speculation




that would be cool

 

Yes, I am glad as well Phil was compensated.

I agree what you are saying Stefano on a broad spectrum. But that wasnt the only issue here. The base plate was from a different carb as well, thus constituting a non original carb.

 

yeah last I know it was sold at a auction to whomever.

 

I know who built the car and I know when he sold it,it was with full disclosure that it was a clone. I know it changed hands and I'm trying to find out where in the chain the clone story changed. I've already contacted one of the owners after the award and he said it was presented to him as the real deal but had doubts after he got the car. I'm really anxious to see where the story goes and who knew what when. The Hemmings award was given to a cloned up car,that's sad,very sad. I voted for it and when I found out it was a clone,made me sick.

 

X2 Mike I know who built it also and it's very sad people try to capitalize on the backs of the uninformed.

 

Let me know if I can help with the researching of chain of seller/buyer, I would be more than happy to confront the thief

 

Thanks but I'll keep researching it myself. That way I'll know whom to believe when I get it figured out. I have known about it for many years and I never said a word till it was brought out here about it. I've got it figured out from the point when the car was sold by the builder to one of the buyers after the award that said he had doubts about it. I guess you could say I'm working both ends against the middle and the middle is where the truth lays.

 

the builder sold the car as a clone and the next public owner was Scott Pierce who bought it in 2005 as a real deal car so my thought is whenever this car was built it was the buyer(S) from the builder so I am curious as to when this car was built if it was built early 2000's it should be east to narrow it down

I Dont know when the car was built
Scott Pierce bought it as an original? so the prior owner to Scott Pierce comes to my mind as a start to work back from i would think

 

The builder did not sell the car to Scott.He sold it to a local guy to him with full disclosure it was a clone. I think it may have went through more owners than the original buyer from the builder before Scott owned it. This is really all I have to say about this ordeal till I have more info than I have currently.

 

thats fair enough... I did understand that Scott did not buy it from the builder so its the person that sold it to Scott or the prior owner that can clear it up hope you can learn the person(S) involved to pass along so they can be known as liars/thieves and those words are mild

 

thanks mister

 

and i sent godon
postal money order

keep it real

 

Is there any legitimate reason that this "69 Vista" dist'r 1111933 has a date code of 4C27, which would be 1974?

The machine marks look legit... what say ye font experts?

 

The two "3"s are a mile off in every way. Also the shaft of the distributor, where it meets the top platform has the square block. That is a tell tale sign that the distributor is a post 1972 design.

 

I want to say GM service part, which would have the square shoulder and '74 date code, because:

Orange paint daub
Machine marks look exactly right
the fillets on the "9" look right

 

The "9" is correct and the lathe turn lines look ok also. If it is a service replacement it should have the correct "3" stamping, that others would have. The three's have a amateur incorrect look, that has an inconsistency with other distributors and what a service replacement would have. The first and second "3" used two different stamps, and do not have the same height as the prefix numbers. A service dealership possibly could of re-stamped the number. But since it is not a VIN, and they usually did not re-stamp a replacement motor as they were suppose to, it is unlikely they would have bothered with a distributor.

 

My guess is that the manufacturer of the replacement part in 1974 first stamped the base with "11119" after machining, as that would be common among many distributors. Then at final assembly, when the proper weights, springs, vacuum advance, etc. were installed, the "33" and date code were stamped.

 

Finally a voice of reason. As I previously posted,the guys who are acting like judge and jury on what is right or wrong in this case are not experts. If it were to go to court and one of the experts gave testimony that it was indeed a restamp because the curly cue on the 9 doesn't look correct,the judge would then ask,how do you know this? I'm not condoning any kind of fraud or restamped parts either but some of this stuff is off base. I would however advise anybody buying a rare part with a stamping to do their research and due diligence before they buy. I don't have a lot of experience with carbs and distributors but I have plenty with alternators/ starters and I have seen some weird looking stampings.

 

Well, tonight I collected a ton of distributor application number stamps. Mainly from dirty non-rare numbers that would not be faked.

Collecting a database of how they looked, in order to help spot the fakes like the '1933 I bought a while back. Still have that thing.

They are not resized and organized as yet, just collected.

 

PRAISE JESUS!

That is 100% it. Restamped parts are like steroids in baseball. Everyone assumes the worst. You can post a pic of part straight off a W30 with 5 miles on it & never touched & 75% of people will say restamp.

 

"Finally a voice of reason". If it be carburetors or distributors the prefix is not what needs to be changed in re-stamps. The 1's and the 9 as I previously stated are original. The 3's are what is questionable. They are the numbers you would need to change in a re-stamp.
I never said I am an expert, and as far as I am concern the only expert is the guy at the factory who originally stamped them. We are therefore left to analyze and compile information as to what is correct and what is not. I spend a lot of time doing this to better educate myself and others. That is what this re-stamp thread is all about. Octania ask for an opinion on the said distributor. I have given a quantified informed one, unfortunately 66-3x2 442 you have not. You criticize me for what I have said but offer no contrary argument. You've advise anybody buying a rare part with a stamping to do their research and due diligence before they buy. There are no books or manuals telling you how to tell an original from a re-stamp that I am aware of? That is reason behind this thread!
In order for a part to be a "Service Replacement", it has to come from the original manufacture. In this case Delco Remy. If it did come from them, it would have the correct stamp and font. It clearly does not. If the service technician at the dealership stamped the 3's which I highly doubt, it is still a re-stamp.

 

FYI I was not talking about you or any one particular person or part analyzed here. My point was,if you go back and read this entire thread you will see how off base some of the comments have been. All I was saying is,some of this scrutiny would not stand up in a court of law because who are the 'experts'? What makes some of this thread comical is,any part that the stamping doesn't look perfect,it's a fraud. Another example is when a car comes up for sale and it's not documented or have wallpaper,it's called a fraud sometimes. If you took my comments as being directed @ you,you are wrong and I was mainly referring to what Black Gold was saying about how some of the stampings look odd. Go back and look @ my previous comments on this subject and you will see what I said before this particular part came up. You will see I was consistent with my comments. As far as my comment about the '9',that was a general statement using it as a figure of speech. If I was calling anybody out,I would have used 3 for this particular part. By the way,I bought some of the restamped parts,so I have some experience with them.

 

Seems like it would be very hard to *re* stamp the 3's over anything other than a blank space, without leaving evidence. Now, we have the trick of machining away the original numbers, then stamping in ALL new numbers, but this leaves the OD and the seat cap OD smaller by a detectable amount. I saved all that data.

I have not looked at 1974-era "3" stamps yet in the photos, but it would seem that the best explanation for this thing is a service part made in 1974. Maybe just the light but something funny about that "4" there too.

 

OK,another piece of the puzzle on the fraudulent 69 W-31 Hemmings Muscle Car of the year has been discovered. I'm not @ liberty yet to say for sure if what I was told indeed is true and factual. I'm not being evasive but I want to make damn sure I've got it right. It could be that I may never know for sure where the story changed but it's not like I'm not trying.

 

it's always tease, tease, tease...

 

This trail is @ a dead end for now. What I was told and what I believe do not match up. I would have to name names to tell what I was told but I'm not going there. I did the best I could to find out where the story on the car changed but without further info,it's over for now. I'm not a BS'er and everything I have said to this point is what I believe to be factual. If that's not good enough for you Chris,come see me @ the Nats and we'll talk about it. If you want to talk BS,where is the payment you said you were sending me for the tri carb block offs after you chiseled me on price? One thing about me,if I tell you or anybody else something,bank on it.

 

Mike, its like the little birdies say.........Cheap.....Cheap.....Cheap
Greg

 

Ended up selling the intake so the need for the blockoffs evaporated. Sorry if that became a problem. I can't tell you how many times I put all manner of effort into a part sale including driving out in the sticks, pulling the part in the mud, only to find the need has evaporated. Currently trying to find a way to get a guy the right water pump casting he needs, and some heads cores.... I am into it about a week's work so far and machine shop heads cleaning costs, and have yet to see any benefit.... but it looks promising. When I was doing this a lot, I finally had to insist on some sort of deposit before pulling a part, the most I would do w/o deposit was take a photo and send it, to see if we are even on the same page. It turns out folks in TX throw out parts that in MI are considered quite good.

There is also a difference between cheap and out of money, sir.... and, MYOB.

 

I'm sick of digging out parts and sending pictures myself with no response from the guy wanting them,so I understand how frustrating it can be. The problem with you is,you called me out about teasing with what I know about this cloned up W-31 and I didn't take it well. I guarantee you I wished I could prove the dots I connected and out who ever changed the story on the car. I'm not one to lie about anything and I can't prove it,so it's on the back burner for now till the dots get bigger. As far as you not buying the block offs,I couldn't care less but the fact you never responded with you didn't need them is the issue. Now,go play in the mud.

Another thing,if you want to say something to me,use plain English and sentences,not cryptic or songs. I know you're a good guy but some of your off the wall comments are going to draw these kind of responses.

Not sure how Greg is going to take you calling him a 'dic' either.

 

OK, not sure how you got an annoyance out of asking for more on the story, but, whatever. It was certainly not intended to annoy. Maybe you don't get the reference to the song lyrics. If there is no more to the story at this time, fine. I have no rooster in the fight, just wondering where that story was going.

I just can't care anymore about this issue at this time. Not getting that warm fuzzy feeling that helping others gives.

We now return to our regularly scheduled font flavor nitpicking.

good day!

 

Thats exacly what I thought when you stuck your nose in on my thread.....MYOB

Greg

 

I have no Dog in this discussion! I would just like to say this. I respect the opinions brought forth in this discussion and hope that everyone settles down. There is some fake parts and i wouldn't know how to decide if i had real parts or not. I sell a few parts now and then and would not want to cheat anyone. It sure help to have a list of experts for these parts listed some where. Thanks to all.

 

I would tend to agree. I would hate to see this thread wiped. I realize people are really paranoid about this issue. When you are spending over 1k for a dist or carb, you want to be pretty sure it's real. But...it's hard to tell, too! If a carb has been rebuilt, especially by a mass rebuilder years ago, the air horn or throttle plate may (probably) was swapped. So...it's a REAL carb, but you can tell it's been cobbled. Then you start to wonder. The fonts and stuff, I don't know. But you can tell if the corner of the carb where the #'s were has been milled. There's a guy on ebay now, he's just knocking off rare dists and alts constantly. Not every week, he keeps rotating. But he IS disclosing they are re-stamped.

 

Here are my 2 cents, for the benefit of the Hobby.

There are many here behind the scenes who know the history of this Cutlass.

Most don't want to get involved and say anything in a public forum.

Apathy only serves to perpetuate the issues at hand.

I personally spoke to the individual who cloned / made up this car. He cloned it to be an accurate representation of a W-31 for his personal use.

He later sold the car with full disclosure and at a price which would reflect it was NOT an authentic car.

This is what was relayed directly to me. He is distraught that the car took on the identity of being an authentic W-31. He was surprised that no one had contacted him directly about the car.

Who turned it into a "real" car, I do not know. All I can say is based on what I was told, the car is NOT an authentic W-31.

 

This is the car right?

http://www.hemmings.com/magazine/mus...5/1735989.html

According to the article it was authenticated by Steve Minore.

 

It's never really a good idea to believe everything that you read. While there may be some elements of truth in the article regarding the spirit of the interview, what is ultimately transcribed on to paper might vary.

I did talk to Steve about this car a while back and he had said that both he and Scott had no reason to doubt the cars authenticity, but that there was not a complete history on it and that it had no paperwork. This car NEVER received an authentication / Rocket report from Steve.

I don't believe Steve even wrote an opinion letter on it, which he does from time to time when he can't authenticate / certify a car.

Anyone can be defrauded. I have been on more occasions than I care to admit and no one is infallible.

 

One of the most evident STOP signs on this car is the flat F85/Supreme hood!

Greg

 

So you are saying that there is NO WAY a "stripe delete" F85 W-31 could have come with a flat hood?

 

Same car?

http://www.hemmings.com/magazine/mus...n/1567619.html

 

Well there you have it
"They" made a least one



cheers
b