| FAQ |
| Members List |
| Social Groups |
| Calendar |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#21
02-19-2015, 10:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Back up this opinion up with something other than your tired insistence that you're correct... because you're not... end of story, because without data, it's just another BS opinion. |
|
#22
02-20-2015, 07:09 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
FWIW, I'll likely never own a "matching numbers" car. The one's I want are way too expensive for my budget or are not to be found. I'm happy to settle with cars that have been returned mostly to stock with the options I would have had from the factory. The candidates I've found(both original factory 400 cars by PHS) have long since lost their original drive trains. I think the consensus would be that they are fairly nice examples of the make/model nonetheless. With no intentions to sell them, this isn't a big issue for me.
__________________
1971 Pontiac Trans Am Cameo White 1968 Firebird 400 coupe, Verdoro Green w/black vinyl top 1968 Firebird 400 convertible, Verdoro Green w/black top 1970 Buick Skylark Custom convertible(driver) Fire Red 1972 Buick GS 455 Stage 1 Royal Blue |
|
#23
02-20-2015, 09:36 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
What a waste of time!
__________________
Some guys they just give up living And start dying little by little, piece by piece, Some guys come home from work and wash up, And go racin' in the street. Bruce Springsteen - Racing In The Street - 1978 |
|
#24
02-20-2015, 01:18 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
ill throw my 2 cents in here. when I remember back to being a young kid hanging out listening to my dad and his friends at their car shows and club meetings (1960's thru 1970's) and when I got into buying these cars in the mid 70's , when the words "numbers matching" was used it was referring only to the vin# stamped on the block matching the vin# of the car. sometimes the transmission #'s were brought up. when I was buying a car I never asked a guy on the phone to verify the numbers on the transmission because he was usually already put out to have to check the numbers on the block for me. when I would look at the car myself, I never went to the trouble of checking the transmission #'s until I had already bought it and had it home.
(my disclaimer to the above was the corvette group, they were checking carb, dist, alternator and starters back when my dad was in the clubs. that is why I quit the vette club back in the 80's they were just too uptight about everything) |
|
#25
02-20-2015, 02:01 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Here is a great opinion from attorney Bryon Shook who I retained on this very same issue to represent me against some clown who misrepresented a LS5 Chevelle I bought at auction:
The Sincere Definition of Numbers Matching January 2, 2011 · Posted in News · Comments Off Numbers Matching: From a Legal Standpoint By: Bryan W. Shook, Esquire Attorney-at-Law BShook@dplglaw.com A seller, an auction house, a broker, etc., all have express duties to not mislead buyers. It is the presentation that entices and induces a prospective buyer to make an offer or bid on a car. Often included within this presentation is the phrase “numbers matching”. Rarely in any field does a single term mean so much; in the field of car collecting, the term “numbers matching” means everything; or does it? The phrase “numbers matching” was coined an untold number of years ago to describe a vehicle which retained its original driveline (i.e. the driveline that was installed into the vehicle during its initial assembly at its manufacturer’s plant). Specifically and most important in this definition is the engine; as this is the single most important aspect of a vehicle’s originality. There are some in the hobby, however that would have you believe that the phrase “numbers matching” has parted ways with its original and understood definition. These individuals would have you believe that the phrase “numbers matching” means that the driveline, has numbers appearing on its components, that look as though they could have been placed on there during the initial assembly process on the manufacturer’s line. This is where the issue with restamped engines and transmissions becomes ever apparent. This disingenuous play on words is polluting our hobby. Numbers Matching means ORIGINAL; the phrase and the meaning of “numbers matching” have never parted company. Numbers matching still means, as it always has, that the engine, transmission and rear axle are original to that particular vehicle. For the phrase to have any other meaning would render it flawed and unnecessary. The use of the phrase “numbers matching” in a disingenuous fashion opens the seller to a high level of legal exposure. The buyer who learns after he purchases the vehicle that the vehicle, is not “as advertised”, has the right to revoke his acceptance of the vehicle and enjoys many protections that come along with legal revocation. For example, these protections could include a statutorily created security interest in the vehicle up to the amount paid for the vehicle, plus certain expenses and other damages. Any misleading use of the phrase “numbers matching” blackens the eye of the hobby. The only reason one would use such a deceitful definition of “numbers matching” would be in a cacluated attempt to mask the true nature of the vehicle for self-serving purposes. This ultimately has a negative impact on the hobby. For more information on what your rights are in such a transaction, please call or email me, I would be more than happy to discuss this or any other matter concerning car collecting with you. Bryan W. Shook, Esquire is a licensed Pennsylvania lawyer. Attorney Shook’s office is headquartered in Camp Hill, Pennsylvania although his practice takes him across the country. During his career, Attorney Bryan Shook has become a powerful advocate for his clients and one of the foremost collector, antique and automotive fraud and misrepresentation attorneys in the country. He has successfully tried as well as amicably resolved cases throughout the United States. Bryan Shook can be reached by e-mail at BShook@dpglaw.com or by phone |
|
#27
02-20-2015, 10:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
This whole "numbers matching" debate is based upon an opinion. Since I can arbitrarily find some reference to back up my opinion, let's use Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_matching Quote:
This is a stupid circle jerk opinion-based exercise in semantics where those with VIN number matching blocks can make a lame ass claim that "numbers' defines the VIN and not the part. My "WN" code 350 HO block is correct for a 69 350 HO... period. It's not "a born with" part, but the part numbers and date code are correct. I assume we're all here because we love the hobby, but to lay down some BS opinion on what constitutes the definition of "numbers matching" based on the car you happen to have with "born with" parts is biased. Parts have numbers... block codes... date codes... that's what defines the part. Will one of you haters please answer this question... Is a 69 Trans AM RAIV car with the "born with" block and a replaced 4 speed trans "numbers matching" in your opinion? Please elaborate. |
|
#28
02-20-2015, 11:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
thews asked: Is a 69 Trans AM RAIV car with the "born with" block and a replaced 4 speed trans "numbers matching" in your opinion?
If you replaced the trans with an aftermarket transmission (non factory built) there is no way you can say numbers matching. Everyone that looks at the car can tell it is not correct. If you replaced it with a trans from the same year or a different year (this could be same type of trans that came it the car new or a different style of trans that was an option in the same year) it would "appear to be numbers matching". If one would look at your Protect-O-plate or build sheet it would show the number of the transmission that was born to the car and it would not match at all. So it could NOT be numbers matching. Paperwork, paperwork, paperwork is what makes GTO $$$$$, not someone's definiton of numbers matching. Let the car speak for itself. If you lost your virginity (transmission) but you have that nice sweet innocent virgin look (a transmission that looks era correct) are you still a virgin? You appear to be numbers matching but your not. You can only be original once. Last edited by Bertone; 02-20-2015 at 11:44 PM. |
|
#29
02-21-2015, 09:14 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Thews
Your 69 350HO WN may be "Correct" but not "Numbers Matching". Just like the XW I have for my RA II 68 GTO - it is correct, but not numbers matching because it has a different VIN on the front of the block than the one on my car. Also the WC I have for my 71 455HO 4spd GTO Convertible which in this case HAS NO VIN on the front of the block is still just CORRECT & NOT NUMBERS MATCHING since it is not the block it was born with, and I'm not going to try to convince people otherwise. ....and you can stop trying to convince us that yours is numbers matching too.
__________________
Some guys they just give up living And start dying little by little, piece by piece, Some guys come home from work and wash up, And go racin' in the street. Bruce Springsteen - Racing In The Street - 1978 |
|
#30
02-21-2015, 09:24 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
My only take on this spin of events...
You can have a numbers matching engine (everything that's on the engine is the same as when it came out of the engine shop) in a non-numbers matching vehicle. |
|
#31
02-24-2015, 11:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
#34
02-25-2015, 01:38 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I do see your point of view where the car has all the correct codes then it must be numbers matching. But also on that transmission are some numbers that don't belong to the new car and those number will not match up to the car's original paperwork. Which leads you back to post number 32. |
|
#35
02-25-2015, 02:13 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
In all my years I've never heard anyone refer to a car as numbers matching unless it had it's original...not just correct...drivetrain....and there are very few of them around.
My '68 has it's 'born with' longblock but the rear end and tranny have been changed in it's lifetime. I would never deem to call it numbers matching even if the transmission and rear are correct for the car.
__________________
Greg Reid Palmetto, Georgia |
|
#36
02-25-2015, 08:02 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
1971 Pontiac Trans Am Cameo White 1968 Firebird 400 coupe, Verdoro Green w/black vinyl top 1968 Firebird 400 convertible, Verdoro Green w/black top 1970 Buick Skylark Custom convertible(driver) Fire Red 1972 Buick GS 455 Stage 1 Royal Blue |
|
#37
02-25-2015, 05:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Just piling on I guess, but for a '68 up Pontiac, "numbers matching" block has always included the VIN stamp in my experience.
That is true for the engine block and the trans, both were VIN stamped. Aside from mistakes, only one trans was identified with the matching VIN. thews, "numbers matching" is a made up concept. In my view, it has its origins in the Corvette hobby. In the old car hobby it had previously been accepted that a car was "correct" as long as the features were possible. In other words, a car built in a certain model year would be incorrect if it featured an option that only became available after the particular car was built. But was correct if later built. Nobody cared whether the car actually was built with the feature, only that it was theoretically possible. This is still true in many parts of the old car hobby today. The Corvette hobby went way beyond that and original drivetrains became a way of establishing comparative value for one example vs. another and became known as "numbers matching". PHS documents have made it possible for the Pontiac hobby to know a lot more about how the car was built. So we nitpick over whether a car was actually built with a particular option or not. A car with a RAIV is devalued if it was built with a lesser engine choice. We have gotten so carried away that it gave rise to restamps which are virtually undetectable and Data Plate and VIN tag swaps, rebodies, and "clones". People have differing opinions of these various practices. thews, what you are hearing expressed in this thread is that a correct code and dated block is not considered "numbers matching" by the definition that most of us use if the VIN stamp isn't also a match. Regardless of the definition, the question is whether anybody sees a value distinction between a '69 man trans 350HO Firebird that has a WN coded block but mismatched VIN stamp vs. one that has a 9790079 p/n block but not the WN manifest code stamped on it. I like to see the correct manifest code but don't place much value on it. It is simply too easy to restamp the codes for me to look at the WN and think, wow, that is worth a lot. The next guy may place high value on it but still less than an all original VIN matching engine. I don't think "numbers matching" carries the same definition all across the old car hobby. What is useful in this discussion is what that phrase means to the '69 Firebird hobby. I believe you won't find many takers accepting your definition excluding the block VIN stamp. Your question about the Trans Am is a no brainer for me. Bertone put it in the context of the Muncie assembly date code which might likely not match to the Protect-O-Plate if the P-O-P existed, although I'm not sure the '69 P-O-P even bothered to include the EUN much less the Muncie assembly date code as was the practice much earlier. However, the VIN stamp on the trans main case, assuming it had not been restamped, would not match to the VIN of the car, so it would easily be seen as not a "numbers matching" trans by most of us. But more of us might place extra value on the car if it had a model year correct trans vs. one that had a trans from the wrong model year. We still wouldn't say the trans was numbers matching. Some guys are content to view the block as numbers matching and nothing else matters. This despite the fact that body panels have date coding, glass is date coded, plastic trim often is date coded, and so on. I tend to dislike the use of the phrase numbers matching because I'm interested in all the numbers and rarely, in my experience, does the guy who claims numbers matching mean all numbers. So when somebody says "numbers matching", you have to ask exactly what component are they referring to. Your original post only asked if the block would be considered numbers matching. That is specific. My '64 GTO convertible has "matching numbers" side window glass. That is, the date codes on the side window glass are reasonable for the build and very likely original. I'm not the original owner, so I'm not certain. When a guy advertises "numbers matching", what does he mean? The entire car? The block? The drivetrain? But the block number match has always included the VIN for most of us. Another '69 Firebird might have a date code correct 9790079 block but with a Lemans engine manifest code on it. I get the sense that you consider your WN block to be more valuable. For me, I would accept that the Lemans block is date code correct and more valuable to me than if it had, say, a '71 350 block in it. Your block is most likely too early to be date code correct for the build. Not impossible, but since it is not original, I would prefer a closer date to the build (which I assume was January if it was delivered in January). So what really is "numbers matching" about your block? The p/n matches the p/n of the original block. The WN code stamping matches the code stamped on the original block. The VIN stamp doesn't match the VIN of the car. And the EUN is implicitly different than the EUN stamped on the original block. Most likely the block was cast on a different day. Either all the numbers match or they don't. If you define your block as "numbers matching", what would you call it if it had the matching VIN stamp on it? If you say "original numbers matching", isn't that playing word games? Would you be comfortable saying you have a "numbers matching non-original block"? Doesn't that sound like nonsense to you? I like factory correct, so I applaud any effort to duplicate what was factory original. Having the correct engine manifest code stamp on the block is cool. Just doesn't make sense to call it "numbers matching". JMO. '64-'67 Pontiac owners don't have the luxury of block VIN stamps. In '64, Pontiac quit stamping the VIN on the block and didn't resume until the '68 Model Year when Fed law required it in an effort to thwart rampant auto theft and chop shops. For '64-'67, date code "matching" is often the best we can do for the block unless certain documentation remains with the car that identifies the correct EUN. But for '68 up, the block VIN stamp has always been part of any numbers matching discussion. For '64, I have done extensive research to match block date codes to Time Built codes. The comments related to the lag time for engines shipped to satellite Plants doesn't hold up for '64. The block cast dates could be almost impossibly close to the production date even for cars built at Fremont. If there was any lag, it is virtually undetectable when comparing to cars built at the Pontiac plant. Blocks usually moved from foundry casting (the date identified by the cast date tag) to engine assembly very rapidly. Transit time was pretty rapid judging from a study of '64 Pontiacs with original engines. Anomalies also exist. Years ago I found a '64 Lemans with an original 326 that was assembled in March (I know the approximate engine assembly dates by the EUN) with a block cast in March. The car was built about 10 weeks later at Fremont in May. But that was an extreme exception. Another exception involved a block that was cast several months before it was made part of an engine assembly. The vast majority of '64 blocks became part of an engine assembly within days of being cast. As long as the engine was assembled before the car was built and has the correct engine code, nobody can claim it could NOT have been original to the car no matter where it was final assembled based on the cast date of the block and EUN alone. You would need other documentation. That is the reality for '64-'67. For a '69 engine, the VIN stamp is the "go to" identifier. Things weren't static so what was true in '64 may not have been so true in '69. But generally, blocks were still being made part of engine assemblies very soon after casting. So an early Oct '68 cast block most likely was made part of an engine assembly in Oct. This can be proven by a study of the EUN stamped on the block for '69 engine assemblies. To answer your original question, it would be very unusual for an Oct cast block to have Dec cast heads originally. The EUN would prove the impossibility. The heads had to have existed when the engine was assembled. Your EUN is 122925. I have a large log of '69 Firebirds for a different purpose, I haven't recorded many EUNs. However, in a quick check I find a later EUN as the original engine in a Nov '68 built '69 Firebird. That would seem to confirm that EUN 122925 was assembled well before December. I'm sure you can find additional EUNs to confirm this fact. If you tell me the partial VIN stamped on the block, I would be able to tell from my log within a week or two what the Time Built code was for the Firebird that your engine was original to. That said, I notice something else odd about your block. Very early in the '69 Model Year, Pontiac switched from stamping a 6 digit EUN on the block to a 7 digit EUN. The assumption was that they anticipated hitting 1 million units for the model year so decided to use a 7 digit EUN. They never got there, but except for some very early assembled '69 engines, the EUNs were 7 digit. Yours does not. It is missing the leading 0 common to 7 digit '69 EUNs. That alone would raise my eyebrows. To be honest, I no longer remember how early they switched to the 7 character EUN format. But I'm thinking it was several weeks before EUN 122925 was assembled. Maybe somebody else here or in the '69 GTO forum will know when they switched. I was thinking before the 50,000th engine assembly. If you are not familiar with the block VIN stamp, you should find it a few inches below the EUN, stamped perpendicular and in very small characters. At the time this engine would have been installed, only Van Nuys and Lordstown were building '69 Firebirds. So the Plant code in the partial VIN should be L or U. |
|
#38
02-25-2015, 10:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#39
02-25-2015, 10:48 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
1971 Pontiac Trans Am Cameo White 1968 Firebird 400 coupe, Verdoro Green w/black vinyl top 1968 Firebird 400 convertible, Verdoro Green w/black top 1970 Buick Skylark Custom convertible(driver) Fire Red 1972 Buick GS 455 Stage 1 Royal Blue |
|
#40
02-25-2015, 11:38 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
That statement alone is enough to indicate that you are no stranger to being 100% wrong.
__________________
Greg Reid Palmetto, Georgia |
| Closed Thread |
|
|
The PY Online Forums is the largest online gathering of Pontiac enthusiasts anywhere in the world. Founded in 1991, it was also the first online forum for people to gather and talk about their Pontiacs. Since then, it has become the mecca of Pontiac technical data and knowledge that no other place can surpass.
Linear Mode
