Team Chevelle banner
  • Hey everyone! Enter your ride HERE to be a part JULY's Ride of the Month Challenge!
1 - 20 of 47 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi all

I’m in central Jersey and new to the forum but not new to Chevelles. My grandma had a 70 Malibu 307 when I was 7 and when she passed, my parents thought it was a good idea to sell the car even though I begged them to keep it for me. Ever since then (now 38) I’ve dreamed of owning an SS 454. I’ve been a mopar guy since 2010 owning all flavors of the challenger (except the SXT because race car) and since selling my 19 Hellcat for a good profit, I decided it’s time to finally get the Chevelle I’ve dreamed about all these years. I came across the one below and it sounds like it’s a real deal with the exception of the build sheet to verify it. I know all of the parts can be bolted on to a Malibu but the fact that the engine casting matches makes me think twice. I’m also aware they can be shaved down and new castings can be added to make it match the vin.

I’m wondering if you Velle experts can help a guy out and give me your thoughts on this. I already made an offer pending verification and the seller accepted. I am also trying to find a pre purchase inspector to check it out for me as I said, I’m a total newbie to the classic car world. Thanks in advance and can’t wait to learn from you all.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,621 Posts
Well the car is the original color but it’s got a column shift cluster in the dash so that’s been changed,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Well the car is the original color but it’s got a column shift cluster in the dash so that’s been changed,
He did say he had the original dash but took it out due to something with the radio knobs.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,621 Posts
Hopefully some of the experts will chime in on that engine stamp. I don’t see the usual marks on the deck but I’m no expert.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
If there’s anything I should look for please let me know so I can ask the seller for a photo before I drive almost 4 hours one way.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,621 Posts
717061
717062


see the broach marks ? The lines. I may be wrong but I don’t see them on the engine pic of this car. Others on here can tell if that stamp looks legit
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
I also read he said it’s original rear end but according to Chevroletstuff CCF code was only for 3.31:1 ~ 12-bolt Positraction (L34/402 & L48/350-4) not for LS5. That would be CRU or CRV.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,393 Posts
Ar
I also read he said it’s original rear end but according to Chevroletstuff CCF code was only for 3.31:1 ~ 12-bolt Positraction (L34/402 & L48/350-4) not for LS5. That would be CRU or CRV.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
If the rear lower control arms are not "boxed", that could point out it's a fake.
People go to a lot of trouble to fake 70 SS Chevelles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,820 Posts
There's a lot in that seller's description that would steer me away.
I know how easy it is to spend money from a past profit. Another private party sale will come along....I'm just repeating what I was told some 40 years ago, but it was sage advice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
There's a lot in that seller's description that would steer me away.
I know how easy it is to spend money from a past profit. Another private party sale will come along....I'm just repeating what I was told some 40 years ago, but it was sage advice.
Thanks. As a newbie can ou point out what would steer you away?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,820 Posts
The stuff already mentioned above. The seller seems to have some knowledge but won't explain the concerns mentioned above. He seems to setting his sights on the ill informed, that usually doesn't happen without intent. .... and the pad stamp.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
256 Posts
Hey all, it's my car. Been a member here since I bought the car in 2004. As to the comments above, I'm not hiding anything, and now I'm starting to be sorry that I disclosed as much as I did in the ad in trying to be as forthright as possible.

As for the concerns:

1. If you go to Dale M's site, ChevelleStuff.net you can see plenty of examples that don't have the "lines" on the pad. The pic I took of my engine pad was taken with my iPhone, and then zoomed in and cropped, to get as clear a picture as possible. This has not been decked, re-stamped, or anything along those lines. Not even sure how anyone could see "lines" or not when the pad is painted. Again, look at the other examples on Dale's page because there's several that look exactly like mine where lines are not visible. Like this one, out of a '70 Monte Carlo SS454:

717101


2. I raised the question myself about the console shifter with the gear indicator in the speedo when I bought the car in 2004. The previous owner had the car for 15 or so years before me, and when I asked him about it, he said that's how it was from the previous owner before him. I've seen others like mine, that aren't the norm, because back then Chevy didn't always do things one way, every time. Is it possible someone converted from column shift car? Yes. Is it possible it left the factory that way? Yes. If I thought it would generate this much buzz, I probably would've swapped out the speedo years ago and put a gear indicator on the console.

3. Regarding the CCF code on the rear axle. The comment was made that, "... according to Chevroletstuff [sic] CCF code was only for 3.31:1 ~ 12-bolt Positraction (L34/402 & L48/350-4) not for LS5. That would be CRU or CRV." On Dale M's site, where he mentions the "L34/402 & L48/350-4" after the CCF code, there's also an asterisk. If you scroll to the bottom and read the asterisk, all he's saying there is that he has build sheets showing the CCF code on them for those models, but he never says it wasn't on any other models. I seem to recall another member here on Team Chevelle who has a 454 car with CCF on the axle that was a barn find car. Again Arlington just starting building Chevelles that year. Stranger things have happened, especially at Arlington.

EDIT: Here's the other post about the LS6 with a CCF axle, also an Arlington car -- click.

The author of that post mentions, "... I did a review of the Chevelle LS6 registry, and 2 of the 28 cars listed from Arlington are shown with CCF rear ends, both supposedly with 4:10 gears." So when I visited the registry page, HERE, there is a note at the bottom which reads:

"At least two Arlington cars have been found with CCF coded rear ends on their Protect-O-Plates (POP). The CCF rear end code is for a Positraction 3.31:1 for L48 and L34 Chevelles yet both of those found also show LS6 engine codes and both owner's swear the ratio is 4.10:1, not 3.31:1."

This is particularly interesting to me, because, like these LS6 cars, my "CCF" coded rear axle does not have 3.31 gears. They're 4.10:1. I just always assumed that , at some point, somebody must've changed out the gears. Seems I may have assumed incorrectly, and this was more of Arlington playing fast and loose with their builds, as has been noted elsewhere. Like "ChevelleStuff.net," the LS6 Registry is also run by Dale M, and I've reached out to him for any more information he might have.

All I can really say is that I didn't touch the rear end, and the previous owner said he hadn't either. So, that's approximately 32 or so years of the cars 51 years of age.

Anyway, this isn't a fake SS454 being posted by a scammer. I knew, as soon as I bothered to put up the ad for my car, that posts like this would pop up here. Unfortunately, I've watched it happen on here time and again, by my fellow Chevelle enthusiasts, for the past 17 years. Sometimes it makes me just cringe, because the opinions are often times just flat-out incorrect. It particularly pisses me off that two posters here have all but accused me of faking information or attempting to mislead buyers. Really? I posted all the information I did in the ad to be as forthright as possible, and somehow I'm being sneaky? God help me, I love our Chevelles, but these assumptions about me and my car are what I hate most about our hobby. Having said that, I know there are assholes out there who will do anything to make a buck. That isn't me. My wife and I are retired veterans, and as I said in the ad, I bought this car for her as a wedding gift in 2004 -- and I did my research at the time.

To "cheveslakr's" comment that I "won't explain the concerns mentioned above" ... I don't even get how you can make that statement. Without knowing me, or whether I was asked about these questions, or whether I had, in fact, addressed them, you make this post. Wow. I wasn't posting on this thread before now, so how would you know what was discussed between he and I? And since nobody here does know, I'll tell you that I was only asked by the OP about these questions this morning, and on a hunch, I came here and just now found this thread about my car. So I'm here now "explaining" my SS and answering questions. But for you to make that comment without knowing anything ... well, see my comment above about some Chevelle owners. Again, I get that a new guy comes here with questions and you want to help him, but your comment paints me as somebody trying to hide something, and that is patently false.

To the OP, best of luck to you on your continued search for a Chevelle.

Regards,
Nathan Zelk
 
  • Like
Reactions: the heckler and SFD

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
256 Posts
Ar

If the rear lower control arms are not "boxed", that could point out it's a fake.
People go to a lot of trouble to fake 70 SS Chevelles.
Yes, it has the boxed rear lower control arms, and the rear sway bar.

Undercarriage.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: shovelrick and SFD

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,595 Posts
Good looking car, I may be a bit biased though. 😁
717103
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
256 Posts
Good looking car, I may be a bit biased though. 😁 View attachment 717103
Nice! I love it! We even have the same front license plate. Although I do love those "day 2" wheels better than the factory original rallys.

It's funny, when I posted my ad on Facebook and other places, the very first day someone posted a comment about my car saying, "they didn't make any white ones." So, I typed back, "didn't make any white what?" He then proceeds to tell me there weren't any white '70 Chevelles with black racing stripes. So off I went to Dale M's page and pulled up the chart showing that, in fact, black was the only color the stripe should be. Then from him, "I stand corrected." Best part was, this guy professed to have been the owner of a red/black '70 SS, and two '72 Chevelles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SFD

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,820 Posts
First, I wasn't getting personal and expect the same respect. Been around the market for some time and first rule is you're always going to get concerned buyers. Whether they're informed or not, doesn't matter, you treat them all with respect and if it's to the point it's not worth your efforts, you move on...simple as that.
I'm sure you'll get some more experts on the '70 model year, and that year isn't my playground, but I've always kept my ear to the discussions and NEVER heard of anything but the 454 rear being offered in a LS5 or '6. That and a pad that I can't see any evidence of broach marks and no other proof of the LS5 claim, would make me dig deeper if I really had interest in the car. These are concerns that the OP is deserving of and that's exactly what he was asking for. You have to expect that, since you're asking a $20k premium for the claim.
Takes a lot of effort to sell a car, and a car that has implied pedigree is even that much tougher. If I may say, you've already dug a hole since your vin is tagged on the internet and it'll be tied to these responses.
Good Luck.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
256 Posts
I wasn't getting personal with you either. I didn't use profanity or anything of the sort. I took your comments at face value, and they were painting me in a bad light before I even posted a reply. Specifically: "The seller seems to have some knowledge but won't explain the concerns mentioned above. He seems to setting his sights on the ill informed, that usually doesn't happen without intent."

So I had to post before this got out of hand. This isn't my first rodeo on the classic car market either, and of course buyers would have questions and be concerned. I get that. It's a lot of money. And I'm not attacking the OP with my post -- I'm answering the questions and disproving some of the claims here by other posters because, as you said, now my VIN is tagged on the Internet. But I didn't dig this hole, and my responses aren't digging it deeper. I'm open to discussion about my Chevelle because it is legit. As for the broach marks, I've seen plenty of them where it's not clearly evident, particularly not when it has a coat of paint on it -- which is why I linked that photo above.

You're right in some regards, and I was hesitant to put the VIN pad photo on the ad for exactly this reason. One person says, "nope that is suspect," and now I have to deal with that. In any event, this buyer says he's no longer interested, and as I told him, if you're unsure, then definitely don't buy my car and wished him best of luck.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
256 Posts
There was also no discussion above regarding the block castings and dates which also fall in line with the production date of the car, or to my comment that, if you look at Dale's website of sample VIN pads, not all of them have visible broach lines either. The block casting number is "3963512" (454) and is date coded "K10 9," (November 10, 1969). This weekend I will take better photos of the VIN pad on the block and see about removing the paint.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,621 Posts
Since I was the one that mentioned the stamp I will respond. I believe I was very respectful and careful with my words and only posted my observation based on what I see. I specifically said “I don’t see the typical lines” I did not say “that block has been restamped” . The OP came here asking for info on what he should look at. The legitimacy of the engine stamp is one of those things that he should confirm. I also stated that I was no expert and that others here would be able to help him with that. The topic of broach marks has been talked about a ton. A search will find lots of info. I don’t think it would be right to just stay quiet and tell him it all looks good if there are things that COULD be a red flag..

Also that deck looks to be clear of paint. Maybe it’s not but that’s what I thought when I saw the photo
 
1 - 20 of 47 Posts
Top