E-Bay '69 Yenko Disguised As a Z-28 Clone! - Page 6

**bergy** · #51 10-07-2010, 11:16 AM

I obviously don't have the answers yet, but everything points to a firewall repair in my mind. I was very encouraged when I discovered that the firewall came from a car that was totaled (from the rear) by a logging truck. Then I asked - why would someone re-body a car onto a totaled body? Anyway, it will be interesting to find out and I'll keep everyone up to date!......to be continued.

**YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY** · #52 10-07-2010, 06:56 PM

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: COPO140</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have said all there is to say. No cowl induction piercing, no mounting holes for the relay, no hidden vins to match the Yenko vin in the dash, no 427/425, no original muncie, no BE, no cowl tag, etc. I think that its absolutely clear as to what the car is and Im not sure I can lend anymore info. It is what it is, a rebody. Nothing more nothing less. As long as it is represented as such, I see no issue. It may have a dash cluster and a subframe from an original car but thats about it. Hardly enough to make a real Yenko from. If you want others peoples opinion as to what the car is, just ask. Not being elusive or cavalier, just stating the facts. So, just state the car is a rebody and move on. </div></div>

I would have to agree with the statements made by COPO140, and I don't know him from 'Adam'. I can't think of a story, or history that will un-rebody this car. Apparently, the rebody aspect was known by prominent folks in the hobby at least 10-12 years ago. Had I been one of them, I certainly would not have searched so hard for this car myself - if I had found it, I would have run for the hills!

Bergy, I'm stunned to read your post about '... its just missing some firewall details...' Those 'details' should not be deemed trivial or inconsequential!

al8apex · #53 10-07-2010, 07:01 PM

wow, that is all I have to say ... [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/smile.gif[/img]

this is some pi**ing match

not sure why, but it is interesting to read about these "opinions"

**Steve Shauger** · #54 10-07-2010, 07:17 PM

Bergy, the rebody history seems to be verifiable and well documented based on several posts in this thread. I would suggest that rather than attempting to legitimize the car, research the history, and obtain affidavits from those responsible for the "cowl only scenario" as you suggest. Possibly they have picture of the whole process. I would then present those facts if available and start the discussion from there. I think we are beating a dead horse at this point, unless new information is obtained.

hep1966 · #55 10-07-2010, 07:37 PM

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: talwell</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

This is like ZL1 #61 - didnt that car have a completely replaced cowl, firewall and lower firewall without matching hidden vins but still wears the original vin? Isn't there a credible and documented history to back this and therefore the car can still be considered genuine?

</div></div>

Agreed. I also fully believe that if someone else (read as a more frequent poster) bought the car, then they would be encouraged and not bashed.

Enoch · #56 10-07-2010, 09:13 PM

If I had the car I would strip it down to a bare shell and have a true expert in body restorastion come and evaluate it. There is a huge difference in #'s experts and body experts. This way you can fully document what was done to fix the firewall. It will be easy to tell where they seamed the firewall in.

**Fast67VelleN2O** · #57 10-07-2010, 09:53 PM

No matter what... the car should be saved. It is a piece of yenko history. I am of the personal belief that the numbers are what make a car... not the body. To each his own opinion.

**Steve Shauger** · #58 10-07-2010, 10:07 PM

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Fast67VelleN2O</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No matter what... the car should be saved. It is a piece of yenko history. I am of the personal belief that the numbers are what make a car... not the body. To each his own opinion. </div></div>

Seriously, your criteria is that a VIN makes a car???

**bergy** · #59 10-07-2010, 10:08 PM

Steve - I'm not sure how you are concluding that the "rebody history is verifiable and well documented". Where exactly is that documentation? As far as I know, the only issue ever documented is that the wrong body stamp is definitely on the cowl (I haven't removed the fender and heater box yet). It is also verifiable that the vin stamp on the cowl belongs to a car the was totaled from the rear by a logging truck in 1981 (sworn statement from owner). Who rebodies a car onto a totaled body?

**Fast67VelleN2O** · #60 10-07-2010, 10:21 PM

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: paceme</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Seriously, your criteria is that a VIN makes a car??? </div></div>

The original vin and the original cowl tag is what makes a car. These numbers were affixed to a body that ALL cars received whether or not it was a 6 cylinder no option car or a ZL1 Camaro. The numbers and the cowl tag is what makes the body different than the next car. In my opinion, there is no difference in replacing every single body panel on a rusty car other than where the vin number is affixed than it is taking the numbers and placing them on a different rust free body. This is my opinion on the "rebody" issue. I am not trying to argue my views with anyone, just expressing them.

Dedicated to the Promotion and Preservation of American Muscle Cars, Dealer built Supercars and COPO cars.