Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

[ QUOTE ]

VINs were sequentially assigned, monitored at the car plants by the FBI.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're kidding right? The FBI has never been involved with "monitoring" VINs at assembly plants.

You may be confusing them with the NICB. The National Insurance Crime Bureau would be the recipient of VIN lists at the end of the model year for statistical purposes but neither the NICB nor any law enforcement agency was ever involved at any level of an assembly plant with VIN monitoring.

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

William,

Thanks for the reply. Out of a total production of 220,906 cars you are saying that your determination is made based on a sampling of just over 200 VIN's after July?? So I would have to assume the D base has perhaps 1000 cars more or less in the entire D base?

This out of out of over 200,000 total units made in 1967.

So I guess we agree to disagree then? I am really going to keep this simple. You know photos are worth a alot and the photo is what it is, and in 1967 you cannot seperate GM, Fisher or Chevy in the basic production methods used to build a car.

Where this specific Z-28 listed was delayed in the production cycle can be debated for a long time, but this I can tell you is my opinion:.

The Camaro bodies at Fisher were sequentially built in 1967. This was signified by a body unit number which allowed Fisher to track production by unit.

At the Hole coming out of Fisher the cars were staged in lines for VIN assignment and Chevrolet did not assign VIN's in the exact order produced by Fisher

Further the date on the Trim Tag reflects the date the Body was built up at Fisher, and - in 1967 the basic option content is also listed on this same tag.

In 1968 Firebird production started at Norwood along with production at LOS and Lordstown. This change from a single line to a multiple GM brand line production method at Norwood caused the change in the data on the Fisher tag in 1968 on the Camaro - as Chevy was no longer the only customer for cars out of Fisher.

Let me draw you a picture:

If you were going to testify in court as to specifically "when" this car was built what do you think a Judge think when you present a case that this specific car was not "built" when the Manufacturer - "General Motors Corporation " indicates it was?

Everything else is correct on the Tag: the option content, the color the trim, Just the date is wrong....

Further to support your contentions you present a summary of information with no submission to prove the information is factual. Further the information you have to base your entire case on is from a statistically small sampling and that the actual data in support is not available to examine?

I would think you would have to show that the tag was somehow flawed or questionable...

I think the Judge will believe the data on the tag. The rest of the collector car community believes "the tag". Ask any guy here on this board when the car they have was built and they will check the trim tag.

I agree that in 1968 and in 1969 Changes were made in how vehicles were tracked and I stated specifically why above.

For 1967 you are swimming upstream here my friend,- but you are entitled to your opinion. I am entitled to mine.

The car in this thread was likely the last 67 Z/28 produced by GM.

https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...iggthumpup.gif

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

Fisher did not build the bodies in body # sequence. It was their tracking # for the unit when scheduling the bodies; that # related the order to a car (talking about 67/68 here). Lot easier to move around a couple of #'s around on paper to balance the line than the logistic nightmare of changing all the order #'s. I.e., it's easier to shuffle paper than it is to move car bodies.
There's tons of data to support this. Look at LOS cars - the work order # sequences up relative to the VIN throughout the day, but the body #'s bounce around. (Assuming you agree with http://www.camaros.org/numbers.shtml#b - I know...the data to support *that* isn't published either...)

VIN's were then assigned when the cars first entered the Chevrolet side. That's why the VIN is never on any order confirmation back then. They never knew it til the car was being built.
VIN order is what decides when a car was actually on the Chevrolet assembly line. But then again, remember when they pulled the last Camaro, Oldsmobile, etc off the assembly line for the musuem, they always say that the last car doesn't always have the highest VIN. Because the staging lanes scramble the VIN order a little. The highest VIN will be the last car thru where the VIN's are assigned, but it probably won't be the last car down the line.

I have no idea what part of the http://www.camaros.org/assemblyprocess.shtml you don't think is correct. This was the same process used at all Fisher/Chevy plants and John was in those (Willow Run) before 67. Have you ever worked in an assembly plant?? They don't resequence the line every year - major undertaking and the tooling is kinda fixed in place. And yes, I did.

*NO* Firebird was ever built at Norwood in 68. Firebird production at NOR started 4/14/69.

The db size is no secret. 15,000+. Just what data are you using to support your 'opinions'??
Look analytically at the data you do have and it doesn't support what you are saying.


This is a post about a car for sale, this discussion should really be in the right forum.

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

Of the run of 50 Gibb ZL1's Mine is body # 222001 which is the first one of 50 in sequence but it is car # 14. My car has a 02D trim tag but cars #1 and #2 were delivered in December. Really confusing.

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

69 is a little different. The body # is the confirmation number.
But still the same concept applies - the scheduler moved the orders around as needed. And a call from Estes caused the #1 and #2 cars to be moved forward in the schedule. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/smile.gif

It is a confusing system from the outside. If you haven't worked in production, esp automotive, it can be hard to grasp. Once you understand it, then a lot of things start to fall into place.

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

[ QUOTE ]
69 is a little different. The body # is the confirmation number.
But still the same concept applies - the scheduler moved the orders around as needed. And a call from Estes caused the #1 and #2 cars to be moved forward in the schedule. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/smile.gif

It is a confusing system from the outside. If you haven't worked in production, esp automotive, it can be hard to grasp. Once you understand it, then a lot of things start to fall into place.

[/ QUOTE ]

Kurt it is not at all confusing. Go back and re read each of my posts. Really read them please.


Now since there was "no firebird production at Norwood in 1968" you are playing dates. Do you really think GM is going to phase in production of a duifferent brand line COLD?? No they are going to change the tag to prepare for the change. The 1969 models were produced at Norwood in year 1968, as a 1969 models. What about this is not clear??

"Once you understand it, then a lot of things start to fall into place".


Yes I know I live pretty close to the retiree hall for the old Norwood UAW. When we speak of our exacting standards of "date and build" to these guys you get laughed at really quick. Been there done that.

In the end it is still your opinion. In the end the guys who built the cars in 1967 tell a different story.

Phil https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/beers.gif

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

The youngest kid in the class is the one who was born last, regardless of when he was conceived. Conceived first (Fisher body tag) could have actually been born last (Chevrolet VIN)

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

I agree if you are talking about a living thing. Not a Car, with VIN assignment managed the way it was, The earlier car could also make it to the end of the line first. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/beers.gif

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

[ QUOTE ]
In 1968 Firebird production started at Norwood along with production at LOS and Lordstown. This change from a single line to a multiple GM brand line production method at Norwood caused the change in the data on the Fisher tag in 1968 on the Camaro - as Chevy was no longer the only customer for cars out of Fisher.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Now since there was "no firebird production at Norwood in 1968" you are playing dates. Do you really think GM is going to phase in production of a duifferent brand line COLD?? No they are going to change the tag to prepare for the change. The 1969 models were produced at Norwood in year 1968, as a 1969 models. What about this is not clear??

[/ QUOTE ]
Phil,
"What is not clear?" Nothing, other that it's wrong. You were talking about 68 model year with the reference to the change to the trim tag and the start of production at LOS in your first post. Then you talk about 68 calendar year. But it doesn't matter.

Absolutely NO Firebirds were built at Norwood in 68 - calendar year or model year. Firebird was removed from Lordstown on 3/15/69 in prep of the stripping of the plant and the installation of the Vega tooling. (JohnZ was the person responsible for ripping out the tooling and installing the Vega tooling, btw. Some good stories there!) Firebird production restarted on 4/14/69, at NOR. This is documented from the General (hence why I know the exact dates). Can you show me *any* NOR Firebirds built before April 69??? Should be easy if you're right. If you want to save time, don't bother - they don't exist.

[ QUOTE ]
When we speak of our exacting standards of "date and build" to these guys you get laughed at really quick.

[/ QUOTE ]Of course. They were there to install a part. They would never look at a build date unless they are entering it for the POP info. Who (in the plant) cares what the date of an alternator is as long as it's the right part #?


I read what you wrote and a lot of it is wrong. Hence my post this morning about how the body #'s and VIN's were handled in the plant. You asked for data and I gave you concrete examples. Just like my post now.

Whether you choose to look at this info analytically and with an open mind, well....

Exactly what do you think was different in 67??
And again, "Just what data are you using to support your 'opinions'??"

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

Kurt,

It has become clear that you are here on this site to supress free speech and push your CRG "agenda". I believe that you already have a really good web site where folks can go to express opinions and submit data to the CRG that gets snapped up into the D-base where it then gets used just like you are attempting to use it here.

Since you are no obsessed with the firebird issue Lets go there shall we?

13 years ago I interviewed several retired workers form both Fisher and Norwood who were employed there in 1967 to specifically determine 1967 production processes. These were the same guys that also recalled the pranks that were played on the new car buyer such as the notorious practice of placing a rattle can in the quarter panel. There were other stories as well.

These gentlemen were specific on the TT change in '68 to ready fisher for Firebird production, because this is what they were told by supervision at the time. Despite the fact that Fisher Norwood was ready - Market forces and firebird sales did not require the Production start for firebird there until mid '69.

I do not think it is productive to insult the retired workers. You have an opinion based on your 15,000 car d base of which you are not really clear on what % is 1967 exclusive.... That is your business, and apperently it is -as you are helping to run a website called the CRG. OK by me - but forcing your views down my gut here is not real polite. This is not the CRG.

In your previous post you stated:

"when they pulled the last Camaro, Oldsmobile, etc off the assembly line for the musuem, they always say that the last car doesn't always have the highest VIN. Because the staging lanes scramble the VIN order a little. The highest VIN will be the last car thru where the VIN's are assigned, but it probably won't be the last car down the line"


Your statement simply confirms what I have said previously on this topic and is what the Retiree's told me happened at the hole on the Chevrolet side.

We can keep chatting on this till the web dies or the moderators shut it down - you are not going to change my mind because what you and I believe is really not that far off the mark. I believe the Fisher Body unit number did matter in 1967 and thus the Trim Tag was relevent and you do not.

It is really that simple. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/beers.gif

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

[ QUOTE ]
Kurt,

It has become clear that you are here on this site to supress free speech and push your CRG "agenda".

[/ QUOTE ]
OK, so supporting my arguments with facts somehow suppresses free speech? I'm not following.
I'm talking, you're talking, and we're not swearing. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/cool.gif

And what exactly is the CRG agenda?
The CRG site says it's "Accurate, Objective, Useful Content".


[ QUOTE ]
Since you are no obsessed with the firebird issue Lets go there shall we?

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not obsessed with it. It was the only thing that you responded to.

[ QUOTE ]
These gentlemen were specific on the TT change in '68 to ready fisher for Firebird production, because this is what they were told by supervision at the time. Despite the fact that Fisher Norwood was ready - Market forces and firebird sales did not require the Production start for firebird there until mid '69.

I do not think it is productive to insult the retired workers.

[/ QUOTE ]
Interesting. So you're saying the tag change that occurred in 68 across all Chevrolet (and GM I believe) models and plants was due one new product coming to Norwood, one that didn't happen until mid-69? Thought you said it happened in 68? Never mind that Pontiac used the same style trim tag in 67.
I'd say it was a corporate wide change due to changing federal regulations (the conformance text on the tag).
Market forces weren't even a factor. It was a production issue - they needed to prep LOR for the Vega. And it took a month of work to prep NOR for the Firebird.
Oh, and just how did I insult anyone?
[ QUOTE ]
You have an opinion based on your 15,000 car d base of which you are not really clear on what % is 1967 exclusive....

[/ QUOTE ]
67's - 8,700 out of the 15,500 in the db.

[ QUOTE ]
Your statement simply confirms what I have said previously on this topic and is what the Retiree's told me happened at the hole on the Chevrolet side.

[/ QUOTE ]
That part is explained in the assembly article. And you stated it above too. It causes a little bit of variance, but only by a maximum of 50-100 VIN's (normally much less than that). Not enough to be evident or significant to any of us.
Almost noone in the plant looked at body #'s or VIN's anyway. If you go out in the plant and asked about a VIN or a body #, they would look at you funny. The rotation/sequence # is all that mattered.

[ QUOTE ]
We can keep chatting on this till the web dies or the moderators shut it down - you are not going to change my mind because what you and I believe is really not that far off the mark. I believe the Fisher Body unit number did matter in 1967 and thus the Trim Tag was relevent and you do not.

[/ QUOTE ]

The trim tag and all the info on it was relevant and important or it wouldn't be there!

I agree, we are saying close to the same thing.
But you made two statements that are in conflict with what I said:
"The Camaro bodies at Fisher were sequentially built in 1967."
" ....the staging lines .... explains why the VIN's appear to be out of sequence compared to the body build up."

No, the bodies were not built sequentially by the body #. Fisher used a rotation # to built the cars. Cars could and did get pulled out of order for repairs. This rotation # is the # that is written on alot of original firewalls. I can provide more examples if that will help.

Chevrolet then used a different rotation # when the car hit the Chevrolet side. This is the # on the broadcast sheets.

Both rotation #'s had the same purpose - tracking the car and it's subassemblies.

The issue with this car being out of sequence is mostly due to 07C being produced for a very short time. Cars got mixed around on the Fisher side (mainly in the body shop), so 07B and 07C cars could be and were interspersed. It's not uncommon to see but it's much more prevalent here, presumably due to the end of the year.


Could you please detail exactly what you think is different in the 67 process than the 68/69 process? Seriously.

Still don't understand the suppression of free speech thing...

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

[ QUOTE ]
(Please Agree or disagree)

8.The VIN# and the computer lock for CFA (with the specific option content) was partially assigned based upon down line parts availability.

[/ QUOTE ]
Disagree.
The VIN was assigned right as the body was received by Fisher.
If the parts were not available, the body wouldn't have been built.

[ QUOTE ]
10 The order that the bodies were staged on the Chevrolet side was random prior to the assignment of the VIN and final assembly computer build lock.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, the VIN was assigned first and then the cars bodies went into the body bank. The six lanes of the body bank were organized by option (mainly AC, RS, hi-po, and regular). The body bank balanced the assembly line according to option content of the car. Certain stations take more time than others. You didn't want 2 rally sports, etc, in a row. Still true today.

Other than that, looks mostly correct.

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

It appears that this car possibly sold outside of eBay?

The ad has been pulled. Congrats! (hopefully)

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

Congrats to the Seller and to the buyer! https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...s/headbang.gif

Kurt,

I too could waste pages in reply to you. Not going to do that - I have far better things to do, as you are clearly in damage control mode now with back to back posts cluttering up a simple discussion. Proof of your claims or info to back it up all coming from a Research Site (that by policy) gathers but does not share information.

Again and simple: In '67 paper work was with the body at Fisher. (Photo Shows that) All '67 bodies had a Trim Tag installed early on that contained specific option content that was related downline to a final build order to which a VIN# was assigned on a "scrambled" order at final assembly.
("Scrambled" is your term not mine- although I gotta say I have to agree)


It is in the implementation of the process that you disagree with me, and that is fine with me - but it is awfully clear that my opinion although clearly supported with evidence (as I outlined above) and my simple act of disagreeing with you - is not acceptable to you at all.

On the freedom of speech thing it is pretty clear that you are obsessed with proving your point - so you keep placing more and more info here that still fails to support your position with the perception I am getting that you simply seek to attempt to intimidate with unsupported theory that leaves huge gaps in understanding to the avarage reader.

Transulation- thread has become a "yawner" now and the car also appears sold.

Obviously we are now both way off topic. I suggest giving this mess a rest as other people have things to sell You know my opinion.

It has not changed and will not change.

By now I think everyone knows who to find your website too. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/beers.gif

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

This discussion is turning in to one of personal attacks. Although the information discussed has much merit and has allowed each reader to be fully informed, lets move on. I think we all have formed opinions and no information that has been presented will change anyones. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/beers.gif

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

With the Gibb novas there is around 50 cars between each VIN# There is 4 different sets of body #s. But the thing I found out is some of the early body #s are on later VINed cars. I thought for a long time that the 4 body #s where related to the 4 colors of the cars. One car showed up that proved that wrong. 20 years of study these cars and still dont know how they were done?? https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/dunno.gif AS the saying goes the more you know the less you know.

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

[ QUOTE ]
With the Gibb novas there is around 50 cars between each VIN# There is 4 different sets of body #s. But the thing I found out is some of the early body #s are on later VINed cars. I thought for a long time that the 4 body #s where related to the 4 colors of the cars. One car showed up that proved that wrong. 20 years of study these cars and still dont know how they were done?? https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/dunno.gif AS the saying goes the more you know the less you know.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ditto on the Deuces! I came late to this party, interesting read.

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

[ QUOTE ]
With the Gibb novas there is around 50 cars between each VIN# There is 4 different sets of body #s. But the thing I found out is some of the early body #s are on later VINed cars. I thought for a long time that the 4 body #s where related to the 4 colors of the cars. One car showed up that proved that wrong. 20 years of study these cars and still dont know how they were done?? https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/dunno.gif AS the saying goes the more you know the less you know.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly Kim... a closed mind is an ignorant mind... none of us know everything and to go into these discussions thinking that we do know everything is ludicrous. There is more and more information uncovered every year and like you said... "the more I think I know... the more I realize I am just scratching the surface!

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

I post twice and I'm in damage control? You've post 16 times on this thread, I've only posted 6!
My last post went thru your list of points and says only two were wrong. I did that specifically cause you asked and as discussion topics.

If CRG didn't distribute info, we wouldn't have a site. We do a whole lot more sharing of info than some other sites.
What we won't distribute is individual car info. We promise that to people who share data with us - that is why we have 15,000+ datapoints and are able to publish the articles and info on our site. Sorry, we don't compromise our standards just cause you don't like it.

I still don't understand what part of what I'm saying you don't agree with. I am more than willing to post some data to support my position - I never said I wouldn't. But you've never directly responded to any of my points except the Firebird one. So I don't even know what needs more evidence. I think I clarified the Firebird part of it.

I get it. Have a civilized, data-driven discussion with you is supressing someone's freedom of speech, somewhere. OK, I don't get it.
And can you point me to that evidence that you posted?


If you can post a specific issue with what I've said, I'll try to post some data to back it up. Else it would appear that the light of data is scaring you away. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/dunno.gif

Congrats Max! Sorry that this got mixed up with your for sale post! https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/beers.gif

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

70copo . What I have derived from all of this is that you seem to have it in for the CRG. You seem to come into this thread baiting William by asking 50 questions and taunting for answers like a attorney at a trial. Supress free speech ? Damage control ? If you don't believe what I am saying about how you are coming across, ask someone you are sure is neutral from outside this forum. I personally don't think you are proving any points because of the argumentative way you are trying to make them. If anything it makes you harder to believe.

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

Kurt,

You should run for office. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...ns/naughty.gif

As anyone who can read the other posts I did here will see those posts were with "William" who also connected his opinions to the "CRG" as did you. Clearly you two "tag teamed me" and you simply took over after he posted for the last time and promptly continued the CRG "our way or the Highway" agenda.

As for the rest of what you say, I am an adult and I will act like it. Please have a good day! https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/beers.gif

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

Charlie,

You need to read the above reply to Kurt. True or not? I have a right to stick up for what I think is true.

No rules broken. I am sure you ripped William for his Mild obscene remark he made to me in a previous post that I did not deserve at all.

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

I always end up putting my nose into things when I shouldn't but I can't let this one go. Although I agree that CRG could do a better job at publishing it's collected information, the work that these individuals have done have been huge for Camaro enthusiasts around the world. Much of the information we know today is a direct result of the hard work and effort of these guys and I thank them for it! https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/flag.gif

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

I agree 100% The CRG is the best resource on the net. We simply disagree on this one issue. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/beers.gif

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

[ QUOTE ]
Ditto on the Deuces! I came late to this party, interesting read.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't know much about 68 Nova's.

The 69+ body numbers are confirmation #'s. The guy entering the data would enter the cars that were optioned the same at the same time. For each car ordered, a confirmation # would be received. It could be the computer system or it could be operator error, but sometimes one in a group was missed, kicked back, or maybe the order was hung up in the computer for a few minutes. However it happened, that order would then drop in the midst of the next group of cars.

The scheduler would schedule them in what ever order he deemed. Add in the possible holdups in the body shop. So for a given batch of cars, relative to the VIN, the body #'s may both up or go down or bounce around. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/dunno.gif

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

I knew this thread would blow past 100 posts!

What about the JL8 cars..did they receive TT's and wait on parts and VIN's or were they tight?

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

I've been enjoying this thread too (from a technical side - not the arguments) because I've been trying to understand and document assembly plant practices in the 58-64 era for 25 years.

One thing my research can offer is the fact that (in that era) Fisher Body sequence numbers do not follow in the same order as the final VINs assigned. It is also not uncommon to find a body build date and body # out of sequence (based on VIN final assembly) with other body build dates.

For example, there may be 50 cars in VIN order that have a body build date of (let's say) 05A or 05B, then a car with a VIN 50 higher will show up with a body build date of 04D, and an expected lower body sequence number.

I'm not taking any sides in any argument. Just merely stating what my dbase of 1000s of 58-64s has proven. And like the CRG, my data is available as correlated information, (though it's not on line) and the individual owner information is kept strictly private. Unlike the CRG (or any Camaro research), I've had to deal with 15 different assembly plants over that time. However I can state that the process of order reception, VIN assignment, broadcast to the lines and Fisher Body build orders appears to be the same at all 15 plants, and it closely coincides with the procedures Kurt has described. There are some notable differences of course, but they don't apply to the 67-8-9 topic of this thread. (sorry if I've strayed)

Verne https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/wink.gif

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

[ QUOTE ]
We simply disagree on this one issue. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/beers.gif

[/ QUOTE ]I'm just not sure what that one issue is! https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...ns/naughty.gif

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

Verne,

The Fisher body # and VIN# do not line up on the 67's either. Thanks for sharing.

Phil https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/beers.gif

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

[ QUOTE ]
What about the JL8 cars..did they receive TT's and wait on parts and VIN's or were they tight?

[/ QUOTE ]
No car ever received a trim tag and then waited on parts. The job of the scheduler was to make sure that all the parts for the car were in house before the car even was started.
JL8's appear to fit in as 'normal' production (as opposed to Abby Normal). https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/wink.gif

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

I enjoyed this whole thread from the sidelines too..

The great thing of debate is it can often uncover forgotten facts and confirm or debunk old theories also maybe even bring previously unknown procedures to light!.

So thanks fellas...it was good to confirm also learn some new things too and really great to see such passionate enthusiasm from those involved!.

~ Pete
https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...ouguysrock.gif

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/smirk.gif

And he used to work in Novi
http://www.martyfeldmanchevy.com/AdWizardMainMenu

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

WWWOOOWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...emlins/eek.gif https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...emlins/eek.gif https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...emlins/eek.gif https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...emlins/eek.gif

So, I left Monday for a short trip and arrived home today to all this....I cannot believe the trouble I have caused..hehehe

WORST OF ALL...apparently Ebay ended my auction because of some type of security breach of my account that due to security reasons they cannot divulge exactly...???? And it actually just disappeared from the face of the Earth...They will not even give me a copy so I can just re-list it...

Needless to say, I am p@**#^ off...I just spent 2 hours on-line with Ebay about it..."But we already credited your account the listing fees" ay ay ay...

So, THE CAR IS NOT SOLD...I apologize, but the car will be relisted soon...

But anyway, I thought maybe I should chime in on the thread I started...hehehe..

I do appreciate all the input and knowledge, and opinions from everyone here and on the other forum sites.

I have not even had a chance to thoroughly read the threads completely since Ive gotten home, but I will later...

I hate to make any more "opinions" on my car at this point...hehehe...maybe it is the " last" known 67 Z "ordered"?? Who knows ???hehehhe

But I would like to say this...I do appreciate the CRG and Team Camaro and Yenko sites and the service and help we all recieve 'if only to ask'...largely because of the hard work of the persons involved with the sites...


I want to say Thank You to this site and the other sites and thier members and administarors...and also to everyone here who has expressed thier viewpoint, facts, and opinions and the genuine passion involved!!!(and for the most part with total respect!!) hehehe

Anyway??? Does anyone want a nice project car...hehehe...before I relist it??? Thanks again...

Max

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

PS...Do I have any recourse with Ebay?? Atleast to know what the heck happened?? ...

also....I'm out of Popcorn.... https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/frown.gif

https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...ouguysrock.gif

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

My opinion is that E-bay is like Dell customer support. They will just wear you down till you give up. Ebay has another white 67 Z/28 listed right now that is complete. Wait till a few days before the other ad ends before you decide to list your car again.
Mark Sheppard

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

I didn't get that for a second. I'm so used to hearing the ads on the radio for that dealer..... https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/beers.gif

You've heard the parody song about him, based on "She's got Bette Davis eyes"?

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What about the JL8 cars..did they receive TT's and wait on parts and VIN's or were they tight?

[/ QUOTE ]
No car ever received a trim tag and then waited on parts. The job of the scheduler was to make sure that all the parts for the car were in house before the car even was started.
JL8's appear to fit in as 'normal' production (as opposed to Abby Normal). https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Kurt, what happend to a '67 Camaro if it came down the line and somehow the count was wrong on parts.. like a 12 bolt rear for a SS and a important piece for a SS I would think...would the car go to the side somewhere till they found one?? I saw a car with a casting date on the rear one week after the trim tag date and I would have sworn on oath that it looked like it had never been out of the car...any merit to that??

Thnx Bud.

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

I don't think ebay will ever tell you what happened with your ad...so just go ahead and relist it. I know the high bidder from your old ad and he's a really nice guy https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/grin.gif

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

I think I had a COPO years ago with a BE rear dated later than the build date on the trim tag but it was the same rear date on the protecto plate.

Re: THE LAST??? 1967 Z-28
 

A good friend of mine had a June car with an original July KQ rear in it. Orange auto on column car