[SuperCars]

Over in Europe here for two week trip, (my wifes choice for the kids springbreak), but have my laptop to keep in touch. I see my friends are making arrangements to get me to bring cars to the Reunion. I'll have to think about it.

Hey Charlie did you drop the reserve on the Duece like you were talking? I think Jim needs to be a three Duece owner. lol.

I didn't get to see the Supercar Show on TV. The producers called me and asked me to send pictures of my 68 Yenko though. I referenced it as being unique as a "Special Order Drag Car" as shown on its GM tag riveted to the door pillar post. I told them about the old article of my car in Chevy Action that asks the COPO question. Seems to be a lot of mystery on this.

Anyway I have the copies of the GM documents obtained by Fran Preve that have a lot to do with this. I have studied these for hours trying to solve the mystery. There are about 50 pages, most of which deal with COPO 9737 which was typed on the bottom as 9737 Yenko Sports Car Conversion. In the 1969 COPO 9737, the word Yenko gets dropped so it appears that in 1968 this was a 1968 Yenko only COPO order. Anyway, I sent Marlin a couple of the noteworthy documents. I haven't forgot, but I promised to send to Brian too(When I get Back). Marlin if you could post the one showing the GM Lab report for 68 Yenko 427 Camaro Smog Emmissions test, which is a document that shows a 68 427 Camaro was factory built.

My personal belief as has been discussed on this web site off and on is that the 68 Yenko COPO 9737 MV code motor is predominantly the L78 396, and Yenko did the 427 transplants. But I also believe there was at least one or two 427 Camaros from GM. I don't think my car was labeled "Special Drag Car" because it was the ordinary L78. But whether you want to call it COPO or Pilot Prototype is the real question.

The Tonawanda GM engine documents I have show the MV code as F body CONV L78, of which approximately seventy some were built. (I am typing from memory so don't hold me to exact numbers.)On this same sheet it shows the separate code for the standard F body L78 as well. In addition to the Tonawanda records, I have the engine ECR's (Engineering Change Recommendation Orders) showing on the L78 the Add and Delete of intakes and carbs etc, to the L88 intake and Carb. These add/deletes were done under one engine assembly part number. It is the engine number of the MV Code. But towards the end of the production year, under COPO 9737, the engine assembly part number is superceded by a different ECR engine assembly number, not just once, but twice. This possibly tells me there were three different motors during this 68 COPO 9737 production run. One other noteworthy item is a handwritten note by one of the GM engineers on the engine ECR is stating make RPO V78 mandantory for Yenko 9737. When I go to the list of RPO's that make up the Yenko 9737, it says RPO V78 is something to the effect of: nonconforming and for export only. Other items on one of the ECR's state use L78 fuel pump only for delivery to Yenko, new pump to be installed at Yenko. If the motor was already a L78 as installed by GM why would the Engineer say to install the L78 fuel pump only for delivery, as if it truely was an L78, it would already have the L78 pump on it?

Well I must be bored over here to have typed this much. I've refrained from typing this in the past as I don't like controversy. So all I can say is that the above is all speculation on my part, as I am no expert. Also typing from memory as I don't have the Documents here in frontof me. Kevin.

[Edited by SuperCars (04-01-2001 at 12:46 AM).]