[allmycarsrjunk]

Alright, I admit, I know it all and by the way I agree with everyone's sentiments on the subject. As to what Steved said, about restamping the sequence number . I agree 100%. If all that info was released, it would just mean one more thing for someone to do to make a nom car a numbers car. Boss, I agree totally, the value of the car for me resides mostly in the car itself and not the block. (Why is the block more impotant than the heads and tranny?) If it's nom than the price is a little less. Who here wouldn't want a '73 stick S.D. or '69 Ram IV T.A. with a correct but nom block for a discounted price, and if you have one call me immediatley and be sure to offer me the Christmas discount.

p.s. I also have everyone's Chistmas list and I must admit that uncle judge and 1969 ram air are sick twisted Bastards.

[Steve Hoog]

Rondelet for Sergeant Schultz

I know nothings.
It’s an oxymoron, I know.
I know nothings,
Oh to think of it is numbing!
I know, perhaps, “I am”, although
To say this is quite apropos:
I know nothings!

[taximan]

Hey Steve or Baron:

Has anyone tried sending a VIN and an engine sequence # for the same car, to Jim Mattison to see if he will at least confirm or deny that the engine sequence # is correct for that car. At least that way he wouldn't have to release the actual engine sequence # that could be restamped.

[Steve Hoog]

The answer is no for me, I've never had a car that I was concerned enough to try on.

[The Boss]

John,

You don't have to wrap mine, just send the keys, I'll come and pick it up.

Chris

[Judge273]

So, who is benefitting from this? JM and CC are the only "power-brokers" of high dollar Pontiacs? CC recently smashed JM 69 TA, must have been a NOM?

I have had very cordial conversation with both of those guys about cars, and they seem very helpful with the information they have to offer about certain cars. CC sells some very nice cars, and does his homework too! I bet he could shed light on this subject if he was asked? If that is the right CC?

More proof is needed for me to believe this is done to keep information hidden about high dollar cars or any cars that Pontiac built.

[R 70 Judge]

This is the reason I only buy original owner cars. No funny business to worry about.

'70 Judge RA III 4 speed - 1 owner
'69 TA RA IV 4 speed - 1 owner
'63 Le Mans 326 Auto - 1 owner

Just kidding.....but in all seriousness, this would be very helpful when the "big money" cars change hands. Very interesting.

[Baron Von Zeppelin]

I think $17,500 was a good fair deal for this particular Car. Assuming everything was as he stated. If he would have better prepared for the auction with better information and pictures it might have hit 25'ish.

The problem with todays restamped engines is - these guys don't offer any discounts on the Cars and rarely if ever mention it was restamped. I would rather ALL the stamping have the ability to be correct than just block code and vin, while they're at it.

As far as Cars that have already been done, it could cause quite a scramble and provide some adjustments to todays market. As far as Cars that have yet been done, it would allow them to be done even more precise - if chosen.

I have always hoped this information could be had. It's out there.

[Steve Hoog]

If one of these guys you are guessing may have this data, remember that some one above them may be suppressing the release of said data.

And before everyone jumps the gun and gets mad at any particular person, ponder this:

To become angry about this matter because you want YOUR one vehicle’s data, that would be incorrect.

If we can all agree that release of said data would only promote and additional forgery, and would not do any good to stop future forgeries?

Then follow these next ideals:

If the data were available it would identify any current RESTAMPED VINS that the engine number was left as is, to in fact be a forgery. I will admit this to be a good thing.

If it is true that only sporadic engine numbers are available for post 68 cars, then the data must remain private is to fend off the people that restamp.

If you follow and agree with these points, then it leads you to the need for a governing body that operates in judicial manor.

Now….. Since all that would only be low possibility for the future: For the restampers to know this data is even out there for the “elite”, it is still a deterrent.

So I suggest that anyone concerned about one specific vehicle; lay that to rest for the moment, and contemplate a more elevated line of thought.

[Baron Von Zeppelin]

This is what you used to get from PHS on an earlier Car. Have been told that now even the early Cars don't have the engine unit sequence number exposed/shown/listed on the form. It's left blank. Makes me go hmm....

This is only the front page of a 67 dealer order form, it was about 5-6 pages total by the time they de-coded color combinations.

[Steve Hoog]

I agree Baron, a lot of questions with no answers. There may be some good reasons behind this, maybe not. Maybe this would be something for say the POCI president and or the GTOAA president to give thought and look into?

[Judge273]

Maybe the reason phs included the billing history with the engine code sequences as part of the packages was that prior to 68 pontiac didn't stamp vin on blocks?

[Kenth]

Just checked the PHS papers, 1966 CAR BILLING HISTORY, on my 1966 Tripower GTO.

NO motor unit number, NO transmission unit number.

Nice touch PHS, $35 and still wont give the info paid for.........

Can´t wait to here the full story on this one.

[dancolkate]

Originally Posted by taximan

Hey Steve or Baron:

Has anyone tried sending a VIN and an engine sequence # for the same car, to Jim Mattison to see if he will at least confirm or deny that the engine sequence # is correct for that car. At least that way he wouldn't have to release the actual engine sequence # that could be restamped.

I did via email and got no reply whatsoever.

Steved400 has it right. This isn't about any one car. it's about principles.

[Steve Hoog]

FYI

I wrote and email to Bob Alexander; President of GTOAA, asking for review and possible action in this matter as a result of this thread.

[taximan]

Baron & Steve:

I think all of your points are valid. I can see both sides of the fence on this one. However, I think an acceptable alternative would be to send in your engine seq. # with the VIN to PHS when requesting docs.

They can then send you the build sheet and a simple "Your engine sequence # matches VIN #XXXXXXXXXXX " , or "The engine seq# on file is inconsistent with this VIN".

That way they are not releasing the number, and therefore eliminating any restamp issues.

I think we need to at least get an answer from Jim Mattison. He has developed a rather lucrative business supported by customers like us.

[my69gto]

I'm sure he's a busy guy, but my own experience is that Mr. Mattison is not too good about replying to emails. I sent him several last year about my PHS package and a question about the VIN for a parts car I had previously owned and never received a reply to either.

My 2 cents...I think that it's great that we are fortunate enough to have the PHS data available...owners of other makes would love to have the same thing. But regarding this topic, if all of the info is not being shared or distributed, then to me it isn't necessarily a deterrent to forgery. We all know that there are people out there that will do whatever shady things they can for a buck. Does anyone really think that withholding this will actually deter those people? If you buy a car that someone went to the trouble of restamping the VIN on the "wrong" block and the dates match up, but you have no way of verifying if the engine sequece is the right one or not, how is that a deterrent? Yes, there are examples where disclosure of this info may be a liabilty issue for fraud, as in the case of a "potentially big dollar collector car" like a RA IV Judge convertible, but for the average car owner, how much of a difference would it actually make? My car is a plain jane 69 ragtop that HAD the base 400 YS engine in it. If it was restored to showroom condition, (which it will never be) how much of a difference would it make in the price if it had the original engine vs another 69 engine of the same code? A few thousand $$ maybe... I understand the concern for frauds but I just think it's silly that this data is "potentially" available, yet we can't get it. JMO...

[Uncle Judge]

No offense Kenth,
BUT $35.00/$45.00 is literally peanuts for the paper to authenticate your Pontiac and literally even in hours! JM/PHS could be charging much more. Real documentation proving whether or not your car is an original Tri-Power car, 4 speed car, a real Judge, RAIII / RAIV etc. is really priceless. Not to mention the original selling dealership/origination info which can open many doors as well. I think everyone will agree that any Chevy or even an Oldsmobile guy would pay 10 times that amount in order to authenticate their cars. These cars are often forged and paperwork is often the only difference between a $30k car and a $100k plus car. We are fortunate to get what we get! We as Pontiac owners are spoiled. Only a portion of the Buick GSX's authentication is available and the cost is a few hundred dollars with a fairly long wait for a response. If you know what you are looking for and have been around these Pontiacs long enough, many of these other questions regarding original transmissions, blocks, etc. can be answered. However, the forgers continue to get better and better as we share more information.

Originally Posted by Kenth

Just checked the PHS papers, 1966 CAR BILLING HISTORY, on my 1966 Tripower GTO.

NO motor unit number, NO transmission unit number.

Nice touch PHS, $35 and still wont give the info paid for.........

Can´t wait to here the full story on this one.

[Steve Hoog]

VERY good point Uncle Judge.

[allmycarsrjunk]

Uncle Judge is a fat, stinking, greasy, Steve Perry loving, left wing, bloated, festering, pervert. However, he is absolutely right about PHS being a cheap, fantastic and easy way to authenticate our cars.