Original vs Correct,, New Body Acceptable?

[MotownMadman]

Stefano, Devils advocate here, I tend to agree with you but as to your last post, how many first generation Camaros have had the rusted dash replaced with the VIN reattached with rivits available through Hemmings. Is every Camaro with a new dash supposed to be assigned a assemblers title because the VIN has been tampered with? Food for thought. Thanks, Motown. [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/confused.gif[/img]

[Stefano]

That which is allowed by law and that which people may or may not do can be two completely different situations.

I have seen the rust repair of a dash as you mention handled by "supervision" and did not require a retitle or retag and all other Vins were also verified.

FYI, there was and is an ongoing "Sting" opperation where people are/were buying advertised illegal items. Some of these unsuspecting buyers have been arrested and convicted.

It is not Illegal however to purchase, change, make up Trim tags and info nor to posess and use the correct Rivets used on GM trim tags.

[Jeff H]

In my opinion, a re-body is no longer the same car. It is unacceptable. A car missing the original factory installed engine is not "original" drivetrain. An original engine, but replaced transmission I would consider "original" though. It is the engine that goes with the body that determines an original car. If the body is rusted out and you have to replace ever body panel, floors, trunk, etc., but the hidden VIN(s) is still in place and untouched then the car is original restored in my opinion. A car with a correct drivetrain is just that, a car with another drivetrain. A lot of classic car dealers will call a car with a correct drivetrain "matching numbers" when it isn't. That's done to enhance the value. A 69 Camaro X77 car with a DZ302 that doesn't match the VIN is not original, but it is as close as you can get, but it's not matching numbers. This is all obviously my opinion and I hate when someone misrepresents a car just to get me to come look at it.

[MotownMadman]

Jeff, Interesting point. I am troubled by the fact that a few years ago the judges at Bloomingtons Corvette show decided that it was acceptable to restamp a vin into an engine block as long as casting and date codes were correct and the correct stamps used in which a company in Texas leases them out for that reason. This is a subject in which there are opinions on both sides and there probebly will never be a unanimous opinion. Interesting in another post here about legal vs illegal, street racing is illegal, yet I have a document here from Ford Motor Company from 1969 which was a marketing stragegy for muscle cars, it goes into detail on how to market and promote street racing as Ford found by survey it encompassed 80% of their high performance market. How can a transmission which carries a VIN be replaced and be acceptable, yet replacing an engine that carries the same VIN not be acceptable? In my mind the only true original cars are those which have never had anything replaced with the exception of normal maintenance items such as belts, hoses, etc. When a car is restored, repainted with new weatherstips, etc, etc, is the car still original or is it an restored original? At what point does a car go from being original to being correct? I would think that a numbers matching car is just that, a car that has the original drivetrain componants wearing the original, not restamped VIN's. On the Yenko cars, when they are repainted and the stripes are replaced with aftermarket, is the car still original? In this day and age with the rarity and value of these cars, and considering all the fakes being built, the top people in this hobby should get together and come up with a survey/questioneer that asks these questions and more that the results can be used to define some guidelines and boundries for everyone to follow that will define original, correct, acceptable, and non-acceptable. The art world has similar guidelines that were defined due to the interest in the hobby and the growing rarity and value. The collector car world needs something similar to go by which answers these questions and more, something that will bring and end to the speculation and arguments once and for all, a self policeing set of rules, guidelines, or laws so to speak which govern the hobby. Just one confused collecters opinion. Motown [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/confused.gif[/img]

[Salvatore]

Gentlemen, These are all tough questions. When I was restoring my 1969 Z/28,I tried to be as careful as I could on my restoration parts. The car has the original trans. and rear. The motor is not original to the car. It is a date coded CORRECT (misleading word) 302. All body panels that were replaced were replaced with used sheetmetal, except the quarters.(NOS) The interior is original except the dash pad and carpets. I would NOT in any way, call this car original. That word original to me means: Original to this car only! The only thing that I do say is that the block and sheetmetal used is all vintage date coded, and or, came on a 1969 camaro originally. Although I feel, that my car is very nicely done, it can not command the price of a true survivor car that has been restored, or partially restored with all its original parts intact. I wonder how many big dollar cars are actually restored with repro sheetmetal and other foreign items? If the vin tag and the frame rails are the only things used in the resto, it almost becomes a kit car. It really is only original once from the factory. Anybody can say numbers matching, but is it original to that car? This is why true original cars are SO hard to come by, and really do command a better price. Sam

[copo9566aa]

The collector car world. [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

The Zl1 No (1) is not restored to day one condition
It is restored to Drag Racing History condition (Gibb/Harrell)
And probably the owner of the ZL1 (1) not trade this ZL1 for
a full original restored ZL1.

Restored original History VS original restored.

Just a remark about the correct originality and value $$$$.

[MotownMadman]

COPO9566.
I completly agree with you on that one. I would much rather have the Harrell ZL-1 as any, I am sure it is worth more than most if not all, I am sure that Bill would agree. That particular car however is not the norm for what applies to most. Somehow everyone needs to find a way to come together on these questions and differences, that would make it a more difficult world for the people building bogus cars, right now there is such a gray area on what is original, what is correct, what is acceptable and whats not... it leaves too many open doors for the people who only care about MONEY to slip through. A chain is only as strong as it's weakest link...together we stand, divided we fall... This site would be the perfect place for the serious car collectors to come together and adopt a policy that stands true and accepted by those who stand the most to lose. Will GM ever release the records? I hope so, but I am not holding my breath. In the meantime it is up to the serious collectors to agree on these issues. Thanks, Motown [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/cool.gif[/img]

[Zedder]

I'm with Marlin and Stefano on this one...and you can bet that if I ever bought a rebodied car and found out about it, whomever sold it to me would be getting a visit from the authorities [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

As for the COPO advertised elswhere on the site, the owner will no doubt be held responsible for that rebody at some point in the future should the car be sold. It makes no difference whether the rebody was disclosed or not to a buyer, the act is still illegal and so is owning a rebodied car that has not had a MOT issued VIN. Should that car head State-side and get inspected at the border, it would likely be confiscated. Luckily, the car is well known up here and would quickly be recognized at a cruise night or car show. I will say for whatever it is worth, it is refreshing that the owner is admitting it is rebodied, however that is a very dangerous and potentially expensive statement to make. If I were him, I'd keep the car and enjoy it for what it is.

[Jeff H]

Truly original would only be an unrestored survivor car. Then you can use the term original to mean what the car was ordered as, ie a SS350. If the car doesn't have any codes on the trim tag or documentation to prove it's really an SS350, then you need to have the original engine to prove it, the trans won't prove it. That's why I would consider a car with the VIN matching engine original even if the trans was gone. Obviously the term means different things to everyone. You could say a 69 Yenko isn't original because the Yenko stripes were not on the car when the car was delivered. But a re-body is definitely no longer the same vehicle let alone original. We'll never get everyone to agree on what the different terms mean and that's what can lead to problems when you're dealing with a high dollar car.

[AutoInsane]

So what would be the correct action if you had a Yenko Chevelle (for arguments sake) with a body that was beyond repair? The car would be worth saving due to its heritage but if you put on a different body that was in good shape it would be illegal and dishonest? Would the correct way to do it to replace every panel? If you save the firewall but replace everything else does it still have its 'original body'?

Is it actually illegal to put a different body onto a car? If so..why? And then I would ask again... it would be legal to change every panel but illegal to rebody? Where is the legal distinction between 'rebody' and 'replacing body panels'?

I find it interesting to read about the various Bugatti's that go up for auction. Some of them have had almost every major component replaced, albiet with parts from other original Bugattis, and are still called original. The ones that command the highest prices (often 50 to 100% more) are the ones that truely are original.

I wonder if that divergence will become more pronounced in the super car market. As of now, as far as I can see, it doesnt seem truely original cars command all that much higher prices.