General Discussion Discuss your Oldsmobile or other car-related topics.

Unreadable trim tag

Old Aug 24, 2012 | 05:03 AM
  #1  
TenMidgets's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 487
From: Melville, NY
Unreadable trim tag

Hi All,

I am taking a good long look at a 71 Supreme for sale and unfortunately the trim tag is not legible from the picture the owner sent. Is this a major red flag? Would it deter you from moving forward with a possible purchase?

I can say the rest of the car is in fantastic shape and this is the only blemish I've found. Just want to make sure its not an indicator of a damaged car.

Thanks,
Bill
Attached Images
File Type: jpg
photo(62).jpg (90.7 KB, 67 views)
Old Aug 24, 2012 | 06:30 AM
  #2  
GAOldsman's Avatar
"Car"mudgeon
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,191
From: Perry, GA
Well it just looks painted over too much but it does look original to me. Maybe the owner can take a better pic or try to do a pencil rubbing of it. As far as damage, I'd definitely search it from top to bottom prior to purchase.
Old Aug 24, 2012 | 07:08 AM
  #3  
joe_padavano's Avatar
Old(s) Fart
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 50,802
From: Northern VA
Originally Posted by GAOldsman
Well it just looks painted over too much...
X2. Consider that the tag was originally semigloss black, and there's blue and gloss black over that. A little paint stripper would go a long way here. Don't use abrasives since the tag is aluminum and will damage easily.
Old Aug 24, 2012 | 07:15 AM
  #4  
TenMidgets's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 487
From: Melville, NY
Ok guys, thanks for the tips. I don't want to get crazy about it either, but would have been easier to decode it before buying. I will go over it with a fine tooth comb and confident that if it all checks out that I can strip it down enough to read.

Thanks!
Old Aug 24, 2012 | 08:53 AM
  #5  
69HO43's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,551
I can make out a faint 71 on the tag, thus it SEEMS correct for the car.

I agree, a pencil rubbing may get better contrasting detail. Many coats of paint have preserved the information for seemingly eternity.
Old Aug 24, 2012 | 10:52 AM
  #6  
Indy_68_S's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,226
From: Central IN
Originally Posted by GAOldsman
Well it just looks painted over too much but it does look original to me. Maybe the owner can take a better pic or try to do a pencil rubbing of it. ....
Or just a different cam angle....
Old Aug 24, 2012 | 11:01 AM
  #7  
1970cs's Avatar
Lansing built
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,330
From: Grand Ledge, MI
my eyeballs pickout 71st 67 for convertible and LAN for Lansing.

Pat
Old Aug 24, 2012 | 07:45 PM
  #8  
jaunty75's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 15,192
From: southeastern Michigan
Originally Posted by TenMidgets
the trim tag is not legible from the picture the owner sent. Is this a major red flag?
Yes, it's a major red flag that the owner is a crappy photographer, but not a major red flag about the car itself. Couldn't you just ask the owner to take a better picture?
Old Aug 25, 2012 | 04:45 AM
  #9  
TenMidgets's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 487
From: Melville, NY
Originally Posted by 1970cs
my eyeballs pickout 71st 67 for convertible and LAN for Lansing.

Pat
That's right Pat - I have the VIN# and all that you mentioned above is confirmed.
Old Aug 27, 2012 | 12:31 PM
  #10  
TenMidgets's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 487
From: Melville, NY
Originally Posted by jaunty75
Yes, it's a major red flag that the owner is a crappy photographer, but not a major red flag about the car itself. Couldn't you just ask the owner to take a better picture?
Those who thought the owener was a terrible photographer were right. Below is another attempt at it by me and it looks totally different and most importantly, legible.

Would someone be so kind to decode this for me? I'm thinking its just a base Cutlass vert in viking blue, but one can't assume...

Thanks,
Bill
Attached Images
File Type: jpg
data_plate.jpg (84.6 KB, 20 views)
Old Aug 27, 2012 | 12:53 PM
  #11  
GAOldsman's Avatar
"Car"mudgeon
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,191
From: Perry, GA
3 = G M Division (Oldsmobile)
42 = Cutlass Supreme
67 = Convertible
LAN = Lansing, Mich Assembly Plant
369229 = Fisher Body Unit #
983 = Blue themed interior with bench seat
26 = Lower body color Viking Blue
B = Black convertible top
04B = April (04) 2nd week (B) build
Old Aug 27, 2012 | 01:45 PM
  #12  
TenMidgets's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 487
From: Melville, NY
Good stuff, thanks GAOldsman!
Old Aug 27, 2012 | 01:49 PM
  #13  
GAOldsman's Avatar
"Car"mudgeon
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,191
From: Perry, GA
No problem TenMidgets Do you have the VIN? Any other documentation with the car?
Old Aug 27, 2012 | 01:53 PM
  #14  
TenMidgets's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 487
From: Melville, NY
Yes the VIN is 342671M183080.

As far as I know, the only other documentation is copies of all receipts from the restoration process.
Old Aug 27, 2012 | 01:55 PM
  #15  
Allan R's Avatar
Just an Olds Guy
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 24,528
From: Edmonton, AB. And "I am Can 'eh' jun - eh"
VIN decodes similarly
3 - Oldsmobile
42 - Cutlass Supreme
67 - Convertible
1 - 1971 model year
M - Lansing production
183080 - Lansing production sequence (not related to fisher body tag)


EDIT: BTW on your 983 code. Your bench seat should be the A65 split bench with folding armrest.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
knoggin
Eighty-Eight
5
Apr 17, 2014 01:48 PM
compusign1967
442
14
Oct 26, 2011 02:00 PM
compusign1967
Cutlass
1
Oct 30, 2007 08:19 AM
Double D Farms
General Discussion
5
Sep 8, 2007 05:28 PM
drtdobber
442
4
Feb 14, 2007 01:16 PM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:14 PM.