# Illegal Car?



## PontiacJim (Dec 29, 2012)

Here's the deal. A member here has been looking at car to purchase and passed this one along from *Gateway Classic Cars*. https://www.gatewayclassiccars.com/HOU/1545/1965-Pontiac-Tempest#desc

In checking out the car, I am using the GTO Association ID Guide to decode the car. Now I am no expert on ID'ing a car, but like most of us think I can read a VIN and Data Tag. I may be seeing this wrong, so passing this on for others to see what I am seeing. IF I am not mistaken, this Vin does not match the body type and neither the VIN or Data Tag match each other. Am I getting senile?

Car is a 2 Dr HT in the photo. The VIN says it is a 2 Dr Sports Coupe, ie a post car or what we call a 2 Dr Sedan. Here is how I read the Vin: 2=Pontiac, 33=Tempest, 27=2 Dr Sport Coupe (Sedan), 5=1965, P=Pontiac (Final Assembly Plant), 2=indicates V8 engine. I know that the different plants used different type of rivets to secure the VIN, but what I see is mostly the "rosette" style rivets on the 1965's. So I don't have enough knowledge to confirm what rivet head should have been used.

Now the Data Tag. Here is how I read this one: KAN=Final Assembly Plant, 65=1965, 2=Pontiac, 37= Lemans, 37=2 Dr Hardtop.

So in comparing the VIN to the Data Tag with respect to Final Assembly Plant, Body Style, and Model Type, they do not match. So, is it a Pontac or Kansas built car, a hardtop or sedan, a Tempest or Lemans?

Next, look at the Data Tag. It has the familiar "5N" on the lower left. The Option Code for the GTO on a Lemans is "5N." But again, the VIN says Tempest and the GTO Option was on the Lemans.

The car is red with a red interior. On the Data Tag you see 217 for the Trim and B-B for the Paint Code. Trim option 217 is listed as Dark Blue, and B-B is the paint code for Charcoal Blue.

This is how I am deciphering the car's VIN and Data Tag according to the GTO Assoc. ID Guide. Am I not seeing this correctly? What am I missing? Has the VIN been taken from another car and put on this one? And why don't the VIN and Data Tags match?


----------



## integrity6987 (May 10, 2017)

I agree with you. Anyone unfortunate enough to buy that car repainted "Arrest Me Red" might get just that! Probably get hung up with insurance and with DMV.


----------



## NOS Only (Nov 14, 2017)

Classic case as to why it is a federal offense (aka: a felony) to buy, sell or remove VIN tags.

But many car people think nothing of it because they are above the law.


----------



## PontiacJim (Dec 29, 2012)

Thanks to you both, I thought I was reading everything correctly that was posted with the car. Just did not add up. The sad part is that someone who doesn't know better could wind up buying the car and find themselves in hot water real quick.

It also goes to show how these classic car show room types don't know squat about cars, but don't have a problem being the middle man to cash in on the profits - even if it might be stolen or VIN altered. Buyer beware and do your homework before making any purchase. :yesnod:


----------



## Charlie DuBois (Oct 30, 2019)

PontiacJim I am awed by your knowledge of cars and willingness to help. I have gained much good info. from you and this forum.

Side note: I am a member who does military honors for our vets. We charge no fee and perform ceremonies and same uniforms exactly as active duty but active duty seldom participate. At a funeral a few days ago I mentioned that I was in search of a car. He told me another member has a 1967 Mustang that was pretty original. This guy got his car from an uncle who has a new car dealership. Ran it through his dealership to check things out. Car was originally from Nevada and he has owned it for six years. He added an air conditioner 3 months ago. I have looked at it once with another inspection Tuesday who has some knowledge of mid-60-mid-75 cars.


----------



## NOS Only (Nov 14, 2017)

PontiacJim said:


> Thanks to you both, I thought I was reading everything correctly that was posted with the car. Just did not add up. The sad part is that someone who doesn't know better could wind up buying the car and find themselves in hot water real quick.
> 
> It also goes to show how these classic car show room types don't know squat about cars, but don't have a problem being the middle man to cash in on the profits - even if it might be stolen or VIN altered. Buyer beware and do your homework before making any purchase. :yesnod:


I recently helped out a friend scope out this.....










It is a 1968 Chevelle SS 396 that the guy claimed it was a 1 owner, numbers matching car that he bought from the original owner.

Now, my friend is a Chevy numbers encyclopedia guy, I frankly don't care about numbers but go more for condition vs. price.

My friend was all up & down on this car and said it was 100% numbers and date code matching.

Without going into every issue I found I will just focus on one.

This numbers matching car that came from the factory as a WHITE car per the trim tag and a few areas that showed original WHITE factory overspray had obvious YELLOW overspray on the inside of the rear body panel around the tail lamp openings, the undersides of both quarter panels as well as the underside of the package shelf. This was not urethane primer or any other type primer, this was YELLOW paint overspray that appeared to be from the factory.

My conclusion was that some time in this car's life it suffered rear end damage, possibly a severe impact, and was repaired with either a used rear body section or used cowl back body assembly. This also appeared to be done at a much earlier time due to the amount of age from dust & dirt as well as some rust repair to the left quarter. This apparent repair also happen much earlier than the fairly recent front end collision that was hastily repaired. And the list went on.


----------



## DustyOldGTO (Jun 26, 2019)

The grill of that numbers matching 1968 Chevelle SS396 says "1969" to me.


----------



## GTOJUNIOR (Aug 7, 2011)

Baring are the mis-matched codes the big red flag with that '65 is the VIN tag. 
Replacing TRIM tags with an OE correct tag or having a new one made isn't an issue.

But when I look at the VIN not having the Rosette rivets and globs of thick paint over it, 
This is a major flag for me on most any 60's GM car. 
I know there were exceptions to the rules along the way but that jumps right out. 

Hell you can even buy the rivets now, So as pointed out this is truly a case of an Ass-hat Dealer/seller.

I would hope anyone with half a brain cell interested in any car would do their research. 
It's not 1970 anymore and research resources are at our fingertips.


----------



## NOS Only (Nov 14, 2017)

DustyOldGTO said:


> The grill of that numbers matching 1968 Chevelle SS396 says "1969" to me.


Yeah, I couldn't remember if it was a '68 or '69.

But then, it's just another Chevy, not a Pontiac so who cares.


----------



## johny (Apr 11, 2017)

Yes, that is 1969 front clip and those are '69 SS stripes.


----------



## Shooter (Nov 7, 2015)

So what does the person that is really, really trying to be legal do? If you have a car with a good VIN but the data-plate is gone?


----------



## GTOJUNIOR (Aug 7, 2011)

Since Trim Tags aren't as vital as a Vin Tag one can be made...
TRIM TAGS - Home


----------



## Shooter (Nov 7, 2015)

It's not that easy. All the data that's needed isn't readily available. I don't believe the PHS documentation includes body build date or body number. No idea where to get it. So do you put in made up numbers? Zeros? Code for whatever you built? What's legal and ethical?


----------



## Rlamarche1 (Nov 22, 2016)

3 years ago I was shopping for a 64 GTO and thought I had found a good one at a classic car dealer in Minnesota. I took the VIN number and went online to PHS and applied for the information they provide. In about and hour I got a call from Jim at PHS. He told me that according to the VIN, the car was assembled in Kansas City, Which was a Chevrolet plant, but did have a GTO line. He told me he did not have access to archives of GTO's assembled there and that unless I was in love with this car, I should pass and keep looking. I did some more research and got a photo of the data plate from the dealer. The data plate indicated the car was assembled in Pontiac, MI and also looked like it had been pop riveted on the firewall recently and painted black. I confronted the dealer and told him this was most likely not a GTO. He said the consignor assured him it was. I moved on.

Got to be extremely careful and do your due diligence.


----------



## O52 (Jan 27, 2019)

Be advised that some states (Oklahoma comes to mind) modifying or removing the data plate is also illegal. 

While US sold Chevelle owners do not have a PHS service (Chevrolet USA never kept records) the NCRS can trace the build date and shipped to dealer for most Chevrolets. Canadian Chevrolets do have PHS type records.


----------



## Guenthar (Feb 2, 2019)

I thought GM changed to astro ventilation in 1969 and eliminated the wing vents.


----------



## 1968gto421 (Mar 28, 2014)

This is a great thread. I think a moderator should consider making it a "sticky". Very important info here. Thanks to all.


----------



## Montreux (Mar 8, 2009)

Did ‘65’s have “hidden” VIN numbers? ‘67 has VIN stamped on the top of the frame rail behind the left rear tire. I think a partial VIN is stamped in the trunk gutter on top of the quarter panel. Things might get real interesting if you compare all 3 stampings!


----------



## CPL (Feb 11, 2016)

PontiacJim said:


> Here's the deal. A member here has been looking at car to purchase and passed this one along from *Gateway Classic Cars*. https://www.gatewayclassiccars.com/HOU/1545/1965-Pontiac-Tempest#desc
> 
> In checking out the car, I am using the GTO Association ID Guide to decode the car. Now I am no expert on ID'ing a car, but like most of us think I can read a VIN and Data Tag. I may be seeing this wrong, so passing this on for others to see what I am seeing. IF I am not mistaken, this Vin does not match the body type and neither the VIN or Data Tag match each other. Am I getting senile?
> 
> ...


you are right Pontiac Jim.the data ,and vin tags are wrong.I have the 65 Lemans sports coupe.you have assisted me many times threw my build this past couple years.here is a picture of my 65 lemans sports coupe it has posts..also my ID tag,not comfortable posting vin but my vin has the rosette rivets. also I have the PHS docs that prove mine..


----------



## CPL (Feb 11, 2016)

65 vin is located on the driver side front door jam


----------



## CPL (Feb 11, 2016)

yes my PHS doc build card has the date and the body number listed. for my 65 lemans sports coupe


----------



## geeteeohguy (Feb 2, 2008)

Yes, Jim is correct, as well as the rest of you guys. I know of a very nice Blue Charcoal/blue interior post LeMans that was cloned into a tripower '65 GTO a few years ago. The owner/builder made no bones about it being a clone, and sold it as a clone for a reduced price. I saw it for sale by a dealer a couple of years later advertised as the real deal. For a LOT more money. (The car was gorgeous). The trick here: it was one of the few that the PHS was not available for due to a fire back in the day. So while the builder/first owner of the clone was honest, the second person or third person who was selling the car was not. Somebody got burned, but no real way to prove it's NOT a GTO unless you could find the old posts of the build with the VIN number. 
Data/trim plates are being legitimately reproduced, but the outfits doing it require proof of the cars original colors and options, so they would need a copy of the PHS or the original trim tag. I have seen early Lemans's being cloned into GTO's as early as about 1981, even when real GTO's were fairly cheap. This has been going on for a LONG time.


----------

