[saltman 1965]

I see one one less 64 Lemans in the future.

[Terry Gartner]

I didn't win this car, but the winner backed out. I've been given the opportunity to buy it. I know it looks like a lot of work, but what is life for. Besides, I've always wanted to work on my welding skills.

[Chris Lance]

Make sure that the second chance offer isn't fake, very common trick.

[66Post]

Who knows, it may grace these pages in, say about 15 years...

[Baron Von Zeppelin]

i'm familiar with Florida cars in this condition .
You don't need a welder - you need a donor shell and a GTO hood .
Drivetrain and glass is about all you get out of these victims .

[Terry Gartner]

OK, I got it home today.

Oh my, this is going to take a while. Yes, I think a donor car is probably in order. The fenders look usable, but that's probably about it.

Anyone have a lead on a donor?

[geeteeohguy]

FYI, Swapping bodies/vin tags is illegal and is a felony. At the very least, the cowl area/left front A pillar area would need to be kept intact. Even then, someone inspecting the car closely would be apt to raise an eyebrow if the grafting together of the two cars was obvious. I would check into it further before spending time and money on a restoration/rebody attempt.

[psw]

At least it is not as bad as this one:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikebai...in/photostream

[John V.]

Originally Posted by geeteeohguy

FYI, Swapping bodies/vin tags is illegal and is a felony.

I am interested in reviewing the Florida Statute that you allude to, would it be possible to provide a link? This has been debated in the past. I know the laws vary state to state. Rather than discourage a would be restoration project, I'd be interested in seeing what the law allows.

You are correct, a pieced together car will almost always be obvious because of date coding on certain body components. But cars that were in far worse shape than Terry's GTO have been resurrected. For my part, I'll be cheering him on, hoping he'll be able to restore this GTO to at least noce driver status.

Terry, congrats on grabbing it. Can't help with parts cars. Wish I was closer to your area, I'd like to see it in the flesh.

So, does it look like the frame is serviceable? How bout some more pictures?

[geeteeohguy]

John, I'm referring to CA laws and yes, this does indeed warrant more research. Excellent point. A lot of the issue is getting the car registered and "back in the system". There have been cases of very expensive cars getting wrecked, parted, and then in a short while, 2 of the same car with the same VIN pop up. I know of this happening with a Ferarri GTO. It's sort of like replacing the hammer handle, then the head, then the handle again. Is it still the same hammer? How much of this '64 GTO will actually be a real '64 GTO when done? It gets quite murky when it comes to "how much of the original car you need" to still call it an original car instead of a VIN swap. I have heard stories of VIN swap cars that did fine for years and years until they were caught by a sharp cop, owner, or DMV inspector. Then all heck broke loose. I'm going to do more research on this.

[geeteeohguy]

From a quick cursory check, I could not find a concrete answer. What I found were multiple auto forums stating that it was a federal offense to swap a VIN or VIN related re-body. I also found out (and I know this to be true in CA) that even removing a VIN plate and re-installing it on the SAME vehicle is known as "VIN tampering" and is a punishable crime. If it is evident that your VIN plate has been removed and re-installed, the DMV will remove the factory VIN, and install it's own propriatary VIN tag in it's place. (I have actually seen this...not pretty). So, it looks like a huge can of worms from pretty much any angle. Will need to do more digging for some more definitive answers, though.

[John V.]

geeteeohguy, your hammer analogy is a good one. I've generally taken the "opposite" side in these debates. I don't want to go off on that tangent right now.

What I DO like about the car that Terry has picked up is the apparent original engine, trans, and Safe-T-Track rear axle. How many restored GTOs DON'T have all-original drivetrains?

Sometimes it seems like it gets to be picking nits as to which GTO is more "authentic".

[64woodwheel]

There is a 64 GTO in a local junkyard that is totally stripped (VIN and trim tag too) I'd love to find the VIN on the frame rail and find out where the tags ended up.

[geeteeohguy]

John, good point with the engine/drivetrain. Pound for pound, an engine, trans, and differential weigh a lot more than quarter panels do! Lot's of ways to "think" this one. The sticky part is the legality that is involved with the VIN which is part of the body, and the body is how the car is identified.

[1969GTO]

just to show you I am still learning...I thought all GTO's had 242 in all the vin's?

[John V.]

Originally Posted by geeteeohguy

John, good point with the engine/drivetrain. Pound for pound, an engine, trans, and differential weigh a lot more than quarter panels do! Lot's of ways to "think" this one. The sticky part is the legality that is involved with the VIN which is part of the body, and the body is how the car is identified.

Yes, the law can make it sticky and unfortunately, the law is not always rational or applied fairly.

I would restate your VIN definition,

"The VIN tag is attached to the Body Assembly on the LH Front Body Hinge Pillar Panel Assembly. The VIN (the no. itself) is how the car is identified. The VIN tag is what law enforcement relies on to confirm the identification."

I wouldn't say that the VIN tag "is part of the body", and the body certainly is not how the car is identified for legal purposes. If I "rebody" a Fiero with a kit to make it look like a Lamborghini, the original VIN will STILL identify the car for legal purposes even though it looks nothing like a Fiero anymore.

The body isn't how the car is identified. The CAR is identified for legal purposes by the VIN. And the '64 VIN was stamped onto a plate in accordance with then existing law and the tag attached by spot welds to the LH Hinge Pillar.

The Body Assembly was made up from many sub-components, each were separately serviced for collision repair by PMD, including the LH Front Body Hinge Pillar Panel Assembly.

The hobby gets worked up about tag swaps today. But not many are interested in the legacy of rampant auto theft that took place in the '60s and evidence surfaces today on numerous collector cars that exhibit VIN tags from cars that were wrecked when brand new, and used to launder a stolen car. No matter how many times these cars have changed hands in the years since they were stolen, legally they still belong to the guy they were stolen from or his insurance co. if a claim was paid.

[John V.]

Originally Posted by 1969GTO

just to show you I am still learning...I thought all GTO's had 242 in all the vin's?

Actually, the ONLY GTOs with the VIN prefix 242 were produced from '66-'71. Not to worry, I learn new stuff about GTOs all the time, that makes it fun.

In '64, the GTO was an option package ordered on a 22 Model Series Lemans. The GTO was not yet considered a separate Model Series.

[1969GTO]

Originally Posted by John V.

Actually, the ONLY GTOs with the VIN prefix 242 were produced from '66-'71. Not to worry, I learn new stuff about GTOs all the time, that makes it fun.

In '64, the GTO was an option package ordered on a 22 Model Series Lemans. The GTO was not yet considered a separate Model Series.

ooohh thanks for the info

[geeteeohguy]

John, I agree with you on all points except where the VIN tag is "part of the body". It attaches to a part of the body that is permanent and intended to last the life of the car. Anything can be replaced/serviced, but we need to consider what is a normal and reasonable replacement. There is a good reason the VIN tags were never riveted to a fender, door, or bumper. The door pillar and cowl are considered a 'permanent' part of the car, and were expected to be part of the car its entire service life.

[John V.]

Originally Posted by geeteeohguy

The door pillar and cowl are considered a 'permanent' part of the car, and were expected to be part of the car its entire service life.

Not true. That was my point.

The Door Hinge Pillar was an available Service Part same as any other sub-part of the Body Assembly. Could be purchased just as a floor pan, fender, or door could be purchased.

The '64-'65 Tempest 2 dr. Coupe Front Body Hinge Pillar Panel Assembly is illustrated on pg. B-436 of the '66 Body Parts Catalog. Convertible is on B-440. Hardtop was not illustrated.

Each of the Front Body Hinge Pillar Panel Assemblies are found in Gr. 12.840.

The LH one for the '64-'65 2 dr. Hardtop is p/n 4508294.

There was NO expectation that this part would never be serviced thru the entire service life of the car. That is why PMD offered them as Service Parts.

I do not know if the Fed law in regard to VIN tag placement (circa '58) spelled out WHERE the VIN tag was to be attached. When the law was revised, it DID spell out that the VIN tag had to be visible from outside the car thru the glazing (ie., the windshield). That prompted the relocation of the VIN tag to the top of the cowl.

But the cowl remained a serviceable part. So there is nothing sacrosanct about the part to which the VIN tag was attached.

I'm not familiar enough with the detail of the law but my guess is that the revised law (circa '68) may have addressed what to do about the VIN tag in the event of collision repair/replacement of the cowl. If the law DID address that issue, it was most likely done to CLARIFY what was legal and what wasn't when it came to moving a VIN tag.

I also do not know whether they addressed this at all in the earlier law. Might not have. Law enforcement and legislators got smarter to combat auto theft as the years went by. I know many changes in State laws were made so as to make it harder for chop shops and other crooks to obtain "clean" tags from wrecks and attach them to stolen cars.

But I also believe the goal was to stop criminal activity. Reattaching a VIN tag to a legitimately repaired, legally owned vehicle would not have been made illegal in those laws.

Any laws that try to thwart that are of more recent vintage as hobbyists have tried to get legislators to outlaw certain restoration practices. While some applaud these new restrictions, I wonder if the result is to make it impractical to restore certain cars, making the hobby more expensive for those of us enjoying the hobby at the low end of the scale.

A guy can restore an original GTO Body Assembly with a swapped in '68 motor, '66 trans, '72 rear end, complete repro seat upholstery, all new aftermarket glass, repro lenses, bumpers, taillight housings, used fenders from a donor, fabricated sheet metal quarter patches, repro floor and trunk pans, repro gas tank, and a host of other used and repro parts so that hardly a thing on the car was factory installed. As long as the VIN tag remains attached to the original door hinge pillar, nobody flinches.

But a car as we are discussing here, complete with all original drivetrain, is "suspect" because it gets restored with all or part of a Body Assembly that was donated from some other car.

Remember, the Body Assembly was a sub-component of the Final Assembly. Each Body Assembly was just another part. Just like the Engine Assembly was a part.

The Body Assembly was made up of many individual parts by Fisher Body. Similar to the Transmissions supplied by Muncie. Lots of individual parts went into the trans or body assembly, but delivered to PMD as a ready to install part. Fisher Body was a captive GM vendor. The part they furnished to PMD was really not more "special" than the Wiper Arm Assemblies supplied by Trico. Certainly more customized per the order. But in the end, just another part to be assembled during the build up of the car at Final.

I realize that what I am suggesting can devolve to the thing Chad mentioned, somebody acquires a set of tags and simply attaches them to another car and "creates" a GTO out of whole cloth.

I guess I am content to let the market figure out the value of a collector car. No tag swap car will hold up to high level scrutiny regarding "matching nos.", body panel date stamping alone would normally expose such a thing. I'm good with "buyer beware".

I know others see this way differently. Maybe they don't think they would be taken, but worry about everybody else. I'm just not wired that way. If my mother gets suckered, I say "sucks to be her".