Just got a hold of the represented "original paperwork" for this alleged 1968 L89 Camaro convertible. I'm curious as to everyones opinion on these documents. I find them both way too clean, no yellowing, no ink residue on POP from roller at service, no frayed corners on paper invoice or POP booklet, infact the metal protectoplate doesn't have ANY aging whatsoever that I can see, surprising for a 40+ year piece of raw metal. I also never saw an invoice before with the interior color specified, and surprised that it specifies a wood wheel and a car of this caliber is restored without that specified option. Also unusual is that it's a 3.07 posi. Why would someone order an aluminum head 396 + M22 rock crusher and non-performance gears like that. To top it off the code on the POP for the rear end is BR1213G (Dec 13th). If that is 12/13/1968 then the rear doesn't match as that date is after the car was sold, which was 7/27/68. If it is 12/13/67 then I am concerned about why it would have sat around for 6-7 months (6 months prior to the date code of the block which is 06/17/68). As to the engine stamp, the alignment of the characters looks suspect to me. The spacing between the "1" and "7" on the left side stamp seems wider than the other characters and the spacing between the "7" and the "M" seems too close. Also, why is the alignment of the last three numbers of the VIN "283" slighly lower than the other characters and why is the spacing between the "4" "7" "1" wider than the spacing of the "2" "8" "3"?
Tell me what you think about the authenticity of this "original documentation" and "engine stamp" please. Thanks
