wmachine

Allan R asked a question in another thread, but didn't want to hijack the thread, so I started a new thread with his question:
"I am also interested in the documentation. Saw one on ebay with all the docs and asked the seller if he would share what the build sheet looks like. He said no because it sounds unethical and illegal. So I didn't pursue the issue. I've never seen one for my car. Is it unethical to recreate build sheet information for a specific car if I claim it is only for display purpose only and is NOT an original document? I do have broadcast sheet for my car. I do not want to open a can of worms here. This is not the same, IMO as changing a VIN, Cowl tag, or body."
I agree, it is not the same.

As far as what is legal, there are laws against tampering with the VIN tag on any automobile. Beyond that, there is nothing illegal about changing/making/altering/etc. body tags, part numbers, paperwork (except the title, of course), or virtually anything else with only one exception.
But it is a pretty big exception. If any of these "creations" are used to dupe a buyer, or investor of any kind into believing that the car is something it is not, that is fraud, and that *is* illegal.

Now that is just what is legal. There are also ethical and moral issues too. Is it right to "parade around" a doctored up car as original? Legal, yes. Ethical and moral?
And what about someone who changed a car, made up documents then sold the car. Sold it "as is" making no claims about the background of the car. Then the next owner takes the car and the documents believing the documents are real and sells the car as such? A mess in the making.
A lot to consider here, in my opinion.

Bottom line here is that I believe it is fine to produce paperwork for a car as long as it is done not to a degree of accuracy to be able to be passed off as original. Believe me, you will find those that think it is okay to make "perfect" forgeries, but you will find that they are the ones that stand to profit from the forgeries, and *they* are part of the problem!
Attached is the "window sticker" I made for my Jetstar 1. I display it with the note at the top about it being a reproduction.

And before anybody goes off in the wrong direction, TK-65 is making window stickers, but though his intention is to make them accurate, he is not trying to make "perfect" ones that can be passed off as originals.

aliensatemybuick

Don't you mean LAWYERED up?

TK-65

The only reason to fake or reproduce a build sheet is for enhancing a sale or forging a car. Thats it bottom, line. There is no other need for it.

The window stickers I make are for showing how much the car cost and the options it had. Its a novelty that starts conversations. Plus they count for literature points at the OCAs.

Anyone with Stevie Wonders eyesight can tell they are reproductions. I dont make them look aged, tear them up, or fade the print. They are as they were printed when new, and there is no way an original can look new after 40 years.

jaunty75

The only build sheets I've ever seen look exactly like you would expect a piece of paper that has been crammed up under a seat or on top of gas tank for 30 years would look: crumpled, wrinkled, stained, with all sorts of industrial-looking printing, columns and rows, etc. I would think it would be hard to try to create something like this from scratch and make it look at all convincing as the real thing.

Run to Rund

I learned how to duplicate the type font and spacing etc. decades ago but no one doing stickers today goes to the trouble. The factory used 8 lines to the vertical inch in the 1966 era, and a silk ribbon. As noted above, Stevie could tell that from the carbon ribbon or laser jet copies at 6 to the inch with the wrong type font. I would rather do it as carefully and accurately as possible just like any other restoration procedure, but the key is honesty in representation.

TK-65

Thats how I feel. The sticker was on the car when sold new. Its was part of the car. Buildsheets were not, the were used by the workers to build the car and were not supposed to be in the car when it left the line.

wolfman98

I see no problem with this at all , as long as someone does not try to pass it off as an original then it's not an issue. I think that it is just an interesting fact sheet about the car when it was new and would like the same for my car. I am not selling it but think it's a neat thing to have.

wmachine

It is the "as long as" part that is the problem. Always has been. The "as long as" clause has been the green light for the the scum that have been making "accurate" cars and passing them off as original. "Oh, I'm not going to pass it off as original". Yeah, "wink wink" all the way to the bank. Once these forgeries are done, complete with restamped numbers (for accuracy, remember?), repoped data plates (for accuracy, remember?), and forged paperwork (for accuracy, remember?), how can one tell what is original and what isn't?
So how do we like going out in the market and not being able to tell if a documented numbers matching car is "real"? Leaves a really bad taste in my mouth I can tell you.

mugzilla

How about a re-body...

Like say you have a a w machine that got stuffed into a telephone pole. You get a parts cutlass and replace the body ...




http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1966-...item20ae4a3907

joe_padavano

That's the supposedly "numbers matching" car that I wrote about earlier without a Protect-O-Plate. I asked the seller "what number match" and he got pretty pissy... Go figure.

As for the rebody, that's a very slippery slope. It's acceptable to replace sheet metal. When does that become a "rebody"? More importantly, do you end up with a better product by replacing rusty sheetmetal with Chinesium patch panels or by swapping a complete shell with factory welds and seams?

By the way, it is NOT illegal under federal law to remove and replace the VIN tag unless there is intent to commit fraud. Read the text of the law at:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-...Cite:+18USC511

For example, say that a tree falls on the cab of your brand new pickup. You can go to GM and buy a brand new cab shell, which comes without a VIN tag. You need to transfer that from the old one. Body shops around here do this routinely and I'm not aware of anyone going to jail. Here's another example. My wife's Civic has the VIN tag riveted to the removable plastic dash pad. The factory service manual even tells you to transfer the tag to the new dash pad if you have to replace it.


I will say that state laws can vary from federal, however. In Maryland, according to the letter of the law, you are not allowed to tamper with the VIN tag OR any VIN derivatives. That means that engine or trans changes are illegal under the law.

Olds64

Interesting topic. If you recreate a window sticker as a novelty item to use at car shows I think that is great, just don't pass it off as the real thing when you try to sell the car. If someone is duped by a recreated window sticker saying a car is a 442 when it is just a Cutlass then they are stupid. If you have the money to purchase a restored classic Olds then you should have the 10 minutes it takes to do some reserach or ask questions as to the authenticity of the car you intend to purchase.

TK-65

My old 79 F150 had the VIN riveted to the door. If you replace the door, are you committing a crime? Did the VIN actually get removed from the truck, its technically still riveted on. If I put this door on another truck, does it now take that other trucks identity? Lots of questions and few clear answers.

Run to Rund

To me, the slippery slope begins with intent to deceive. Galen Govier got on the hot seat recently because someone used his Mopar "reproduction" tags to deceive. Body shells? If done correctly, not just a quick and dirty switcheroo, GM considered them a legal part: from the 1966-7 GMPD catalog:
Group 10.001 SHELL ASSY., BODY
NOTE: Information pertaining to availability and prices of body shells will be furnished upon request. Body shells are less paint, trim, glass, hardware, instruments, doors and compartment lid. They are shipped F.O.B. Lansing, Michigan plus crating charge.

jaunty75

Couldn't agree more. Anyone with half a brain ought to be able to tell if they're holding in their hand a document that was printed 40 years ago or one that was printed yesterday. I've seen original stickers, and it isn't just the paper. The typeface often looks like an old typewriter, complete with all the slightly misaligned letters and partially filled in "a's" and "o's", whereas anything made in the last 10-20 years or so will likely have been written on a computer and printed with a modern printer. Also, a real sticker will actually like have some "stick-um" or whatever on it or some evidence that it was once stuck to a window. It might be torn a little bit or frayed around the edges. Again, all of this is going to be hard to reproduce on a modern document by an amateur. The bottom line is, you don't have to be an employee of the FBI's forged documents section to tell an original window sticker from a fake.


P.S. You know how to make a piece of paper look old? Dip it in milk and hold it over a toaster until it dries. Now THAT will make you think you're back in 1776!

Dan Wirth

A simple "This is NOT an Original Document" should be enough to validate the non-original paperwork. IMO, with this phrase printed on the document, the spirit of the law is not violated in any sense.

WhatIf

Well, when money is involved, ethics go out the window. A 1970 Cutlass fully restored may bring $10,000. Make it into a W-30 442, it's now worth $60,000, all for the price of some Taiwanese reproduction parts. If you've ever talked to body shop guys, not for having work done, but just to kick it around, have a beer, etc., they have no problem hacking together the front half of a 1970 Skylark frame with the back half of a 1970 Chevelle frame, dropping a Cutlass body on top, and making a 1970 W-30 442. I'm amazed at the extent of butchering these guys will go to, and it's all for the sake of money.

The lesson here is that people pay too much for matching numbers nowadays.

There was a time (25 years ago) when people were pretty honest with these cars, and forgeries were obvious. But when the market went out of control after 2000, the greedy unethical people came in. Unless you're the original owner, or bought your car before 1985, you really have no idea what your car is. I've seen perfect, fully documented W-30 442's that I knew were Cutlasses before, and while the original owner was honest about it being a clone, 20 years and 5 owners later, it's become a real W-30 according to the last 3 owners.

Documentation is nice, but documents can be forged on a home PC quite easily, and aged and weathered to look original.

These guys have been in business for over 20 years, and they even state that "if you added options or changed colors, you need a new trim tag."

http://www.trimtags.com/

It doesn't help when scumbags like The Parts Place make millions by selling cheap Taiwanese parts to people. They've ruined the hobby.

Body Panels - HURST OLDS APPEARANCE KIT

Product Name Price Quantity BP9872T
(1969 - 1969 Cutlass/442) HURST OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS FACTORY APPEARANCE KIT H/O - COMPLETE KIT TO CONVERT ANY 1969 CUTLASS "S" 442 OR CONVERTIBLE INTO A 69 HURST OLDS LOOK-A-LIKE. KIT INCLUDES: 1 DUAL SNORKEL HOOD SCOOP, 1 PAIR OF SPECIAL MIRRORS AND MOUNTING HARDWARE, 1 REAR SPOILER WING, 3 HURST OLDS EMBLEMS, 455 H/O SCOOP DECALS, 1 DOC WATSON GLOVE BOX EMBLEM. ANOTHER PART NOT INCLUDED THAT WOULD TAKE YOUR CAR UP A NOTCH IS A SET OF ORIGINAL 455 "D" HEADS, WHICH WE ARE ALSO REPRODUCING. WITH THE PARTS WE MAKE YOU CAN BUILD AN EXACT DUPLICATE OF THE FAMED 1969 HURST OLDS

$929.00



Now I DO have a clone Pace Car, but I never considered fooling anyone for profit!!!! I just like the white/black/red combo (and I don't have the door decals). I wouldn't even THINK of trying to sell it as a real one. I wouldn't be able to sleep at night!!!!!

wmachine

You obviously underestimate the ability of present day forgers.

Well put. And again, there is nothing wrong with making clones, just don't mess with the numbers.

TK-65

Anyone remember the 68 Z28 vert in Hemmings Muscle Machines? A car that was never made but every document stating that it was? And everything looked real and 40 years old.

1969w3155

The Parts Place is also offering a W30/31/32 O.A.I. kit for '68 and '69 Olds, how god*mn greedy can you get? I never have done business with them, nor will I ever. The Z/28 convrt. clone or whatever it was is why I dropped my subscription to Hemmings Musclecars.....anything goes with them, enough already!

joe_padavano

My sentiments exactly. That is also how I interpret the federal law.

OLD SKL 69

x3

I also do not see any issue with someone recreating a window sticker for display purposes only.

Allan R

Kurt,
First, thank you for taking the time to start this thread and field comments. Thanks also to all the others who contributed their opinions.

I wanted to see what the general feel was before posting. So here's my take on this. There is no intent to deceive anyone on my part. I was first of all really curious to see what a factory build sheet for a 1972 Cutlass looked like. I saw an ebay auction a couple of months back that the guy had a build sheet in plastic. I asked if he would share it with me so I could see what they really are like. He declined (his option) but accused me of wanting to do something illegal. So I just let it go, it's not that important.

I also remember seeing an auction on ebay a couple of years ago where a guy was "reproducing authentic build sheets for your car" if you had an old chevy. He had the factory codes for all the options yada yada and would "age" the document complete with stains, tears, yellowing seat spring marks etc to give it that special old look. To me that smacks of the intent to create fraud or misrepresent a car. I wonder how many old Chevs have crossed the BJ auction block with this documentation to "prove" their originality.

Anyway, to my car now. I have documentation on my car in the form of a broadcast sheet. GM Canada has records they are sending me that authenticate the build date, selling dealer and other stuff they put into their documentation. Hurray for GM Canada! They maintain records. I'll definitely display that information to describe how the car was originally put into service. Since I'm adding a lot of options, and have already changed the color and general appearance a little already, I don't see that I'm doing anything wrong showing how it was originally born.

As far as the window sticker, I know it's almost impossible to re-create the exact same way it was attached to the car. Dont want to for that matter. Just want something that shows a representation of the Olds window sticker appropriate for the car.

Finally, and I think this is the most important thing: I am not trying to sell my car or misrepresent it. I know what it is and will proudly state that to anyone who is interested. I am in fact thinking of asking TK65 to do 2 sets of window stickers. 1-how the car was born. 2-how the car would compare to that original. If push ever came to shove and I absolutely HAD to sell the car, it would be represented by it's original broadcast sheet, original bills or sale, and original manuals and warranty booklets. I am the kind of carguy who will tell you more about what is wrong with a car that I'm selling than what's obviously good with it. Upfront honesty never has to come back and bite you in the tush.

There's only one place on my car I haven't looked for a build sheet and that's under the parcel shelf. I've looked everywhere else, inside door panels, under front and rear seats, on top of the gas tank, and behind the dash. This takes me back to the original question that started this thread. Is there any issue with sharing the details of the build sheet? If I could put one together like Dan suggests (This is NOT an original document) for display only I'd really like to do that. I don't believe that my intentions are fraudulent or illegal. Having said that, I can fully understand the overtone many have that it's wrong. That's fine because they're entitled to their opinion too. Would you be willing to share a high res copy of the build sheet?

Blk71SX

mens rea

(menz ray-ah) n. Latin for a "guilty mind," or criminal intent in committing the act.

Producing a window sticker to display the cost of options for comparison to today's prices should not be a problem until it is artificially aged to pass as original, without collaborating documentation.

Falsifying a build sheet would be a different matter. It would have to be considered a possible attempt to defraud. The average car show attendee wouldn't care about all the alpha-numeric codes in the many boxes on the build sheet. Or the list of options listed, JL2, L32, Y79, etc. But a knowledgeable potential buyer would study the sheet for all the options installed on the car.

I made the decision to keep my 71 just as it left the factory so to match the build sheet and not add consoles, power windows, trunk lock, etc. My only deviation is the vinyl top. Without a white interior, I just couldn't go back to a white top. Something that's easily reversed.

.

Allan R

I had thought about keeping it "as born" but decided not to. I don't think it classifies as a clone, just a Cutlass S that I'm adding all factory options to. I think everyone may feel differently about a certain car, but as far as their own goes, I think it's safe to say that each of us decides how we want to personalize our rides. I do agree with your comments about faking documents. Like I had mentioned, I would like something to show the process GM used in building these cars. If the actual build sheet can be found that's a bonus. If not it's not the hill I'm prepared to die on. Also keep in mind that I'm not selling or interested in selling my car.

Thanks CW. My car doesn't have AC though. Would that make any difference? Most AC cars kick panels are sealed, mine have grills for air flow and the two silver ***** for upper and lower air flow. Is it still possible to find them there?