'67 Roadster question

[Robert F.]

I am looking at purchasing a '67 327/300 hp roadster, #'s car, silver pearl w/black int. w/ 49K original miles (verified). The car is a solid #2 (my opinion). The question I have is that the undercoating is a shiney black (not powdercoated), which was shot to cover the entire undercarriage (I mean everything underneath the car). That seems odd to me, and the first thing I thought of was maybe they are trying to hide something. I had a friend look at the car with me today, and he too thought it was odd. The car is an older frame-on (over 10 years ago), and since it is #'s matching( I am in process of verifying this, but it looks promising), I was thinking it might be a good candidate to go thru the NCRS judging process to see what the car could do. The frame appears to be solid, and we tested it in several known problem areas and it passed our inspection. The car is for sale by a dealer well-known to me with a good reputation and I have bought several cars from him over the years. The price seems reasonable, etc. Is the undercoating as I described a big problem? If so, should it be corrected and how can it be corrected?

[Joe L.]

Re: '67 Roadster question

Bob-----

If the undercoating appears to have been rather recently applied, I would proceed with EXTREME caution. In my opinion, the only reason that someone would do this is to hide something. It's just not part of a restoration (i.e. no Corvettes were ever originally undercoated from the factory) and it's not even part of what would be considered general practice for just plain, old used vehicle detailing.

There are, at least, several things that could be "lurking" under the undercoat. Primary, of course, is frame corrosion. However, it seems that you are satisfied with this aspect based upon your inspection. Another thing, though, that could be hidden is previous frame REPAIRS. This could include new, welded-in sections OR conventional "frame straigtening" performed on a rack after collision damage.

In any event, removing the undercoating is a BIG hassle and it will be a significant problem if you were to ever to enter the car in judging.

[Barbara S.]

Re: '67 Roadster question

Bob. I don't want to rain on your parade, but something seems out of place with this car. I don't understand why someone would go through the time and trouble of doing a body on restoration 10 years ago but undercoat the entire underside of the car. It's not like he needed to prepare it for heavy snow and ice driving in northern Minnesota. No offense, but the undercoating seems to raise more questions than it answers for me. If you are fairly new to the hobby, maybe the undercoating isn't a deal breaker for you now, but if you decide to become more involved in NCRS judging, I think you'll find that the undercoating will become a real irritant to you.

I have an NCRS friend in New England that owns a really nice Top Flight 67. When he bought it, he describe it has having had the underside basically blacked out. He's spent considerable time and effort (and I'm sure money) making the underside right again.

I'd suggest you hire an NCRS judge in your area to go by and look at the car with you. An NCRS judge can help you decide what car to buy and what car to avoid.

JMO, and good luck.
Tony

[David L.]

Re: '67 Roadster question

hey bob is this car located in the rochester ny area if so no a ncrs judge that could possibly look at it call me dave at 716-818-1753.

[Joe R.]

Re: '67 Roadster question

Hi Bob:

Is the undercoating just paint or is it an asphalt undercoating material with a high build-up? A high build-up material can hide a lot of repairs to either the frame or the body pan. I would think that just plain paint would not be able to hide as much.

One thing to keep in mind is that for NCRS judging the fiberglass on the underside is supposed to be bare. Any repairs made in this area are very difficult to conceal without paint.

My car had a body-off "restoration" performed by the previous owner in 1988. The shop that did the work was not into NCRS-style restoration, but rather just doing what they thought was right. When they rebuilt the chassis they painted every single component of the chassis black, and for some unknown reason they applied an asphalt-based undercoating to the entire underside of the fiberglass body BEFORE they put the body back on the frame. My guess is that they thought the undercoating would reduce road noise.

It took me a long time to remove all of the accessible undercoating on the body, and I wasn't sure what I would find underneath it. As it turned out the body underside was pristine with no damage whatsoever. Over time I have rebuilt most of the chassis and have restored most of the parts to the correct finishes, and have Top Flighted the car.

So, if you don't mind doing a lot of the work yourself, the proper finishes can be restored at only moderate cost. I think your main concern should be to try and determine whether the coating that has been applied is hiding some repairs that would otherwise keep you from buying the car.

It is certainly possible that some previous "restorer" was simply trying to make the underside look better without investing much effort or time. I think that painting the entire chassis of a car black (with paint, not undercoating) is a fairly common method that some sellers use to try and "freshen up" the appearance of the underside.

[Robert F.]

Re: '67 Roadster question

Thanks for your responses which were all very helpful. I'm not sure which direction I will go with this decision, but your input will help guide me.