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.
Demonstrating once again why I think fake window stickers are a bad idea...
While that may be true in some cases, if the right person does it with the right resources, this is the result. I had this done a while back and I couldn't be happier.
While that may be true in some cases, if the right person does it with the right resources, this is the result. I had this done a while back and I couldn't be happier.
What’s the point of aging it so it’s undetectable as a fake?
What’s the point of aging it so it’s undetectable as a fake?
It seems to me that the fake aging proves it's a fake.
I bought a Corvette new in 1970 and kept the Moroney label. Today the label does not have the brown look that the fake aging provides--it is more off-white than brown. It does not have folds and wrinkles. It does have a slight discoloration where the glue was.
It seems to me that the fake aging proves it's a fake.
I bought a Corvette new in 1970 and kept the Moroney label. Today the label does not have the brown look that the fake aging provides--it is more off-white than brown. It does not have folds and wrinkles. It does have a slight discoloration where the glue was.
Uh, the opposite is true. A nice crisp white one wouldnt look that way after 60 years. One like yours looks exactly like a real one does. Most guys do not know what to look for and this stuff gets laundered after a few sales. All of a sudden your reproduction is now fact used to sell a car.
Yours looks real. Identical letters don't have identical variation in darkness. No wrinkes. Variegated color on the background-no overall brown color. Yellow traces of adhesive.
Wow, that is one sorry attempt with a window sticker. For one, it's not even all caps, and the wrong font.
Sorry, aged or not, the one below that @72455 has is easily spotted as a fake all day. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that. The A's and the E's are faded exactly alike, all the letters/numbers are in perfect alignmment with each other, as is the letter spacing. Most of these "aging" options are really stupid. Might as well wad it into a ball, pour water on it, and roll it around in a used ash tray for a while, hose it back off, flatten it out and let it dry in the sun a few days. Who's original looks that bad? Very few from what I've seen. Sure, it happens, but not to the extreme some of these guys go to.
Originals are easier to te@VC455 points out, the IBM print hammers hit so hard the alignment of some of the lettering is off slightly, and spacing isn't always perfect. Good? Yes. Perfect? Hardly.
This is not to say there aren't some pretty good reproductions out there. But MOST of the companies offering their services are in it for the $$ and MOST owners are so happy to get something even remotely close to an original label, then they don't seem to be as critical of the quality. Even ECS does shoddy work, and they claim they're licensed from GM. They get fonts wrong, and information wrong, and their laminates fall apart before you can even mount them on the car.
I still think that reproduction paperwork, if done correctly as possible to the original, is no different than anyone reproducing any other part on the car. I see no issue with it if it is a re-creation of damaged/missing labels and not used to pass something off as reality when it is not. The main issue is, most people don't have the equipment, skill, or artistic abilities to pull it off.
Originally Posted by 72455
While that may be true in some cases, if the right person does it with the right resources, this is the result. I had this done a while back and I couldn't be happier.
Here's my original safety label for my 85 442. I decided what the heck, I'll try ECS. I can't recommend them. They messed up the weight ratings and build month. WTF? Must've been using a template. And before I could even use it, it delaminated by itself within 2 weeks of receiving it.
My original:
ECS's attempt below right. My first attempt draft on making one myself is on the left. TBH, I think my version is better, with a few tweaks. Note, the ECS's font isn't correct (ECS used a font used on late 86's through 88 at least, note the flat top 3's), and the build month and weights don't match. It LOOKS nice, but it's nowhere near correct. I thought it was pretty cool at first, but once I started peeling that onion...
*Edit: I have to say, when I pointed out the error of the date/weights, ECS printed and sent me another one pronto at no charge. However, they STILL didn't fix the font.
I've never tried to pass it off as real, and I wanted the aged look because it represents what it may actually look like if it were real.
I’m bald. If I wore a wig, I’d be me trying not be bald. Not what I “may” look like “if” I had hair. I made window stickers for years, and never aged them. I laminated them so nobody could. A few times guys requested not to laminate and 9 times out of ten it was to deceive. I even saw the laminated ones pop up represented as real. So I quit making them.
Stuff like this should be destroyed once the car sells. Never to be passed along to the next buyer if all you are doing is displaying a “what if”.
I’m bald. If I wore a wig, I’d be me trying not be bald. Not what I “may” look like “if” I had hair. I made window stickers for years, and never aged them. I laminated them so nobody could. A few times guys requested not to laminate and 9 times out of ten it was to deceive. I even saw the laminated ones pop up represented as real. So I quit making them.
Stuff like this should be destroyed once the car sells. Never to be passed along to the next buyer if all you are doing is displaying a “what if”.
Ok, so what if it's not a "what if", but an accurate representation? Case in point, the picture I posted is a replica window sticker of how my car was equipped when built....the car I actually own.
I know you prefer things explained solidly, so I will try.
There is an issue in this hobby of faking high-dollar option packages or models. Considering that many option packages are simply bolt-on parts that can be acquired elsewhere, or bolt-on parts that can be doctored with re-stamping, the documentation is important to show authenticity of vehicles presented as legitimate. Industries that make replicas of paperwork that is used for that documentation could be used to make forgeries with incorrect information that would be passed off as the real deal. Does your car meet that category? Not really, in my opinion; it is the wrong body type to be a 442, the U-code powertrain is clearly shown, and it is not trying to be a Hurst/Olds.
However, paying for that service is enabling the continued existence of industry that could make faked documents for fraudulent sale. Every "customizer" out there who "just wants to make his car the way he wants it" has, as the way he wants it, an absolute clone of a W-30. A guy quit posting here after his explanation of he just wanted to pick a cool color for the the front fenderwells that just happened to be red fell on its face and he was called a cloner. Usually, the people who make out as the most offended when called on it are the ones making the clones; a guy legitimately customizing usually is reasonable and makes sure it can be identified as a custom and not a clone at the end.
The restamp, exact repro parts, and aged reproduction documents that don't explicitly say they are reproduction are tools of fraud. Even people who just want fake accessories for their car and will eventually sell honestly, or people who are actually ordering the correct thing, like you, are aiding businesses that could do services for a fraudulent aim. A lot of us avoid them for that reason.
I know you prefer things explained solidly, so I will try.
There is an issue in this hobby of faking high-dollar option packages or models. Considering that many option packages are simply bolt-on parts that can be acquired elsewhere, or bolt-on parts that can be doctored with re-stamping, the documentation is important to show authenticity of vehicles presented as legitimate. Industries that make replicas of paperwork that is used for that documentation could be used to make forgeries with incorrect information that would be passed off as the real deal. Does your car meet that category? Not really, in my opinion; it is the wrong body type to be a 442, the U-code powertrain is clearly shown, and it is not trying to be a Hurst/Olds.
However, paying for that service is enabling the continued existence of industry that could make faked documents for fraudulent sale. Every "customizer" out there who "just wants to make his car the way he wants it" has, as the way he wants it, an absolute clone of a W-30. A guy quit posting here after his explanation of he just wanted to pick a cool color for the the front fenderwells that just happened to be red fell on its face and he was called a cloner. Usually, the people who make out as the most offended when called on it are the ones making the clones; a guy legitimately customizing usually is reasonable and makes sure it can be identified as a custom and not a clone at the end.
The restamp, exact repro parts, and aged reproduction documents that don't explicitly say they are reproduction are tools of fraud. Even people who just want fake accessories for their car and will eventually sell honestly, or people who are actually ordering the correct thing, like you, are aiding businesses that could do services for a fraudulent aim. A lot of us avoid them for that reason.
So in other words, we shouldn't pay for replica documents because we're enabling the fraudulent side of that particular service?
This is what I used to put on my car when I went to shows and cared about this kind of stuff. It gives all the pertinent information with no ambiguity that it’s not an authentic document.
So in other words, we shouldn't pay for replica documents because we're enabling the fraudulent side of that particular service?
It's called the appeal to probability. Most legit pay-to-play repro places ask for invoices or something to try and prevent that. Places like ECS can lose their licensing doing that as that's kinda their bread n butter. Do some places make them anyway for deceitful purposes? Likely. But I'd wager not as many as you think, I would imagine. I understand the arguments from both sides of the paperwork fence. To me, it's not about whether the re-created document exists, it's what's the intent of the seller? If you automatically go to "must be trying to pass it off as something it's not" then you need to become an expert on something you're willing to drop big coin for so you don't get screwed. But not everyone is out to screw others. I've yet to see any repro window sticker maker get the paperwork 100% correct.
OTOH, you can always reproduce them yourself, put anything on it you like. And if you're intent is to deceive, it's on the potential buyer to be educated enough to look for signs of that prior to purchase. No truer example of that was the latest episode of "Dutton Ranch" TV show. Rip buys a bull at a seemingly legit auction, but later all his herd is getting foot and mouth disease so he has to kill them all. He suspects it's the bull he recently bought was the root cause, and his wife Beth finds out the paperwork saying he was cleared by a vet was fake. So he lost his entire herd of cattle due to some unscrupulous seller faking paperwork and them not verifying it first. His remedy was to go to where this guy was staying, beat his ***, chase him off, and burn his trailer down.
If you have a 2020-current GM vehicle, you can get a reissued window sticker for your car/truck without having to re-invent anything. Just replace the "xxx" at the end with your VIN to the end of the url line, hit enter, and poof.
