The Yenko Series II dude is back at it

[SMGCO]

I know the feeling. I looks great and maybe even sounds great but you really need to know what you are doing before you spend a lot of money on what could be a clone. Don't contribute to the snakes that are around our hobby waiting to burn someone. Buy Mac Neish's book and read it a few times before you buy any 69 Camaro. It takes a while but the wait is worth. Your patience and learning will pay off big in the long run.

[Mark_C]

You talking about the orange and black convertible? Nice looking car but:

ZL2 hood is not original, stripes are incorrect, only Z28's Z10's and Z11's had Rally stripes. Stripes are painted as if they were dealer added since the rear lip of the trunk lid has the stripe on it. Disc brake master cylinder is wrong, can't see if it has a rear proportioning valve, the A/C suitcase is from a Firebird, repro air cleaner, wrong valve covers.

Not to say the options didn't come on the car, just they aren't "correct" now. The engine code appears to be a 69 L48 but it has a typo in it, and the ad says if has the VIN stamp on it. It doesn't say its on the pad but implies it is. It should not have the VIN stamp on the engine pad if it's a mid March Norwood car, and they are almost impossible to see down by the oil filter with the engine in the car. Not enough info in the ad, or pictures to determine if it is or isn't an SS.

[69SSConvertible]

Thanks alot. What interested me most from the comments was the part about it not having a partial vin stamp on the front of the block if it is a mid March car. Can you expand on this a little? The numbers from the block "V0902HB" means September, right? I knew the hood was wrong (why would anyone change that beautiful SS hood for a non-functioning cowl?) and the stripes are wrong. I can live with those for now. I really just care that it is a true SS, because they seem to be hard to find 100% correct.

The car does not have the guage package, either. That hurts.

[Mark_C]

The ad say the engine suffix code is V03902HB for what one would assume is March 2nd. Now maybe he has fat fingers and hit the 9 when he was typing the 0 but you never know. Can't be a September of 68 car since they didn't have X codes, could be a September of 69 car. Either way there is one to many numbers in the Assembly code.

Norwood quit placing the VIN on the engine pad around the first week of December 1968 because they had to move the alternator to do it. They replaced the pad stamp with the on above the oil filter on the rough casting. Easy to do with the engine not installed in the car, but almost impossible to see when installed in the car. They never moved it back up onto the pad after that date. Easiest way, besides not having broach marks on the pad, to ID a restamped engine is to have a partial VIN stamped on a Norwood built car made after December 68.

LA on the other hand, started and ended the year with partial VINs on the Pad, but shifted to the rough cast area for about 3 months.

For almost 31K I would expect a much closer to original car, no stripes, no ZL2, correct parts. Small block SS's aren't really worth the 30's yet, unless they still have the original air in the tires, and plastic still on the seats. It's probably a nice lower 20's car, that of course assumes the car is an SS and does have the original drive train.

[69SSConvertible]

Wow. Sounds like you really know your Camaros. The block is stamped "V0902HB", the web site is a typo (see attachment). The vin is 693784, the engine stamp is 19N693784, and the cowl tag reads NOR146218 with a 10A date and X11. Do those #'s tell you Sept/Oct 1968 or 1969? You wrote that there were no X11's in early '69's, and no partial vin's in late '69's. Is that 100% true?

Also, I always read that it was "extremely difficult" to see the oil filter stamp with the engine in the car. Is it impossible? Do mirrors, lighting, removing the oil filter, etc. help?

Thanks again.

[drdave69]

That is a high VIN so that makes it a late '69 built car/engine. The engine assembly is Sept. 2, 1969 and body build date is first week Oct. '69. If the engine VIN stamp is there, it will be near the oil filter. It is nearly impossible to see with the engine in the car. You can remove the paint in that area (with lacquer thinner) and try your best to read it but it still may not be identifiable.

[Mark_C]

Hard to tell from that photo, but the pad looks like it is a late production 3970010 block with the 1/2 width pad. 69 and earlier pad lengths equal the width of the whole head, late model ones are only 1/2 the width of the head. The engine code stamp is also in the wrong place and uses the wrong font. The 9 on Flint engines always has an upturned end on the tail, it's almost an 8 that is missing a short segment. On this stamp the tail is pointed downward. Can't say Norwood never stamped the VIN on the pad after December, but it was not the normal practice to do so, and it wouldn't be in the location shown on this picture if they did do it. Looks like it could be a restamp. See the attached images (harvested from Ebay if they belong to anyone here) of a same period engine. This car is about 1000 VINs earlier (about 1.5 days production)and is a much lower production engine (302/290) is dated 9/25/69. The build date is a bit to far away for me to feel comfortable with the engine and this car without a bunch more info on the car.

On a car this late in production the easiest way to identify it as a "real" SS is to count the fuel lines. There was only one small block that used 2 fuel lines after 1/1/69 and that was the L48. of course if the lines are new or have been replaced I wouldn't use that as evidence either. Even if it is an SS I would have to be convinced that that engine is the original one.

[Mark_C]

Heres an image of the block stamping above the oil filter from the same engine as attached above

[T Billigen]

It is possible to see the number. Jack the front of the car up as high as you can and get a good flash light. I took a little steel wool and rubbed the area and the numbers stood out pretty good. They are not in as deep as the numbers on the pad but they are readable. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/scholar.gif[/img]