possible copo

[Mr70]

I have not seen enough COPO Chevelles to form any kind of opinion on this subject.There's just not enough around.

[Stefano]

I meant,RPO Chevelles.

[Kurt S]

This is clearly an 05E car. It has nothing at all to do with long 06A. And 11000 units before this car is early May.
Out of 283 May cars, not one has a June axle in it. Hence I doubt this axle is original. That and there's no way for a car to sit for 2 weeks on the line til the axle showed up.

[COPO PETE]

Thanks for the reply Kurt. I do agree.
Peter

[CJP_69]

Kurt S,
Too bad you weren't closer, I'd have you come look at this car. Is there anybody on this site who was actually on the assembly line who can comment on this. Unless you were there, or have documentation from the Norwood plant on actual day to day output and production, to unequivocally say "NO WAY", although you surely have plenty of data to compare, its wrong to make the assumption. If Mr. Mattison could comment on this. On one of his previous posts, he stated that a body for a "special" could be built through the Fisher body plant a few weeks prior to going down the assembly line and that supplying rears were a problem. Maybe you're right. But if a rear switch is the case, according to the previous owner, it would have been done prior to 1980 as this is the way the car was when his friend initially bought it(and owned it from 1981-1984). I asked about date coding on the radiator because it has an "F". Could this also be a June date code, and if so, could the car have gone down the line in June? Maybe someone in the 1970's stripped a June built COPO to build this car. I know it is all speculation, and it's not going to change this car one way or another, but just when you think you know the answer, a car like this changes the question.
Thanks- Chris

[Jeff H]

Sorry, I meant 11,000 units after this car. It was Charley's old car but it was an 06A car as opposed to this one being the 05E. Obviously without documentation it's pretty much impossible to prove anything especially an exception to the rule. But here's a case where the car was never represented as a COPO so why would someone waste time and money putting another BE rear dated so close into a car and then sell it as an SS? Remember, they never built any Z28 convertibles or ZL1's with 4 wheel disc brakes. [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

[Zedder]

CJP: I hear what you are saying about a rear swap prior to 1981, but remember it was easier and cheaper back then to swap a rear than rebuild it. In the mid 70's we never rebuilt anything, we just swapped the rear, motor or tranny out for another. Also, as a case in point, my first 67 Z-28 sat in a salvage yard from the 1980 until I bought it in 1998 - I didn't realize it had a BE rear in it until I got it home!

[Stefano]

Chris,
It is unlikely that the rear is original to the Camaro based on the data which exists (per Kurt). The COPO clues which you mention point in that direction, but are easily added to the Camaro.

Since you appearantly have a low miles original sheet metal and unrestored Camaro, I would say that it would behoove you to pay for an expert opinion as to the possible status of the car.

With only four owners and the car having been 'local' you would think that there would be more info. available about the Car itself.

What are the dates and part numbers of the internal components like the ring and pinion of your rear axle housing and do all the proper COPO specific items exist?

[Kurt S]

A car was not scheduled until all components were available. When they come off the end of the line, they are ready to ship, not waiting on parts. No plant is big enough to do that...... JohnZ was there and confirms that. I worked in assembly plants and confirm that.

#'s look like a COPO, axle doesn't look original to the car. Could be they swapped with another racer, who knows....
I never assumed it was wrong, I said I doubt it is the original axle. Please don't say I said something I didn't.

BTW Jeff, 11,000 cars is about 2 weeks production......

[CJP_69]

Jeff H,
When I heard about this car, I assumed it was possibly an SS 350 car because of the X11D80 tag, disc brakes, 4speed body, 12 bolt etc. The car was never represented as such, just a regular Camaro. My friend bought the car because the previous owner(who purchased it in 1984 and parked it in 1988 until last month) was having trees cut on his mother's property so the car had to go. It wasn't until I got it home when I sanded the corroded rear to check the codes.

Stefano,
I am well aware we are in an age of clones, rebodied cars, fake tags and documentation. These parts may have been swapped, but prior to 1980, I wonder how many actually knew what a COPO was. It's not to say that it couldn't have happened and I realize that. Like I said before, I am trying to look into info on the car's history.

Kurt S
My mistake and my apologies. I am very familiar with JohnZ's posts on camaros.net.
I asked about the radiator dating but I guess no one knows. I have not popped the housing cover to check the posi.

Again I will ask if Mr. Jim Mattison can comment on the statement that he made about the body tag build date in the "Dealer Ordering Procedure" thread.
Thanks for the replies-Chris