trim tag is it OK 67 L78

rare4k · February 26, 2008, 11:38:29 PM

there is a car on e-bay Item no# 190202189586 does the trim tag look OK?

red67l78 · February 27, 2008, 07:09:26 AM

I think it is a mistake. The engine number of 20736 works out to be the 3rd week in April for production numbers. Also the 103345 would be for a Sept. 66 car build. Also my vin and my cowl tag number is only 50.

red67l78 · February 27, 2008, 07:24:02 AM

I just looked at the picture of the cowl tag and it shows the 103345 which would make it made the first week of production for the 67 camaro. I think the cowl tag date should be O8A for dating for car. The 4K was not available yet.

Mark · February 27, 2008, 12:07:43 PM

Only problem with that theory is that NOR and LA body numbers started at 000001 in 1967, not 100001.

firstgenaddict · February 27, 2008, 01:50:21 PM

The tag looks out of place on the firewall... it looks newer. looks as though it was changed after the car was "restored"

red67l78 · February 27, 2008, 03:27:39 PM

Mark
according to crg web site the first car would be 100001. So the 103345 would mean to me the 3345 car in production. It shows both los and nor starting this way. I went under the general info tab and thats what it shows.
My car starts with 249??? and is the 149??? car in production that comes out to be 2nd week in July
Charlie

KurtS · February 27, 2008, 05:27:55 PM

In 67, VINs started at 100001; body #'s started at 1.

red67l78 · February 27, 2008, 06:21:54 PM

Am i thinking correctly on this. Would the cowl tag number of 103345 mean that it is roughly the 3345 car in line starting from 100001 as the first car?

rd67RSSS · February 27, 2008, 07:09:12 PM

The biggest problem I see is its an 04A with a 4K tag. With the first L78's coming out at the end of March (03C?) until near the end of April the L78's would have been tagged with a 4N. After 04C or so they began to use 4K for L78's. So I'm thinking for this to be a good tag it would have to be a 4N, and NOT a 4K.... Perhaps this car was an exception???

69yellowz · February 27, 2008, 07:47:32 PM

Quote from: red67l78 on February 27, 2008, 06:21:54 PM
Am i thinking correctly on this. Would the cowl tag number of 103345 mean that it is roughly the 3345 car in line starting from 100001 as the first car?

No, your not. As stated above with Kurt and Mark the cowl tag did not start with 100001, that was the vin. Im sure this is where you are confused.

69yellowz · February 27, 2008, 07:53:05 PM

Quote from: rd67RSSS on February 27, 2008, 07:09:12 PM
The biggest problem I see is its an 04A with a 4K tag. With the first L78's coming out at the end of March (03C?) until near the end of April the L78's would have been tagged with a 4N. After 04C or so they began to use 4K for L78's. So I'm thinking for this to be a good tag it would have to be a 4N, and NOT a 4K.... Perhaps this car was an exception???

I hate to disagree, but there are as far as I know no L78's with a 4N code. The first few had a 4P code before going to 4K

69yellowz · February 27, 2008, 08:18:21 PM

Quote from: firstgenaddict on February 27, 2008, 01:50:21 PM
The tag looks out of place on the firewall... it looks newer. looks as though it was changed after the car was "restored"

That trim tag sure looks like its been off the car to me. The car looks like it was painted then the firewall all with the tag off. Then the tag reinstalled or installed and then painted black. You can see the overspray around the top of the tag where they didn't mask it off good.

Zedder · February 27, 2008, 08:34:23 PM

My old documented 4P L78 was built later than this car...04B, NOR 107984, VIN 7N207927, T0405MQ...

rd67RSSS · February 27, 2008, 09:11:47 PM

I didn't mean to write 4N. I meant to write 4P.... sorry. That car should be a 4P, not a 4K....

News:

trim tag is it OK 67 L78