GoGo87U

edit

79CalShark

Hey, that looks like J&D's yard.

Easy Mike

Interesting car. 67C indicates dark red cloth. GM may have called it rust. Leather was standard; cloth was a buyer's choice. Bowling Green also offered dark red cloth, but the code was 74C.

Keep in mind the Bowling Green plant was not open at the time this car was assembled.

The two-tone paint pilot project at St. Louis was during the 1980 model year. Codes 50 and 74 were used.

My money says the Chevrolet Engineering sticker could indicate this car was ordered as we see it by Chevrolet Engineering as an audit/pilot car for intended production at Bowling Green eight months later. I would be interested in seeing the invoice for this car and where it was shipped when it left St. Louis. To whet appetites a bit further, there could have been more than one of these cars.

The owner's story of purchasing the car new and off the showroom floor could be true. It could have gone to a dealer after Chevrolet Engineering was finished with it.

7T1vette

To my knowledge, GM never allowed a test car to be sold as "new" to any dealer. I more likely scenario was that the car was sold through the employee purchase program 'in house' rather than being sent to a dealer.

GoGo87U

edit

SWO vette

Interesting reading.

maverickmk

Here is one for sale - in Orlando . . .

http://orlando.craigslist.org/cto/4964346540.html

Easy Mike

With respect, interior color (whatever its name might be) is not the interesting factor for this car. The interest is the two-toned enamel paint from St. Louis when it was not supposed to be available and the possibility this car went to Chevrolet Engineering.

Look into those two areas first and foremost. You can come back to interior color at a later date.

7T1: I otherwise agree one-offs and pilot line cars almost never went to the public, but I think the car in question was a paint test car and should not have offered any liabilities for GM if it was sold to a private owner.

7T1vette

Still, it was used for 'test' purposes; and at that time, I doubt that anyone in the system would care to bypass the standing practice that NO test car would be resold to the public. I agree that paint is not a 'mechanical' issue, but still don't think it would have made it to a dealer...especially with a GM Engineering sticker applied to it.

An employee sale car, on the other hand, could have retained that sticker and been sold, internally.

BurnedVette1980

Build sheet on the front of the gas tank would tell you where the cars initial dealer or corporate destination. Might be very helpful if you could locate that.