69' Z28 with Factory Cross Ram

[dannystarr]

This guy says the cross ram is still in the trunk the way it came from the factory. Could this be the one?? ... Danny


               http://www.classicalgasmotors.com/cars/13040/13040.htm
 

[hgger69]

Amazing! 
....but if the car is  an all original one why is the color of the striping and grille wrong then?
It should be white striping and silver grille, shouldn't it? 
And the steering wheel looks like a Grant?   

[ZLP955]

Stripes would've been black if the car originally had a black vinyl roof, but the trim tag details indicate it was a 72 72 PNT car.......

[6667ss138]

And the whole "Cross ram still in the trunk from the factory" we know was a myth that never happened. Jerry's book pages 30, 31 and 32
But nice sales pitch. Another issue going on with the car along with the ones already mentioned. The build date of 02B is to early for D80 on the cowl tag. This thing is looking very fishy. Fake trim tag I would say.

[wisemanz28]

The casting date on the block and the pad date are on the same day , that can't be
possible.

[6667ss138]

Yeah good point on the block dates. Just watched the video. What a bunch of major you know what. That car is as phony as a three dollar bill. Did you see how perfect that "factory" cross ram set up is still sitting in that trunk for the past 44 years. These are the types of guys that have ruined the market.

[69Z28-RS]

The casting date on the block and the pad date are on the same day , that can't be
possible.

I can't say about that particular engine, but it IS possible.. if the casting is done early in the day, and the assembly later in the day (confirmed by GM engineers).  I've owned (for over 35 yrs)  an original 57 BelAir with born-with 283/2bbl which has the same date for casting and assembly.   When I rebuilt it in the 90's, none of the fasteners had ever been removed from the engine...

[JohnZ]

The casting date on the block and the pad date are on the same day , that can't be
possible.

I can't say about that particular engine, but it IS possible.. if the casting is done early in the day, and the assembly later in the day (confirmed by GM engineers).  I've owned (for over 35 yrs)  an original 57 BelAir with born-with 283/2bbl which has the same date for casting and assembly.   

It's true that there are documented examples of this, but considering the overflow of ridiculous BS in this particular ad, I'd just call this one the work of a really dumb restamper.

[BULLITT65]

And the whole "Cross ram still in the trunk from the factory" we know was a myth that never happened. Jerry's book pages 30, 31 and 32
But nice sales pitch. Another issue going on with the car along with the ones already mentioned. The build date of 02B is to early for D80 on the cowl tag. This thing is looking very fishy. Fake trim tag I would say.

I understand this car is a sham for the most part, BUT there was a recent post by john mello showing vintage documents where 67 Z-28 did have the cross ram in the trunk, how long was done for and after seeing those documents how could you disprove that a cross ram didn't come in the trunk? thanks

[69Z28-RS]

67 Z28s came with, or could be had with, headers in the trunk from the factory, but not sure if the 'cross ram 2x4bbl intake' ever could be had that way.   I've always believed that to be an OTC part only...

[6667ss138]

And the whole "Cross ram still in the trunk from the factory" we know was a myth that never happened. Jerry's book pages 30, 31 and 32
But nice sales pitch. Another issue going on with the car along with the ones already mentioned. The build date of 02B is to early for D80 on the cowl tag. This thing is looking very fishy. Fake trim tag I would say.

I understand this car is a sham for the most part, BUT there was a recent post by john mello showing vintage documents where 67 Z-28 did have the cross ram in the trunk, how long was done for and after seeing those documents how could you disprove that a cross ram didn't come in the trunk? thanks

I hear what you are saying and I have always tried to have the attitude that when it came to GM you never say never as it has been proven many times that with the right dealer or connections strings were pulled. But when it comes to this particular issue I am just going by what Jerry wrote in his book on pages 30,31 and 32. He spends quiet a bit of time on it. He says it never happened and has two letters from GM executives confirming that the cross ram set up was only available as an over the counter item and never came in the trunk from the factory. Maybe someone out there has some other evidence.

[wisemanz28]

I also noticed the ad states that the car has an "all original 12 bolt positraction rear end" casting date E239. The trim tag has a 02B build date on it. A little late for that car.

[Jon Mello]

I understand this car is a sham for the most part, BUT there was a recent post by john mello showing vintage documents where 67 Z-28 did have the cross ram in the trunk, how long was done for and after seeing those documents how could you disprove that a cross ram didn't come in the trunk? thanks

The section from page 3 of the December 13, 1966 Engineering Service Letter dealing with the '67 Z-28 made no mention of a cross ram ever being delivered in the trunk so please don't distort or misrepresent my words that way. Thanks.

[BULLITT65]

Sorry Jon my mistake. thank you for posting that.

[jack92584]

I also noticed the ad states that the car has an "all original 12 bolt positraction rear end" casting date E239. The trim tag has a 02B build date on it. A little late for that car.

Trans is wrong as well..not an m22 as advertised, its an m20 also from a later date