COPO -vs- 396
 

When looking at a no motor, no trans hull, what did the COPO cars come with that the 396 cars did not?

Re: COPO -vs- 396
 

You would find a Cowl hood and the components for it on a COPO, but that could also be had on a 396 car, even though rare.

Single fuel line, but that did also a 396/375 have.

COPO could for the most cases be X11 or X44 on the trimtag. A 396 would,ve been X22 or X66. X11 or X44 were on all plain jane Camaros, even the six-bangers.

Probably a few more items that I for the moment can't recall :-)

Jan

Re: COPO -vs- 396
 

Wouldn't the COPO have the "BE" stamped rear too?

Re: COPO -vs- 396
 

Yepp, I did forget something :-o

Jan

Re: COPO -vs- 396
 

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jireh Customs</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When looking at a no motor, no trans hull, what did the COPO cars come with that the 396 cars did not? </div></div>

Aside from a VIN-stamped engine, there is nothing that will positively ID an L72 COPO. Some 396 SS cars had the same radiator and axles are easily changed.

There are some things to look for.

The first stop should be the VIN. All will have the 8 cylinder model number 124379 - 123379 is a 6 cylinder. No COPOs prior to 01B [Norwood] and about 99% of those went to Yenko. Very few if any built at Van Nuys. Production of COPOs for dealers other than Yenko began around 02D; Berger received many of these.

COPOs all had power front discs, ducted hood, BE rear axle, curved-neck radiator, dual exhaust. Much or all of that is generally removed for racing. Most [80%] were 4-speeds; column automatics are not unusual. X44 tags are typical with a few having X11.

So if the roller in question was built at the right time and has all the other characteristics, could be. Current market conditions do not support restoring such cars.

Re: COPO -vs- 396
 

Vin 124379N66 and it is an X44 with the BB heater core &amp; break booster, 3/8 fuel line. It is an automatic car. If not a COPO it is at least a 396/375 car correct?

Re: COPO -vs- 396
 

Not with the X44 tag. L78 SS would be X22 or X66.

Re: COPO -vs- 396
 

That is at least a start. Next thing would be to look for the Cowl hood stuff, count the coils on the hood hinge springs.

It has disc brakes, check where the hoses are attached to the frame, on top or on the outer side.


Jan

Re: COPO -vs- 396
 

the hole punched in the firewall for the cowl hood harness is right above the fuse panel. i am not sure of the size but is about 3/4ths of an inch. that is a good place to start as most x-44 cars with cowl hoods would be COPO's.

Re: COPO -vs- 396
 

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: x77-69z28</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> most x-44 cars with cowl hoods would be COPO's. </div></div>

most??? ....were there any x-44 cars w/ cowl induction made that were <span style="font-weight: bold">not</span> COPO's ? those that were made by the General that is...

Re: COPO -vs- 396
 

i never want to say all, always or never, but that is what i was thinkin!

Re: COPO -vs- 396
 

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: iluv69s</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: x77-69z28</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> most x-44 cars with cowl hoods would be COPO's. </div></div>

most??? ....were there any x-44 cars w/ cowl induction made that were <span style="font-weight: bold">not</span> COPO's ? those that were made by the General that is... </div></div>

Well, theoretically a X44 could have been ordered with a ZL-2 hood. So it is possible...

Jan

Re: COPO -vs- 396
 

Don't forget the dual exhaust adapter plate for the left exhaust pipe. The only possibility a X44 could be a COPO is if it had that adaptor plate. One curious thing when George Z documented my car. He stated that the COPO's had extra bracing through out. I have not yet had a chance to discuss this with George.

Re: COPO -vs- 396
 

The ONLY X44 factory-built with a ducted hood would be a COPO. The hood was included with COPOs 9560 &amp; 9561 and does not appear as a line item on documentation. The ZL-2 hood became available
as an option 12/1/68 on Z/28 and Camaro SS.

There is no &quot;extra bracing&quot; in a COPO Camaro.

Re: COPO -vs- 396
 

One more detail. The car does NOT have the hole in the firewall for the induction hood. I think that piece of info just sank my hopes. I'm thinking out loud here, why would someone go to the trouble of putting a big block heater box, break booster and what appears to be an original 3/8 fuel line in an X44 car and not finish the cloning?

Re: COPO -vs- 396
 

Because as you probably already know &quot; it takes all kinds&quot;

Re: COPO -vs- 396
 

Seeing this late, but single fuel line and brake booster would have come on both 307 and L65 cars. The only change would be the heater box, which people did if they installed a BB.

Send me a pic of the cowl tag and I might be able to help more.....

Re: COPO -vs- 396
 

I guess this is not a spoiler car ? The way I understand it X44 combined with D80 on the cowltag is a good indicator of a COPO. Even though there were 6-cylinder cars built with spoilers, they were very scarce.
But with no hole in the firewall for the special ducted hood wiring, it really doesn´t matter.

Re: COPO -vs- 396
 

Anders, D80 only showed up on tags in late May.

Jan

Re: COPO -vs- 396
 

Yes I know Jan, but since this car has a 124379N66xxxx VIN it would have the D80 on the tag if it was equipped with a spoiler from the factory, wouldn´t it ? The X44 D80 COPO I had was built at the end of June and the VIN was 9N661xxx.
I just meant to say that any X44 D80 car is worth investigating. If it has the hole in the firewall then it starts to get real interesting.