Go Back   The Supercar Registry > General Discussion > Supercar/Musclecar Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 02-26-2009, 02:56 AM
HiHorse HiHorse is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ontario
Posts: 276
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: looks are deceiving L-71

[ QUOTE ]
if anyone is getting sucked in by this car, I can speak from first hand knowledge that things look better in pictures. Dont waste your time JMO. you can contact me if you have any questions. I dont want anyone to make a quick decision and get burned.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Chevrolet...1QQcmdZViewItem

[/ QUOTE ] Can you share any details?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-26-2009, 10:13 AM
LS6 RAT LS6 RAT is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Nevada City, California
Posts: 275
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: looks are deceiving L-71


Bill,
A friend of mine went to view this car last week. He was interested in it, so he asked me to take a look. At first glance it appears nice, like a survivor quality car. The undercarriage is quite rough and scares a lot people off. The stamp pad has several unusual anomalies, first the engine assembly uses two different zeros, not typical for big block, the digit eight is upside down,there is bounce back on both Tonawanda stamping and St. Louis stamping, and on top of that the bounce affects digits that are flanked on both sides of a digit that does NOT have bounce back, and the last suffix letter which is an R is obliterated by that ?. The same bounce back situation also is with the VIN derivative, bounce on two digits flanked on either side by one that doesn't. Two stampings at two different plants at different times by different people have the same anomalies?
I've seen factory goofs but the chances of this many on one stamping? The other problem is their is no factory paperwork to prove this option on the car, unfortunately. Even if substantiated as all real by the factory, you would have a darn difficult time convincing most collectors of this, especially when prices go back up to what they were early last year.
__________________
2 1971 LS-6 Corvette coupes (Duntov's last stand)
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-26-2009, 08:29 PM
Wardy Wardy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: PA
Posts: 37
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: looks are deceiving L-71

[ QUOTE ]
------In the $29,000 area the car is fairly priced unless the frame is rusted out. You could fluff a lot of small stuff and still be on the money. I did notice it has headers, I think, but even thats not that big a deal.
------Im curious, Chris, how did you get that shot of the pad. Its a good one!.......Bill S

[/ QUOTE ]
The seller linked to a photobucket acct in the ebay ad. I figured it was ok to post the pic if they linked to it on ebay.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-26-2009, 09:21 PM
Charley Lillard Charley Lillard is offline
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Woodland, ca. US
Posts: 15,957
Thanks: 479
Thanked 4,681 Times in 1,204 Posts
Default Re: looks are deceiving L-71

I like the engine pad but I am not up on similar dated pads to see if they used 0 and O on similar. Someone must have some close built engines in their data base. TimG where are you ?
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-27-2009, 04:11 AM
Fast67VelleN2O's Avatar
Fast67VelleN2O Fast67VelleN2O is offline
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Mullica Hill, NJ
Posts: 4,106
Thanks: 7
Thanked 186 Times in 93 Posts
Default Re: looks are deceiving L-71

The car looks pretty legit to me... Don't know why someone would restamp a car that hasn't been restored and has had headers installed at some point.
__________________
Day 2 is Life.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-27-2009, 06:29 PM
TimG TimG is offline
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 4,417
Thanks: 1
Thanked 2,360 Times in 920 Posts
Default Re: looks are deceiving L-71

I don't have a problem with the "O's" or even the inverted "8", I've got plenty of examples of those in my files. The over stamp is a bit unusual and pretty messy. I'd look real hard for 435 signs on this car. No pictures of the tach, oil pressure gauge, four bolt main (big oil cooler plug), or transistor ignition stuff.
These would help verify its 435 heritage. Could it be a 390 horse motor with an over stamp from the factory? Could it have been over stamped later in life? I don't know. Too bad they had to pull the motor and rebuild it, with a strange stamp and no paperwork, you'd love to see the motor in its original, never removed condition. They should have documented the motor before removal if nothing else.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 02-28-2009, 06:06 AM
Pat O'Connell Pat O'Connell is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Detroit
Posts: 96
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: looks are deceiving L-71

Excellent points, Tim..I'd question the seller as to why the engine was pulled for a rebuild...From the description, it didn't need much once it was torn down.
__________________
Pat O'Connell

Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 02-28-2009, 07:31 AM
LS6 RAT LS6 RAT is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Nevada City, California
Posts: 275
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: looks are deceiving L-71


The engine was pulled by the original owner and a small block stuck into it. This original engine was mounted on an engine stand in the garage of the owner when he died and in need of a repair from a broken piston ring. The widow sold the car to a classic car dealer and stated that this engine was the original engine from the car.
The car is and has all the original unique pieces for a L71 optioned car. The engine pad has original broach marks. I am not questioning the authenticity of the stamping, I am stating that this car with this stamping anomaly and the fact that there is no factory paperwork to verify its options, makes this car somewhat suspicious to collectors with that messed up stamping and no paperwork. This wouldn't be my first choice for an investment quality Corvette.
__________________
2 1971 LS-6 Corvette coupes (Duntov's last stand)
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 02-28-2009, 02:17 PM
bergy's Avatar
bergy bergy is offline
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Pennsylvania, Florida
Posts: 2,786
Thanks: 821
Thanked 1,395 Times in 383 Posts
Default Re: looks are deceiving L-71

Great discussion and observations guys. I was a GMI student sponsored by Chevrolet Tonawanda back in the day. Like most co-op students, I occassionally got the crap jobs (like stamping parts that had missing/wrong digits). I'm not saying that the "T" in question is or isn't ligit, but it wouldn't surprise me. Our job was simply to obliterate the old digit and add a new one - "pretty" wasn't in our vocabulary! I usually used an "X" stamp or grinder (on "as cast" surfaces) to get rid of the incorrect digit. It was really up to the inspection department to determine the method - it just had to be correctly, permanently marked - that's all. I hate that this car has that goofed up "T", but who knew that our work as a bunch of 18 year olds would someday be placed under a microscope?
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 02-28-2009, 06:46 PM
al8apex al8apex is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 1,993
Thanks: 25
Thanked 10 Times in 10 Posts
Default Re: looks are deceiving L-71

I, too, went to GMI in the early 70's

I worked at Pontiac in Pontiac MI. The sh** that went on back then was truly unbelievable, at least for this 18 year olds eyes

One of my duties was to crawl around in the rafters of the engine plant and count the number of blocks that had fallen off the conveyor system ... in black sand / dust environment, probably the equivalent of being in a coal mine ... so the "myth" that block HAD to be cast within a certain time period is only that, a myth. They would send up a newbie GMI student every year to get them counted and pulled down ...

I was never involved with the stamping process, but here is a Muncie we had last year that obviously had problems with the stamp, they finally gave up and stamped it 90 degrees from the "normal" area to the top of the case ...

http://www.camaros.net/forums/showthread.php?t=136529






__________________
Jim R
Scottsdale, AZ

Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

O Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.