Re: 1967 Z/28
 

The '67 Z/28 I was involved with years ago had a V0706MO engine stamp, 06E body.

Protect-o-plate, 2 owners, absolutely original drivetrain.

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, it's not suspect to anyone that I know that "knows" '67 Z-28's, but I can understand those without significant knowledge regarding these cars having questions.



[/ QUOTE ]

So, you're saying that I and a few others don't have enough knowledge to question these car? Hmmmmmm. Alrighty then.

Rick H.

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

Or.... If you had more knowledge, you wouldn't be questioning.....

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

I'm going to get the popcornnnn. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...ns/naughty.gif

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

[ QUOTE ]
Or.... If you had more knowledge, you wouldn't be questioning.....

[/ QUOTE ]

Back at ya!

Rick H.

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm going to get the popcornnnn. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...ns/naughty.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
I'll take mine with butter if you please.

Good idea for people to save this entire thread for future reference. I know nothing about the Jun/Jul scenarios being explained here and those explanations seem to come across quite valid. However, five years from now, if I was looking at this car, and willing to pay "matching number" dollars for it, the conflicting dates would certainly throw up a red flag. Nothing much you can do except have evidence on file similar to what this thread is bringing out and hopefully potential purchasers will not dispute it.

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Or.... If you had more knowledge, you wouldn't be questioning.....

[/ QUOTE ]

Back at ya!

Rick H.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not the one doing the questioning, https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...s/rolleyes.gif

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

Thanks great info, I know I learned a few things from this thread.

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

Just one more to chime in. It is always safer to question than to assume to much.

In the case of this car and a few others that I have on record it looks very much like there was a shortage of a particular part, could be the MO engine, that held this car on the line longer than it should have been. Based on the body number sequence to the vin number this car and at least one other I have record of were both held for a number of days counting the weekend. This hold over number is based on several cars on record that are within 20 build numbers away, taking their final vin numbers and subtracting from this cars vin number, divide.... This is not a common thing but well documented on high performance and rare option cars from several years where parts were short and the car had to be held up until they were in. The hold over of 69 Copo's where they sat waiting for a BE rear is a well known example. I've got enough cars in my own registry that I have to see and agree with Jon, not that I was questioning, 6E/7A are odd weeks with a number of peculiar things showing up.

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

As I said, I am no expert and representing the car as it was to me. The engine cast date is F297.As for what Jerry states in his certification "This Z28 Camaro coupe and drivetrain have been certified as real and authentic." Will this statement be parsed to mean that the car and drive train have been certified, seperately, as correct but not necessarily "born with" each other? I would hope that no licensed appraiser specializing in these cars would be that ambigious or evasive. I appreciate the discussion and have learned a lot. I am sticking with my belief that the car is real and if no one buys it then I guess I will just be "stuck" with a car that they only made 602 of and, as I was told, only approx. 169 are documented as still on the road; for all of the vultures circling, that is just a number I heard and I did not have sex with that woman...

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

[ QUOTE ]
they only made 602 of and, as I was told, only approx. 169 are documented as still on the road

[/ QUOTE ]
Based on the usual lack of docs for 67 camaros in general [buildsheets etc] id say 170 documented on the road out of 602 made seems like a rather large percentage,especially given that the vast majority of those cars werent grocery getters. Im curious as to what criteria was used to document the other 169.......If my numbers are accurate they made around 225[roughly] 427 COPO Chevelles,which had the luxury of having 1 2 or 3 buildsheets in each car and cars from canada, and there are only around 20 or so documented last i heard. Furthermore the vins of the yenko chevelles are known, and they havent found 30% of those.

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

Last I heard there was about 195 of 602 found to date.

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

I've had several people ask me to comment. I'll keep it simple since Jon and Bill covered most of it.
Dates all line up fine. Car was built / finished ~7/06/67, if that helps clear it up.
And, IMO, block stamp is fine.

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

[ QUOTE ]
I've had several people ask me to comment. I'll keep it simple since Jon and Bill covered most of it.
Dates all line up fine. Car was built / finished ~7/06/67, if that helps clear it up.
And, IMO, block stamp is fine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the confirmation. I do believe the car to be original and the engine stamping correct along with all the other components. I have held my comments to a minimum as I do not want to end up in the same situation as 427RCODE in a recent thread. Skepticism is fine and there is nothing more I can say or do to change anyone's mind (ZEDDER, your pm box is full). I have every confidence that this car is correct and has the born-with drivetrain, thus my comment about being "stuck" with it if I do not sell it; I put it in quotes to indicate that I will be glad to keep it as it is, in my and other people's opinion, a matching numbers car, it just does not fit in to my collection of BB cars. Nuff said...

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

If I could offer a suggestion...
Can someone from the CRG write Joe a letter? https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/dunno.gif

No guarantees, just something simple like:
"Dear sir, According to our research... Here is what happened in June of 1967".
If this is truly a verified, and documented anomaly -
then someone needs to put it down in writing. (not a former owner- no offense)

I would imagine, that EVERY single time that this car hits the market,
these same exact questions are going to be asked.
100 years from now when we are all gone,
someone is still going to ask the same questions again, and again.
Unless maybe they find those shipping documents by then. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...ins/tongue.gif
Just my opinion, but that would certainly help this beautiful car in the future. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/beers.gif
With this stuff docummented, this Z can always reach it's full potential.

To be perfectly honest, even if this car HAD a replacement engine, (which it doesn't seem to have).
I think it still is worth the asking price.

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

A letter from CRG would be great, how would I proceed? I hired MacNeish to certify the car in an attempt to make up for the lack of documentation. When I asked him about the engine assembly date being after the 06E cowl tag date, he said he expected to see that apparent discrepency and did not give it a second thought, so I did not either. I guess I just wasted my money having him certify the car??? I am not going to manufacture paperwork so all I could do is post pics and tell it like I know it. I mentioned the former owner because I believe what he told me to be true as he is a stand up guy and most of you know him and his reputation. Now, I promise I will bow out...

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

Sorry Joe, I just emptied my PM Box https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/beers.gif I think the CRG guys who have spoken up have eliminated any doubts that most would have about this car and given Jerry's "professional" opinion also, I wouldn't lose any sleep about the car's pedigree. Frankly, anyone who is serious about a '67 Z usually contacts one of a handful of guys who follow these cars closely and asks for an opinion. Those in the know would not hesitate to endorse the car based on the dates, engine pad and trim tag - I wouldn't have bought it myself it this wasn't the case. My opinion as to why the car isn't selling quickly is simply that the market for anything about $65K or more is very soft right now compared to this time last year. Look at Quick Bow-Tie's '70 L78 Chevelle that only went for $69K. I was very interested in that car and would have probably paid $75K for it last year, but I bowed out at $65K for fear that a correction was happening and I didn't want to be upside down. Obviously, "the market" had similar concerns given what it sold for. Cars over $65K will sell, but they will take longer to find the "right" buyer - especially as we go into the winter. I'd put the car on ebay with a copy of Jerry's report and get it more exposure. I'd also put it on Team Camaro. Good luck with the sale!

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

I don't think you wasted any money with MacNeish. I think his certs carry a lot of wieght with a car.

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

I didn't take any pics of the pad stamp on the Blue low mile '67 Z which sold at Mecum. Did anyone else?

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

When I was going to buy that 7K mile car in 2002 or 2003, the original motor was not in the car but the owner (an engine builder) claimed to have the original motor in a bag. I requested video and pics of the car which I got, but again without anything on the original motor. I again asked specifically for shots of the engine pad...and the car was sold to someone else. The car was a drag car since new.

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

[ QUOTE ]
the original motor was not in the car but the owner (an engine builder) claimed to have the original motor in a bag.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe it was on 06E car and he had Santa Claus bring him the engine for Christmas. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...ins/tongue.gif https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...emlins/eek.gif https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/wink.gif

Rick H.

p.s. for you guys with no sense of humor, that's a joke.

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

[ QUOTE ]
If I could offer a suggestion...
Can someone from the CRG write Joe a letter? https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/dunno.gif


[/ QUOTE ]
That's not something that CRG does or wants to do. That's a slippery slope....
If the owner or buyer wants a certified opinion they should contact a professional like Jerry.

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

[ QUOTE ]

That's not something that CRG does or wants to do. That's a slippery slope....
If the owner or buyer wants a certified opinion they should contact a professional like Jerry.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I would imagine it would be.
Has this anomaly been documented on the CRG site?
Maybe a blurb somewhere, telling the story about the June 67 cars -
seems like there should be a bunch of examples.

https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/flag.gif

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

Hey Guys,

Just wanted to chime in here. Jon, Kurt and Bill have basically covered all of the issues with this 1967 Z28. This car is real and the stampings are real and original to the car. I have many other original engine stampings that match this one.

Jon and I have been working together now for about 18 years. I started the 1967 Z28 registry in 1988 and Jon Mello joined in to help me with the registry that same year. Over the past 18 years, we have learned a lot and know about many of the production trends with these cars. Many of the cars built in an "E" month, 06E, 03E, etc are usually built during the first week of the next month. In the past, I have done seminars on this topic at the Camaro Nationals explaining this trend in great detail.

During the early 1990's GM of Canada supplied me with most of the 1967 Canadian paperwork for our research. It was during this time that we noticed vin numbers with an 06E trim tag build date were actually assembled during the first week of the next month. GM of Canada gives you the actual assembly date of the vehicle. This information was very important to our research and has helped us break the codes on many drive train issues.

The car that Joe has for sale is a steal at this price. It's a very nice car that needed some minor TLC, and to my knowledge, Joe has taken care of many of these issues.

Thanks,

Jerry@CHP

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

Im posting here because the motor questions came up in this thread,im not speaking of this 67Z in particular. My question is for ANY car that is inspected and "certified" by anyone that offers that service. I cant see anyone stating as fact, the originality of a motor with 100% certainty,whether the car has factory paperwork or not.There are many factory unstamped motors w perfect factory broach marks out there in the market,and anything can be properly duplicated to match any car out there. Saying a motor in someones qualified opinion is consistant with others that have been inspected,broach marks appear correct, etc is fine and is normally the type of language used in most inpection processes whether it be cars or baseball signatures,etc. Stating that a motor is guaranteed the original for the car in my opinion is not being realistic.

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

Chuck i agree i own a few unstamped orig 512 351 blocks ect done right no one could tell

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

427King...I have to ask...based on your last post, how do you guarantee the motors you sell are not restamped like in this ad? "Factory MN motors for sale, all are rebuilt,3 have fresh ZERO miles one has 100 miles or so.All are intake to pan w dated 840s. All are original pad stampings. Have the following TO128MN TO512MN TO521MN TO528MN....Remember there are NO restamped ,reground motors here.$18500.00 youre choice,offers accepted ". Please understand I am not accusing you of restamping and my guess is that you have seen enough motors to know a real stamping when you see one, it just seems to contradict the comments you just made concerning appraisers???

I used to own the Z in this post and based on the number of real Z stampings that I have seen and the info that has been shared regarding these cars, I confidently sold it as having the original motor and have no second thoughts about it.

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

Oh boy. Anybody got any popcorn left? Kim?

Rick H.

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

There is no need for popcorn. I simply wonder how he feels comfortable making guarantees given everything that has been discussed here. He may just feel comfortable enough with his own knowledge and be prepared to refund monies for anything that slips by him some how. No big deal really as I have never heard anyone say that they have bought a restamped part from him and he has sold more hi-po chevy parts than anyone that I know! So there is no need to take offence or to sit and wait for a train wreck https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/grin.gif

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

Thats a good point,i believe i should word the ads a little bit differently as stated above. As far as how do i guarantee them, i offer a full 100% refund if anyone disagrees with my description ,no questions asked. I also document where and who the motors came from for the next owner, and they are assured that is how i bought the motor[s]. If an appraiser is wrong in his "certification",is he responsible for the 400.00 he charged, or the 50K he cost the new buyer if it is proven the motor was restamped in 1978 for example in the above example???

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

Thanks 427King...that is exactly what I expected and wrote the above post before reading your response. I feel the same way about the Z that I sold, if joe wants his money back I am happy to give it to him...and he has already told me that he is completely happy with the car.

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

If you make a mistake in your representation of the car,you buy it back. If i make an error in my judgement, i buy it back. The difference for the "appraiser" however is that he normally charges a few hundred dollars and if his opinion is wrong he cant just offer a refund of the appraisal price, that may cost someone many 10000s if he falsely[unknowingly] documented a car. Thats why he really cant offer 100% guarantees. Remember that by saying a stamping is the original while the motor is IN A CAR , you are essentially saying the CAR is real as well .

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

Since I have no takers, does anyone know where I can get the correct fan assembly (5 blade, 4 rivet, 3.25in bolt pattern) and correct water pump for my anomoly? These items should finish up my MacNeish punch list.

I appreciate everyone's input and questions, learned quite a bit about the 67 Z as well as the thought patterns of some of the sYc members.

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

Shoot first...ask questions later ??? https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/dunno.gif

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

[ QUOTE ]
Since I have no takers, does anyone know where I can get the correct fan assembly (5 blade, 4 rivet, 3.25in bolt pattern) and correct water pump for my anomoly? These items should finish up my MacNeish punch list.

I appreciate everyone's input and questions, learned quite a bit about the 67 Z as well as the thought patterns of some of the sYc members.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am sure some one will step up soon.
Give it some time - I might even be able to be convinced. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/smile.gif
Why spend more on it, if you are trying to sell it?
Then you will have to ask $93K.

Or - are you taking it off the market?
IMO, Let the new owner find those things. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/dunno.gif

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

[ QUOTE ]
... Why spend more on it, if you are trying to sell it?
Then you will have to ask $93K.

Or - are you taking it off the market?
IMO, Let the new owner find those things. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/dunno.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

I am too anal when it comes to these sort of things; if I can find the part I need, I will buy it, can only add value to the car. As I do not NEED to sell it I will continue to attempt to "add value", no matter what car I have, isn't that the whole point of the hobby? Only a flipper would remain satisfied with something less than correct, within reason of course and, no, I am not taking a stab at anyone that flips cars.

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

Okkkk, Charlie...do you have another fan??

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

Joe,
Well said. What an adventure the road trip up to your house with Jerry was. Nothing like getting stuck in Atlanta traffic at rush hour with the outside temperature at 95 degrees! https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/cool.gif

Re: 1967 Z/28
 

[ QUOTE ]
Joe,
Well said. What an adventure the road trip up to your house with Jerry was. Nothing like getting stuck in Atlanta traffic at rush hour with the outside temperature at 95 degrees! https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/cool.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Enjoyed meeting both you and Jerry and, yes, the ATL traffic i something to avoid at all costs!!