I think it's drop dead beautiful!

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1968-Chevelle-396-Big-block-SS-options-Beautiful-car_W0QQitemZ260285883892QQihZ016QQcategoryZ6164QQ ssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

I like it and if someone gets it for that price I would think they are doing well. Someone correct me if I am wrong but are those not 69 seats? Seems the seller has some great feedback comments.

Those are '68 seats. I thought the same thing.

It is a nice 68. The best year. Not really my color. Something about red makes me not want it. Low option but was just a 136 car orignally. I lose the fender trim. Not the right fan shroud and doesnt fit well. Caution decal.No tach or gauges just lights. I couldn't pay 15 for just because its red.

I thought 68 SS's were all 138 cars,is this a clone?

I fell for the color and the center caps.

Those are '68 seats. I thought the same thing.

I am not so sure Ryan. Those are are exactly like the seats in my 69. My 68 seats (as well as my friends 68) has no headrests, and the catch release on my 68 is on the side. My 69 had them in the center of the back of the seat like those ones.

I am not so sure Ryan. Those are are exactly like the seats in my 69. My 68 seats (as well as my friends 68) has no headrests, and the catch release on my 68 is on the side. My 69 had them in the center of the back of the seat like those ones.

Darn Terry, good eyes! You might be right!

I thought 68 SS's were all 138 cars,is this a clone?


You're right. All '68 SS's were 138 VIN's. This was a Malibu from the factory.

This car is more correct than most real Super Sports you'll find. There are no cheap reproduction items on my Chevelle. Even all of the SS emblems and trim are correct original. :noway::noway: - not on a 13637 Malibu sport coupe they aren't. I'd think most real Super Sports would be more correct.

She came factory optioned with interior code 766 which denotes bucket seats with center console floor shift.Trim code denotes black bucket seats - console is a separate item and not included with bucket seats.

The 12-bolt, non-posi rear end is tight and quiet with 3:08 ratio for comfortable highway speeds as well as acceleration off the line.3:08 is a time, 3.08:1 is a ratio. I don't know why so many people get the 12-bolt gear of 3.07:1 confused with the 10-bolt gear of 3.08:1. :confused: Probably the same folks that think Chevelles had 4.11:1 gears from the factory.

I too think they're 69 seats with the release on the back, 68s were on the side like 67. Engine accessories apparently are from a 69 or newer - alternator on the passenger side. Engine suffix code CLB shows it to be fro a 70 402/240hp Monte Carlo w/TH400. That kinds shoots the "...more correct than most real Super Sports you'll find..." theory. Good thing he left the Chevelle script on the rear cove too, not too many SS cars had those. :rolleyes:

Pretty car but the overhyping would make a savvy Chevelle buyer be leery IMO. A lot of burned oil on the exhaust, looks like from the rear of the transmission.

Maybe it's the lighting but it looks pretty bright and a tad too red for a Maroon paint :confused:

http://perkton.com/ebay/1968chevelle/100_1745.JPG

Compared to a photo of another one I have.

http://www.chevellestuff.com/1968/chevelle/gallery/n2.jpg

Darn Terry, good eyes! You might be right!

No Ryan. Darn poor eyes in fact. My Mom warned me if I didn't stop it I would go blind. It appears she was correct.

Hmm so that's what happened to me.

I think the car is nice.

Looking at the pictures alone, here are the things I dont like for this SS clone.

Caution sticker by the fan
lower body color, that should be black.
rear antenna placement
Chevelle script on the rear
wrong bucket seats
alternator setup
color of the hood hardware
The interior trunk color
The oil fill cap
The headers

IMO The color looks a little bright for Cordovan Maroon.

I realize that some of these items are personal preference, but they are the first things that stand out that bug me.

For cruising around, I would definitely make a few adjustments on the outward appearance. But the paint and bright work look pretty darn nice.

I am not a big fan of clone cars, but on the 68 and back cars there isnt really a secret. Restoring a 68 can be hard work with the lack or reproduction stuff available. I hope isnt expectations arent super high on this car that in most eyes isnt the highest desirable year.

I have a couple questions about 1968's:

1. Did all SS's cars have the black lower body paint?
2. on ther car in question, it says SS and uner it, it says 396?
3. did '68's have windshield mounted antennas?
4. Was the underside of the hood really supposed to be black?

1. I am under the impression that all 68s had the lower treatment in semi gloss black, except black cars.
2. The SS 396 foils were seen on some early production cars.
3. No rear mounted antennas were optional see this ad
http://www.chevelles.com/showroom/data/500/68ad.jpg
4. Yes

Cool, thanks Mark!!:thumbsup:

clone or not... I think its perty! :)

Saw this car last week. Looks like someone robbed all the parts off a 138 car and stuck them on a nice 136 car. Just short of the seats and some other misc items.

The seller is very careful with the wording of his ad.

All in all I think it's a pretty sharp car and should be in the 15-20k range.

A couple of things I don't care for is the lack of detail/attention to some items, such as the body side trim (driver side front fender overlaps the WW trim.) In one of the under car pics there appears to me a fiberglass patch that has been paint over.

Curious about the AM/rear mounted antenna and there is a radio delete panel in the dash.

Curious about the AM/rear mounted antenna and there is a radio delete panel in the dash.
Obviously added the antenna, as stated before the mounting location isn't even close? He should have removed the WW moldings to make it more SS like. I'm not a big fan of clones. I would have left it as a Malibu with a BBC transplant. That is not Cordovan Maroon, It looks more like some sort of Sikkens maroonish red. From the looks of the pictures it looks like someone got a fair deal.

Obviously added the antenna, as stated before the mounting location isn't even close? He should have removed the WW moldings to make it more SS like. I'm not a big fan of clones. I would have left it as a Malibu with a BBC transplant. That is not Cordovan Maroon, It looks more like some sort of Sikkens maroonish red. From the looks of the pictures it looks like someone got a fair deal.


Hey!! I like the WW mouldings! LOL!! I think GM made a mistake not putting them on the SS in the first place. To me, they look a lot better than painting incorrect stripes on a 68 or 69.

Seems like a pretty reasonable price for a car that nice even though it is a home brewed-I did it MY way car.
Beautiful car!

A pretty in pics car. Not a car that I would use correct to describe. Seats are 69-72 vintage A-body but have the 68 pattern seat covers. I wouldn't have paid the ending price in this current market. Much better cars out there. Hope the new owner enjoys their purchase.

Edit: Being an NN code car would mean the V-top wasn't factory, I would be real suspicious of the paint job. If they did such a poor job of prep under the top that there are bubbles, what is possibly hiding under the paint? A couple years ago I saw a car similar at a local show and I remember the trimtag being for a Canadian 136 car like this one in about the same shape and I was not that impressed with the paint up close. I wonder if it is the same car. It would be pretty wild to have to cars like that within 60 miles of each other.

I noticed the shoulder belts. That must have been an option?? I gues I have never noticed any other cars that had them. Do many of you have that option??

I noticed the shoulder belts. That must have been an option?? I gues I have never noticed any other cars that had them. Do many of you have that option??

I believe shoulder belts remained an option until 1 Jan 1968, when the new Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards came into effect making them required.

Air cleaner and chrome cover are wrong for that model SS as well. All in all though, a very nice looking reproduction.

its an ok looking car that is a poor representation of a SS396.
Bad, red trunk, wheel moldings, seats wrong. thats just for starters.

I never understood cloning a 68 when the VIN is a dead giveaway.

Its a decent $12,000 car a best, and that might be a bit high gven the problems under the vinyl top.

Seems funny to me that everyone always says "it's your car, do it the way you want it" then when they see one they turn around and say "this is wrong or that is wrong" and pick it to death.

"wrong" by the owner's definition or wrong by who's definition? :confused:

Good Call! ^

geeze guys, this is a nice car. it's probably better quality than 90% of the cars out there. do people think if they can't come up with a couple negative things then they will lose their credibility as car guys?
first off, i doubt this guy was trying to make the perfect clone. second, why would the presence of the 136 vin on a '68 make it a bad cloning candidate? unless the purpose was to pass it off as real in the end. believe it or not, not one person out of probably 100's that have come up and commented on my cars have EVER checked the VIN's. i don't even think anyone has asked "is that real or is it a clone"? 99.8% of people couldn't care less.

it makes a difference in the value, that is why. one level pricing for a 138 vs pricing for a 136. 138 is rare comparatively.

This car is a decent 136 car which in itself is worth 10 grand, it has a big block so give it a couple grand more 12 grand. The same car as a 138 would be worth in the 18-23 grand range in the current market.

The owner is the one advertising it and comparing it to a factory correct SS not me. And its not a good comparison given all the things wrong on it. Just because it looks good in a picture it still has rust issues under the vinyl top and a 12-13 yo paint job. Not like this is a freshly done car. People tend to over estimate the value of these things when they should be more realistic in what is there. It creates to high of expectations.

Seems funny to me that everyone always says "it's your car, do it the way you want it" then when they see one they turn around and say "this is wrong or that is wrong" and pick it to death.

"wrong" by the owner's definition or wrong by who's definition? :confused:

Well, when I read this in the ad-

This car is more correct than most real Super Sports you'll find. There are no cheap reproduction items on my Chevelle.

I believe that give folks a reason to pick at the car, especially when there are so many incorrect things on it.

BillL

Maybe so Bill but he might be right about a lot of 138 cars having cheap repro stuff compared to the real stuff he put on this car. :confused:
I think that's what he meant, true or not we don't really know.

But anyway people always say this or that is not correct about a lot of cars that weren't built to their personal liking but yet they tell others "build it like you want it".
This car is not a clone, it's just personalized.

Dean,

I think this is only being critiqued since the car is being put up for sale. IMO folks saying this and that are only critiqueing it on the point of sale value and what the owner presented. It is his car done his way BUT here it is being critiqued for its sellable value. If it was "hey check out my car whaddya think?", thread the answers would be different unless the owner was asking for criticism on improving his car (which would then be in the resto forum instead of here). Does that make sense? It is the way I see these threads in this particular forum or at least a majority of them anyways.

I see threads like this pretty useful. Folks on here always say "ask questions before you buy". It might be that I am a bit of a purist but, I think talking about what is or isn't factory correct is a good way to start looking at a car. If gives a potential buyer some sort of idea how much the car has been messed with. Of course their are excptions, drag cars restomods. However in this case the car is clearly be marketed as a correct clone.

There are all types of buyers with just as many different goals with their cars. If someone that didn't know the details was interested in this car they could now make a more informed decision.

Also it gives folks a nice arena to interact about the details and maybe learn something along the way.

Whatever may be incorrect or not on this car, your not bringing it to this level for 15K. That's a nice looking show car/driver for that money, if he let it go for the 15.

Seems like a pretty reasonable price for a car that nice even though it is a home brewed-I did it MY way car.
Beautiful car!

Agree with Dean. Remember... not everyone is worried about 100% correct restos. As long as he is not misprepresenting the car, it's A-OK by me. He says right up front it is a 136 car, so cut the guy some slack! Seemed to go for a fair price, given the condition.

JMO.

I see threads like this pretty useful. Folks on here always say "ask questions before you buy".


Oh I agree but just saying "a lot of things are not correct" with out being specific is not really useful.

I think we all know that a modified 136 car is not even supposed to be "correct" because there is no such thing as "correct" on a personalized/modified car.