer.

first time on forum: I have 25yrs of camaro craziness. Owned 13 cars. Current corral: 4 68Zs, 69 BB, 69 Z, 69 Z11

ps. Can someone send me an attachment to more info. on the X codes on the back seat divider? I have one car with it. Want to check others. and know all the code info. Thanks

Lotsa poeple have every reason to go nuts over cars that cost $900 in 1979 and are now worth close to or over 6 figures.

I apoligize Jim. I am not trying to be a smart***. I guess anyone has a right to go nuts if they want over these cars. I have been scammed by a guy in B.C., Canada. Cost me 100k and I am still working with the police there to get this guy behind bars.

I apoligize Jim. I am not trying to be a smart***. I guess anyone has a right to go nuts if they want over these cars. I have been scammed by a guy in B.C., Canada. Cost me 100k and I am still working with the police there to get this guy behind bars.

No need to apologize.

Just try to remember that for many here, 100k is the difference between living in a home and living on the street.

It would be a wonderful world if all car lovers were rich enough not to be bothered at a 6 figure expense over a car, or if our muscle car of choice was always affordable to anyone who desired one.

Also guys... I wear my mod hat in electrical and copo, only. I read everythnig here because I want to, and I help everyone I can because it gives me pleasure, and when I occasionally "nudge" someone over a post, it's just me applying my opinion. If I was wearing the mod hat, it would be happening in one of the forums I'm in charge of, and it would be happening officially, and the means used would be a PM or forcibly editing someone elses post.

Thanks for the reply. My problem is that I asked, and was told the car had
a BU coded (3:73), rear end. Since that is what the majority of Z28's came
with. The seller told me that was what was in the rear end. If he had told
me anything other than that, or a 4:10, I would not have even considered the
car. I contacted the seller and he agreed to make it right, but then ceased
communication. Since I had found that out I looked closer at other items,
and found them to be inconsistent with the car being a "real" Z28. Since
car was built in Van Nuys I am sure you are aware there were no X codes.
There is absolutely "No" doubt in my mind this car is a fake. seller offered
to settle with me for $2500.00 a month ago. Since I started
this all two years ago I have paid over $5,000.00. Had he offered me the
$2500.00 when this all began, this would be a mute point. In fact I told
him initially if he would just get me a replacement rear end I would be
satisfied. I had found one on Ebay for $1700.00, he agreed to get one. He
never did. So I do not think I have been unreasonable. It just seems to me
now with all the fake tags, and paperwork out there right now that these
guys feel untouchable. I believe in standing up for yourself, and that is
what I am doing. Ed Roberts

Ed, it's too bad that you didn't just file a small claims suit agains the dealer. Here in Washington the small claims limit is $5k (don't know the limit for your state), which would have covered what you are looking for without having to pay any attorney fees. By the way, I doubt there are many (like if any), 1969 Camaro Z/28's without the/a 302 that are worth $58k. Just the fact the dealer was looking for an unsuspecting buyer (at $58k) should have been a big red flag. Best of luck. Charlie

I have more than one six figure muscle car. It appears that finding date coded 302's with your favorite date for your car are readily available for you to put you vin on the front pad. If you do not have owner original docs, real build sheet or real tank sheet, any matching number Z28 could be a clone. Or could it? If you do the above and it cannot be proven then I guess you have yourself a real deal Z. I own a 69 yenko with a can am all aluminum 427 with the yenko name cast into it. Yenko had a few of these made. This car is more rare than the zl1 copo cars and is in mint condition. I also have a 69 L88 vert corvette. 67,68 and 69 Z28 camaros are not worth six figures, by the way. If you pay over 60k for one of the finest of these models then you are in for a staggering surprise when you try to sell it. Nada old car book is not the authority on these cars. Dont buy a car and expect it to be a great investment. Buy it to enjoy your dream. Life is too short to go nuts over a rear end ratio. Sorry

Don't want to hi-jack this post but being a big Yenko fan, would like to hear more about the Yenko with the alu Yenko engine. Did you build the car? Was it an original L72 Yenko? thanks

I think that Ed's doing the right thing. These guys who are passing these cars off as something that they are not are breaking the law and deserve to be punished for it. Bottom line, when you sell a car, be honest if you don't know if something is true, don't say it. That is the only way to protect yourself as a seller. The law favors the buyer and that's quite alright by me.

Jim,


Your help and input are always appreciated by me and I am sure many others. You run a great site. I wish it was around 15 years ago!!

To the others looking at 1969 Camaro's. GM did not place a VIN stamping on the rear end code. The best thing to do is get the code and the manufacturing date. This is found on the passenger side axle housing. It is very difficult to spot since most rear ends have now been painted over 35-40 years. I doubt a seller will let you scrape paint off the axle housing. If you are unsure and there is no paperwork to back it up, then assume it's a clone.

I love first gen Camaro's but Thank God that Chevrolet ended up putting the engine code in a 1972 & 1973 Camaro as the 5th digit of the VIN that way you know if it's a Z28, SS, RS, or maybe even a Type LT in 1973. yes I know the SS was not offered in 1973 for all you 2nd gen lovers out there.

Thanks guys for the moral support! I know now I should have went the small claims route, 20/20 hindsight. The attorneys are the ones who make out in these types of cases. I only hope if only one person reads what I have went through and thinks twice, maybe its worth it. These scammers think they are untouchable and to some point they are. Others out there who have been scammed need to share their experiences so others may learn. This site is the "BEST"! I only wish I had known about it three years ago. The car hobby now has become a product of the Barret Jackson age. Cars are being priced insanely, and we are starting to believe they are worth that much. Then the crooks come along and fuel the feeding frenzy. Like lemmings we follow, trusting. I know I am as guilty as anyone, and I should share the blame. That is why I never asked the guy to take the car back. I just wanted him to make it right in my eyes. To at least get me the correct rear end. To me that would have been a BU coded 3:73, which the majority of Z/28s came with from the factory. Save the posts! I was not interested in a Z/28 with a 3:07 or 3:31, or whatever. I have taken up way too much of the space on Team Camaro with this subject, but I appreciate having a place to talk it out. Thanks Ed

It has been awhile since I have posted. Just to update I am "still" suing the guy who sold me the car as a "real" Z/28. I was contacted some time back by the person who now owns the car. He bought it from a dealer in Kansas City area. He paid $58,000.00 for a "numbers" matching car. Amazingly since I owned the car the vin numbers majically appeared on the block. The current owner paid Jerry McNeish to fly in an inspect the car. His conclusion the car was just as I suspected a pieced together 69 Camaro. Current owner is now pursuing litigation with the dealer who sold him the car. Just beware, these crooks seem to be untouchable! I am trying to do my part and it hasn't been cheap. When I told my attorney that you can even buy fake aged paperwork, he was amazed. Keep the faith. Happy New Year! Ed

It is unfortunate that when something becomes popular-which means high profits are at stake-thieves and crooks line up for the action everywhere.

Ed, I sympathsize with you, but I am curious how your case may unfold in court. I would think the defense attorney will question you if the gears were ever actually inspected? If not-and probably by someone other than you, I don't think anyone can actually prove what gears were in the car when you bought it. I'm not sure if in civil matters defendants can take the 5th and not testify-if they can I think it will be hard to win.

Don't get me wrong, I am with ya all the way 'cause I think the snakes in our hobby are doing alot to tarnish it and drive the prices up to where normal everyday folk can't buy these cars anymore.

In looking at the 69 Z28s on the Team Camaro classifieds, and ebay, most state that the rearend is the "correct" or "original" 3:73. Again that is all I requested of the seller, to replace rearend. He said he would but never did. I have all of this in writing. He could have taken care of the problem and I would have accepted that. He left me no option. I told him I would have to see an attorney if he did not contact me. He didn't. What would you do? I traded the car to a dealer for a car and took a loss. His attorney has offered me $2500.00 to settle the case. I would have jumped at that offer when this began, Now two years later I have paid close to $4000.00 in legal fees. I did say I was a man of principal, maybe to a fault. I have offered to settle for $5500.00. Thanks Ed


you should have just taken it to an axle shop and paid them $1500 to change the fricken gears, then you would have been happy and you would still have the car

ANYBODY that calls me from Arkansas would be suspect in my book, after all that state breeds liars, like the Clintons ....

you bought an SS 350 that was presented as a Z28, and you accepted that, just that the 3.73 was or wasn't there, the code was wrong.

You should have bought the $1700 axle and installed it and sold the 3:31, you probably would have only lost $3-400 on that trade

to continue quibble over the axle ratio is unbelievable, then on top of that you traded your dream car that had the wrong axle ratio ($200 fix if you did it yourself) and lost $8k on a trade to a chevelle?

Your replies are mixed and make no sense.

What makes no sense is you still hanging on to this after x years when you traded away your 32 year dream (knowing it was pieced together, you admit that) for a Chevelle ... was that dream car number 2? ...

all because the ratio was 3:31 instead of 3:73 ...

JIM; you are right on about him. Gullible is the understatement. A true "babe in the woods"

Ed,

I feel for you being taken by the crooked seller, pawning off another clown as a real Z/28. Unfortunatly that is all to comon in todays market with the values sky rocketing on these cars. I also have to wonder as with a previous poster, did you had ever pull the rear cover to see if they had just installed 3.73s in 3.31 rearend?

I agree any scam seller should burn in h*ll but at this point if I were you I would just let it go. Dont let this consume your life. I agree with you in principle and would love to see this guy go down & set an example for the rest of the scam artist sellers but, it comes to a point where is just not worth it. Consentrait(sp) on the things that really matter in this world. your family.

Good luck& I wish you my best.
:beers:
Nick

Jim I really don't care what you think. I bought the car as being a true 69 Z/28, which is what the seller represented it as. It wasn't. I was going to accept him paying $1700 to replace the rearend. That still would not have made it a real Z/28 but I wanted something back. He said he would then backed out. So I took him to court which is my right. I don't think I need your permission. Obviously you know everything and I should have checked with you first! Oops! I made another mistake. Then the guy who bought my car wouldn't have spent $58,000.00 for a fake as well. Excuse me for trying to give some other unsuspecting buyers a headsup.

Ed,

I am really sorry to see this has consumed so much of your life (in a negative way). This is supposed to be a fun, educational, relationship building & rewarding hobby. I would suggest as I did over a year ago that you FIRE your attorney and simply file a small claims suit.

The bottom line is, we all want you to get into a position that you can let go of this and move on with your life as quickly as possible. I can only imagine what your family & friends are going through from painfully watching this. You need to get this over with if not for your sake, then for theirs.
Charlie

sorry to hear your story ed, however a real 69 Z for $32000 sounds too good to be true, and when it sounds to good to be true , you know the rest

hey Ed, I am NOT the only person that has told you the truth here.

We ALL have tried to help you out, but your refusal to see the light is uncomfortable to a LOT of us

You need to release your pit bull grip and get on with life

The fact that your acceptance of the fake Z28 would be ok only if it would have had 3:73 gears (we still do no know for fact it didn't) is enough to tell us ALL where you are ...

Should I go over to Team Chevelle to see if you have a similar story for the Chevelle you traded it for?

Some people learn others do not, we are only trying to HELP you ...

I've been following this thread and something is just not adding up for me. This guy sold you something it wasn't, but you were willing to accept it for a 3.73 rearend gear. When this dealer didn't do this you sued him for what, the rearend gear or the car. Why was the rearend gear acceptable on a misrepresented car. In my mind, screw the rearend gear. You didn't pay whatever you paid on this car for the rearend gear. You paid what you paid (whether it was way too low for market or not) because, in your mind, it was a Z-28, period. Now, you have this website where you put in writing that the car was acceptable but the rearend gear wasn't. And, you have a legal case pending. I don't see where you have a case. The guy you're suing can use what you wrote here to prove you didn't care about the car. If I were a judge it would be "next case! Oh and by the way, the guy who sued can pay the court costs too."

You may think this is cold, but it is fact. You bought the car he misrepresented but you had the right to check what he was misrepresenting. You didn't. I say move on, lesson learned. The money you are dealing with isn't worth the heart disease you are giving yourself. Your suit is not going to stop people from misrepresenting things they sell. It's happened since before man. Plus you are spending money that can be used to buy your next camaro.

I am at a complete loss here. If the gears were wrong, ok, the guy lied. Put in a set of 3.73's and don't send the guy an Xmas card.

There is the phrase "Buyer Beware" and "due diligence".

alan

Going back to the axle ratios. I checked my original paperwork for my 69 Z that I bought back in 69. I have the POP and it reads BT. (355) It also came with no tach, no console, flat hood, standard steering and power disc brakes, radio delete. Not many like that!. Kurt S has all the numbers in the CRG website. I don't know what a Z would be like with 331 gears but the 355s were dogs. I went through a clutch in 11000 miles.
Can you imagine finding that car now and trying to prove it was a real Z. Lucky it was a Canadian sold car so there is GM documentation. It is very funny how as the years go by so many of the actual facts blur, and others become fact. It is also a sad commentary on the state of the hobby. I feel sorry for the guys who do have a real Z and know it but don't have a lot of background paperwork. Which is almost a must now along with the mandatory lie detector test!

ANYBODY that calls me from Arkansas would be suspect in my book, after all that state breeds liars, like the Clintons ....


you admit that) for a Chevelle ... was that dream car number 2? ...

all because the ratio was 3:31 instead of 3:73 ...

hey Ed, I am NOT the only person that has told you the truth here.

We ALL have tried to help you out, but your refusal to see the light is uncomfortable to a LOT of us

You need to release your pit bull grip and get on with life

The fact that your acceptance of the fake Z28 would be ok only if it would have had 3:73 gears (we still do no know for fact it didn't) is enough to tell us ALL where you are ...

Should I go over to Team Chevelle to see if you have a similar story for the Chevelle you traded it for?




Jim,
I do not think your replies here as noted above are called for. The man got swindled and you are talking down to him like he is a pile of dirt. You put down him, anyone from Arkansas, the Clinton's and then spoke for ALL OF US saying we are uncomfortable because of his posts. The only thing here that made ME uncomfortable was your snide posts.

Let the man settle his case because he got taken by the dealer. None of us should be taken by anyone in this hobby. You have only added to his frustration in this matter. He fought for this country and has the right to speak out without being scowled like a school child. Unreal......

Kev

I feel sorry for the guys who do have a real Z and know it but don't have a lot of background paperwork. Which is almost a must now along with the mandatory lie detector test!


Isn't that the truth. :sad: I am unfortunatly one of those lucky guys you are refering to. No Build sheet, No POP, No dealer invoice, just an honest old Z that speaks for it'self. I have the so called car show "experts" picking my car apart and claiming my DZ isn't original because it doesn't fit into the "cookie cutter":rolleyes: 2 week prior time frame that a lot of "experts":rolleyes: say it has to. :sad:

I hate to say it but with all these crooks & clown cars out there, it will probably get worse before it gets better.
Ok off my soap box:D

:beers:

Isn't that the truth. :sad: I am unfortunatly one of those lucky guys you are refering to. No Build sheet, No POP, No dealer invoice, just an honest old Z that speaks for it'self. I have the so called car show "experts" picking my car apart and claiming my DZ isn't original because it doesn't fit into the "cookie cutter":rolleyes: 2 week prior time frame that a lot of "experts":rolleyes: say it has to. :sad:

I hate to say it but with all these crooks & clown cars out there, it will probably get worse before it gets better.
Ok off my soap box:D

:beers:

Same here, I bought mine new and everyone in Willacy County , TX as the black marks on their pavement to prove it, but it don't matter , I will die with mine, keys in hand. :waving:

Jim,
I do not think your replies here as noted above are called for. The man got swindled and you are talking down to him like he is a pile of dirt. You put down him, anyone from Arkansas, the Clinton's and then spoke for ALL OF US saying we are uncomfortable because of his posts. The only thing here that made ME uncomfortable was your snide posts.

Let the man settle his case because he got taken by the dealer. None of us should be taken by anyone in this hobby. You have only added to his frustration in this matter. He fought for this country and has the right to speak out without being scowled like a school child. Unreal......

Kev
how MANY times do the members here have to say the same thing?

you are right, perhaps it is a tad harsh, but sometimes reality is

dirt, I think not ... gullible, perhaps

and I will stand by my statement about the Clintons

the rest is tongue in cheek (with a tad of sarcasm) and if you don't like it, that is ok, we can agree to disagree

I guess that I don't get it. You would have been fine with a fake Z if it had the correct rear end code? Either way you were had. Why let the guy off of the hook for replacing the rear end? The car is misrepresented either way!

I would not have been happy, but I figured I would at least get something back. I did not determine the car was a fake without question until Jerry McNeish inspected it this past year. So for all you guys who have been dwelling on the rearend gears, you missed the point. That was my first indicaction the car was a fake. Had seller assumed some liabilty I would have worked with him. He said he would, then blew me off. He has deeper pockets than me, but I have honesty on my side. By the way I like the "pit bull" analogy!

I would not have been happy, but I figured I would at least get something back. I did not determine the car was a fake without question until Jerry McNeish inspected it this past year. So for all you guys who have been dwelling on the rearend gears, you missed the point. That was my first indicaction the car was a fake. Had seller assumed some liabilty I would have worked with him. He said he would, then blew me off. He has deeper pockets than me, but I have honesty on my side. By the way I like the "pit bull" analogy!

Ed, I've read this thread thru completely and I may have missed this so I'm going to ask, when did Jerry inspect the car, I'm assuming after you purchased it and what were his findings?

I will say that I applaud you for standing up for what YOU believe in, not many people will do that these days seems everyone thinks they need to be polically correct, let everybody do what they want to do when they want to do it and that's a big part of what's wrong with our country today and why we have a big problem with this hobby, people are just to afraid to say No you can't do that !!! On the other hand you have to know when to pick your battles, in this case it may be better off for you in he long run to accept their offer, cut your losses and move on both financially and mentally.

Back to rears, and away from what edsvet "should or shouldn't do". I was under the impression that for a Z/28, the 3.73 was standard, but numerically lower gears could be ordered.

Ed,

I got your PM and have to answer it here since I can't attach pictures through the PM page...

Here's page 2 of the 1969 Camaro Power Team Chart for you to look at. As you can see (bottom of the page), the 69 Z28 (302) came "Standard" with the 3.73 rear axle, or you could order the 3.55 axle if you wanted the "Economy" ratio. The 4.10 was available (as were others that aren't shown on the chart) as the "Performance" ratio. Finally, there were two "Special Order" ratios available, the 3.07 and the 3.31.

As for your other question, I wouldn't walk away from an actual "FACTORY" Z28 just because it didn't have the 3.73 axle. On the contrary, ANY REAL Z28, no matter what the transmission (M20, M21 or M22), rear axle ratio, Interior (Deluse or Standard) or Options installed would be in my garage if the price were right. Unfortunately, we no longer have the ability to walk into the dealer and special order a 69 Z as we want it. In these days, uless you happen to stumble onto your "perfect" car, if you want a Z28, beggars can't be choosers. I recommend you find something as close as possible to what you want and trade up (or down) if you find your dream car.

But that's just my opinion...

Ed

http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h52/bertfam/powerteam.jpg

Back to rears, and away from what edsvet "should or shouldn't do". I was under the impression that for a Z/28, the 3.73 was standard, but numerically lower gears could be ordered.

Correctomundo.

So, according to that chart, you could not get a M20 with the L89, but you could get a MC1 3 speed? ?

Gary, thanks for the kind words in your PM, and also for the above info.. The car was a total fake according to Jerry McNeish who inspected it for the current owner. Once again after it left my hands the vin# appeared on the block.

So, according to that chart, you could not get a M20 with the L89, but you could get a MC1 3 speed? ?

Not all the published GM materials are accurate. BTW you could get the M20 in an L78 and even a few COPO's got them as well.

Back to rears, and away from what edsvet "should or shouldn't do". I was under the impression that for a Z/28, the 3.73 was standard, but numerically lower gears could be ordered.

Yes RPO posi to 4.10 then through COPO process for 4.56 and 4.88

My buddies 69 Z 28 has a M-21 and a 3:55 posi rear end. I have seen the build sheet . He also has a 1969 El Camino 396/375 with a Turbo hydomatic and a 3:31 posi fully documented