When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Your info lines up with what is in the NCRS Technical Information, the vin and tag don't match. Have you checked for a tank sticker? That can give you the trim info as well.
NCRS Technical Information doesn't list a 992 paint code, but some other checking shows it as Corvette Bronze, and the Trim code is for Dark Orange Vinyl. This was a Chevrolet listed combination, so the tag is feasible to be accurate to something, but not to that VIN.
Last edited by buckwylde; Oct 4, 2017 at 09:01 AM.
Reason: for clarity
S403673 should be an early Nov. build, VIN S403410 was the last car in October.
992 is Corvette Bronze in 1968 and Laguna Gray in 1970.
425 is Dark Orange Vinyl in 1968 and Dark Red Vinyl in 1973/74.
With the above information the 425/992 combination could only be a 1968 trim tag.
First off, I find that VIN 03673 was built approximately November 3rd, not "early-mid October". Of course, 11/3/67 doesn't work with the trim tag body build date of 12/7 either.
I'm not sure why you called the car a "mutt", but if it really is, then the tag may have come from another car, but why would someone bother? The car's obviously not painted Corvette Copper, at least currently, so why go to the trouble of hanging a Corvette Copper trim tag on it? The rivets on the VIN tag, appear top be correct, and I don't see any indication that someone has played with the VIN tag.
68 production was a mess, especially at the beginning. It is possible that the trim tag was incorrectly stamped. There are documented known examples of 63-67's, with mistakes on the trim tag. It's certainly possible that it was a mistake on the tag, though I'm not aware of any other 68-82's, with documented mistakes on trim tags?
Originally Posted by buckwylde
NCRS Technical Information doesn't list a 992 paint code, but some other checking shows it as Corvette Bronze, and the Trim code is for Dark Orange Vinyl.
I'm not sure what "NCRS Technical Information" you're using, but both 992 and 425 are listed in the NCRS "1968-1982 Corvette Specification Guide".
First off, I find that VIN 03673 was built approximately November 3rd, not "early-mid October". Of course, 11/3/67 doesn't work with the trim tag body build date of 12/7 either.
I'm not sure why you called the car a "mutt", but if it really is, then the tag may have come from another car, but why would someone bother? The car's obviously not painted Corvette Copper, at least currently, so why go to the trouble of hanging a Corvette Copper trim tag on it? The rivets on the VIN tag, appear top be correct, and I don't see any indication that someone has played with the VIN tag.
68 production was a mess, especially at the beginning. It is possible that the trim tag was incorrectly stamped. There are documented known examples of 63-67's, with mistakes on the trim tag. It's certainly possible that it was a mistake on the tag, though I'm not aware of any other 68-82's, with documented mistakes on trim tags?
I'm not sure what "NCRS Technical Information" you're using, but both 992 and 425 are listed in the NCRS "1968-1982 Corvette Specification Guide".
I didn't even look up the vin beyond verifying it doesn't match a December 7th build date. As far as the color is concerned I know its a valid color combination but I was pointing out that its missing from the current NCRS 1968-1969 Technical information manual and judging guide so I had to use another source.
We know that there are deviations from time to time, but for a trim tag to be off by a month there would need to be documentation beyond this trim tag.
Last edited by buckwylde; Oct 4, 2017 at 09:00 AM.
Hi c,
I believe it refers to "mixed parentage' when talking about dogs.
But we all know of mutts that are wonderful pals!
When talking about cars I think of a car that's been put together with main pieces from several cars.
K68 may have meant something else?
Regards,
Alan
Alan got it right (as usual). The interior was from a 70-75? The frame isn't original because it has the bracing at the kick-ups which I do not believe were on early 68's, NOM, differential from a 65 (according to Tracdogg). It had YJ8 wheels and bubble tail lights (now gone). I'm trying to bring back some of the 68-ness, but overall the bones are solid, even if mismatched.
First off, I find that VIN 03673 was built approximately November 3rd, not "early-mid October". Of course, 11/3/67 doesn't work with the trim tag body build date of 12/7 either.
I'm not sure why you called the car a "mutt", but if it really is, then the tag may have come from another car, but why would someone bother? The car's obviously not painted Corvette Copper, at least currently, so why go to the trouble of hanging a Corvette Copper trim tag on it? The rivets on the VIN tag, appear top be correct, and I don't see any indication that someone has played with the VIN tag.
68 production was a mess, especially at the beginning. It is possible that the trim tag was incorrectly stamped. There are documented known examples of 63-67's, with mistakes on the trim tag. It's certainly possible that it was a mistake on the tag, though I'm not aware of any other 68-82's, with documented mistakes on trim tags?
I'm not sure what "NCRS Technical Information" you're using, but both 992 and 425 are listed in the NCRS "1968-1982 Corvette Specification Guide".
The color under the current paint is a non-metallic orange. You can see it in the upper right of the second picture where the paint is worn and wherever there is worn or chipped paint on the car, the same orange underlies the red. I haven't looked for the partial VIN on the frame because it has the bracing on the rear kick-ups which were not a feature of the early 68's so I'm assuming the frame was replaced. There was no tank sticker when I dropped the tank a couple of years ago. The VIN is the only thing that matters as far as title and registration so I'll call the birthday 11-3 and move on. Thanks for the correction on the date.
Hi K,
REALLY nothing wrong with having a put together car…. you just don't want to have one that caught you by surprise!!!!
Regards,
Alan
A good friend of mine use to have a 63 convertible. It had 67 side louvers, 66 big block hood, 64 seats, 65-66 door panels, 65-67 gauge cluster, 71 350, and so on.
When someone would ask him what year it was, he'd say to them "What part are you looking at?".
Hi K,
REALLY nothing wrong with having a put together car…. you just don't want to have one that caught you by surprise!!!!
Regards,
Alan
Well I can't say that I knew the extent of it when I bought it and I'm sure I paid too much in early '08. I was really just looking for a solid base that I could make my own and, in that, I succeeded. Like so many on here, I am learning a lot. I'm thankful that I didn't do this as an investment and I have the resources to take it slow and do a good job. My heirs will be the ones that have to take the "investment" hit.
A good friend of mine use to have a 63 convertible. It had 67 side louvers, 66 big block hood, 64 seats, 65-66 door panels, 65-67 gauge cluster, 71 350, and so on.
When someone would ask him what year it was, he'd say to them "What part are you looking at?".
Awesome line, I have to save that. It describes my vette to a T.
Talk about confusing - My passenger side window and hardtop glass are each dated Dec '67. The driver side glass is dated April 1968.
The car has a build date of March 1968. Go figure
Does the car have its original transmission? Does the partial S/N on it match with the S/N in the VIN? If not, you then are sure that you have a "mutt" in good health.
A little off topic but since this thread is here, I have to ask: "What part of the assembly process does the build date correspond to?". I am thinking it is the beginning in some fashion. Like maybe printing the build sheet. slapping it on a tank, and starting it down the line. My car has a Jan 3 1969 build date but is it really 50 years old, or is that it's, well, conception? I mean who wants a car that was built over the Christmas/New Year holiday?
...What part of the assembly process does the build date correspond to?...
The day of the month the body arrived at the station on the assembly line where the trim tag was attached. The body had been painted at this point and assembly had begun, but the car was not complete.
The day of the month the body arrived at the station on the assembly line where the trim tag was attached. The body had been painted at this point and assembly had begun, but the car was not complete.
So pretty close to, but not yet drivable. The build sheet, if dated, would have had some random earlier date. Back before those pieces of paper had some value, I tossed mine. Too bad I guess but I have some other goodies. I guess my car is a holiday baby. Door fit could have been better, but otherwise no complaints.
Build date confusion
A good friend of mine use to have a 63 convertible. It had 67 side louvers, 66 big block hood, 64 seats, 65-66 door panels, 65-67 gauge cluster, 71 350, and so on. 
