'63 with "309" VIN??

[Andy #31563]

I looked at a '63 convertible today that had a vin tag with the numbers: "30967S.....". The tag did not appear to have been tampered with and the "9" was clearly a "9" (not a sloppy "8").

Has anyone ever seen anything like this? The car was an early build (October) and had several of the "correct" parts (block, T10, heads, etc.).

If anyone has any information on this one, I would really appreciate it.

Thanks in advance.

[Joe L.]

Re: '63 with "309" VIN??

Andy-----

About the only thing it could be is a mistake when the tag was produced. Mistakes do happen as long as humans are involved. It does seem strange, though, for a mistake at this position of the VIN sequence. What does the car's registration say regarding VIN number?

[Joe L.]

Addendum

Andy-------

Another possibility comes to mind: it's theoretically possible that this circumstance was generated by some previous "monkey business" with respect to the creation of a false identity for the car. Let's say that at some point the car with the normal VIN sequence (with the "8") was stolen. If a new identity and VIN plate had been prepared for the car by changing the "8" to a "9", that VIN number would not show up on any national crime information system as being stolen. At the same time, all of the VIN derivatives on the the various components of the car would still match, particularly important in states where one or more of these must match for registration purposes.

Now, the perpetrator would still be faced with the task of creating a registration "paper trail" in order to get the new VIN "into the system", so to speak. In other words, there would be no registration history or manufacturer's statement of origin (MSO) to initiate a registration process for the new VIN. But, I'll bet there are ways that this could be done for someone "in the know" or using the relatively loose registration laws of some states. Once that's accomplished, everything else is a "piece of cake" from that point on.

Now, I'm not saying that this is what happened here; it's STRICTLY a theory. But, if I were going to purchase this car, I'd want to do a VERY THOROUGH title and registration search. If I couldn't document the car's history back to year one WITH THE VIN THAT IT CURRENTLY HAS, I wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole. Shenanigans of various types with vehicle VIN plates are NOT rare, especially with Corvettes. Remember, these early VIN plates have virtually no theft or fraud prevention features of any kind.

[Loren L.]

Re: '63 with "309" VIN??

Contact Noland Adams at nolandadams@d-web.com. He has significant computerized records about 1963's as a result of his second book - if this "9" is legitimate, it more than likely made it into more than one car's tag.

[Jack H.]

Re: Addendum

Had a great car at the shop a few years back.... '65 coupe 365HP, 4-spd, factory A/C, and lot of other goodies. Original owner was trying to sell it and getting no takers despite his rather fair asking price. He brought it to us to look over.

Didn't take long to see what the 'hang-up' was. The factory original VIN plate CLEARLY had a 19467 instead of 19437 prefix! Now, I've seen guys chop the top to make a more desirable convertible, but I've never seen anyone go the opposite way.... This is one that left the factory with an opps and was never caught.

Poor guy had listed the car in the paper at $28K, then dropped price all the way down to $19K.... He had so many folks come look with their 'expert' buddies and walk away that he was at his wits end. I heard he finally did sell the car for $14K. Pity, this was a real Bowtie candidate with only 38K original miles on it.

[Terry M.]

Re: Addendum II *TL*

Jack, just FYI I once saw the same in a rubber bumper I once judged. I would not have noticed had not the owner asked: "Hey, what about this VIN that says...." All the evidence on this car was exactly the same kind of oops you cite, but some years later.

So now we know there are two out there.

Terry