thinking of purchasing this vehicle... owner claims its a #'s matching car, but i want to get your opinions and knowledge to whether this is a valid claim... ill post all i have and will appreciate all responses...
thanks,
scott
vin# 136370F147208
trim tag - 70 13637 FL 2230044 TR 755 PNT 19 19 04D
engine pad - T0220CTX 10F147208
TRANS - P9B26A 10F147208 39255272
block - 3955272
bell housing - 3899621
wheels - 28 ya
carb - 7079223 1y0559
and here is the link to any other info you might need: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=020&sspagename=STRK:MEWA:IT&viewitem=&item=300159926806&rd=1

thanks in advance for any help!!!
scott

This sounds like a conman's answer, especially if he's going to declare that the car is a true SS.

Q: Nice car. For my own....69???? If these cars had a build sheet where did the factory put them? I know the vetts were on the gas tank.

A: ah the build sheet question, I knew I would get one - those build sheets were not intended to be with the vehicle, they were to be thrown out and used for different areas of the manuf. process - If GM wanted you to have a build sheet they would have included it with the sale of the car, but most line workers stuffed them any place they could and over 30 years of finding them I can safely tell you there most everywhere! good luck finding one!

TRANS - P9B26A

The assembly date of the transmission is: Feb 26th 1969. How would this be possible for a 1970?

Looks like the auction ended a month ago :confused:

All the CON VIN numbers look correct. Reported last VIN for end of April is 146868 and this one is 147208. VIN sequence is a little outside the numbers supplied by GM for Framingham in April but that's not uncommon.

Trim tag shows exterior color to be black not the red it is but seller stated that. Technically all the numbers do not match but paint color, and consequently the stripe color, is a small point.

I'd ask for photos of the other numbers to (1) see if that's what they really are and (2) check for possible restamp.

Good catch on the 4-speed, Feb 1969? Build sheet answer is a correct one. They weren't meant to be left in the car as a treasure hunt item 20 or 30 years later. :)

I guess resale red sells but, man a Black '70 is a pretty car if done correctly............. Makes you wonder why it ever went red.

Build sheet answer is a correct one. They weren't meant to be left in the car as a treasure hunt item 20 or 30 years later. :)

Dale, I'll agree 100%, although IMO I'd never buy a car that the owner claims is an SS without a build sheet and other pertinent documentation. But, that can be faked, too.

TRANS - P9B26A

The assembly date of the transmission is: Feb 26th 1969. How would this be possible for a 1970?

not sure... im hoping someone can let me know if this is possible... could this truely be the assembly date and still be the correct code with the vin stamped for a 70 model???

Is that the correct casting code for a 70 402 block?Something about that broach marks and Tonawanda stamp don't look kosher.Should be examined by an expert in person.

asked the owner a few of the questions that you guys are considering... this was my response...
ah the number thing! Scott heres how the numbers go on these high production cars, this car was built in april of 70 thats only 4 months into that year, GM purchases thousands of trans from many suppliers, of which some go here and there and some sit on docks etc etc. Now if the trans was dated 68 I might me concerned, of interesting note the carb is dated 7049 the 9 means 69, and the block is a very late 69 everything on this car was never apart until we did it. Of other interesting note, 1970 was a strike year and GM produced one million vehicles less than in 1969 - by far the most important numbers are the GM vin stamped in the engine block - thanks tim Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 11:33 AM

any thoughts???
thanks,
scott

Trans date of "9" is not a date code. It's a model number code. Muncie used the "9" as a model year number designator. Changed to "0" for the 1970 Model year production.

That is without question, a 1969 trans. (no leftover BS about it)

Mortec shows the Block number as 1969, I'm curious if Chevrolet by the numbers concurs? (I'm currently not at home)

Anybody? 3955272

VIN sequence is a little outside the numbers supplied by GM for Framingham in April but that's not uncommon.Oops, car was made in Flint, Michigan

Btw-He is full of bs about 1970 being a strike year. It was not.

As suspected earlier 3955272 was used in 69.

Per Alan Colvin, 3955272 was used from Sept. 68 until June of 69.

In 1970, the 396/350 block was 3969854.


Good catch to those who caught it.

69 motor/trans and a restamp on the block.

30 years of restorations of mostly GM "A" bodied vehicles. Chevelles and El Camino's is about all we do these days,The above quote from his auction tells you a lot.

As suspected earlier 3955272 was used in 69.

In 1970, the 396/350 block was 3969854.


Good catch to those who caught it.

69 motor/trans and a restamp on the block.

I thought so.:yes: He might have bought the car to resell and make some money on it,now he realizes there is a problem and he has to get rid of it the best way he can without getting in trouble.

Whoever stamped it was an idiot.

30K is not unrealistic for a fully restored 70......

Once you re-stamp it.... it get's shunned, but in reality, can you build one for less? (not by much)


They just hurt themselves in the long run.

Sell them as clones, get good reviews, and sell repeat customers, instead of them hiding out in the bushes with a Shotgun waiting for you to lock-up shop at night. :noway:

Scott, you seem to have posted this question in a few different places. I haven't seen your response to my replies about this car being a fake. What do you plan to do with it? It is not a matching numbers car by far. If you check my responses in the other areas you posted this, you will see the facts as to why it's a fake.