First Super Bee built?
- Thread starter 68 Super Bee
- Start date
- Status
Hello everyone. I know this is an old thread, but I found it as a new thread on another blog. Here is the deal...and I know this for fact because I own the first Superbee out of the LA Plant. I documented mine with Galen which he states that mine is the first one to exist out of the LA plant. Your car is the last superbee out of the LA plant. The sequence number is the beginning of 1969 year. Look at the 1969 sequence numbers and where it begins...in LA that is. Yours is 100740 and the first one listed in 1969 out of the LA is 101028. There are a ton of date codes that will tell you if its an early build or late build. Mine was built 1/23 out of LA. The dates stamped on the crossmember, the trunk and k member all confirm this. There is a date on the wiper motor that is the 347th day of 1967. My mufflers are also dated correctly. Here is the interesting part of your car...it was going down the line along with the 1969 models. So...that hood might have been correct for the car. In other words, the customer may have ordered the 1968 car and optioned for that hood...at the dealer or something. I can't remember if there is a date code on the hood somewhere. I have been painstakingly restoring mine to 100% original and documenting everything. For example, my K-member has a stamp 009 of 1968. So, the 9th day of 1968. Unfortunately, the engine and tranny were lost over 30 years ago. I found a period correct block and began the build from there. Galen Govier is your first stop. If anyone has anymore information about my car. Thanks.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd advise anyone to do some research on that guy's current status before attempting to do any business with him.
My opinion,
Stay-a-way from Go-vee-ay......
My opinion,
Stay-a-way from Go-vee-ay......
Bean Head...why do say that? What did I miss?
- Local time
- 10:52 PM
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2010
- Messages
- 31,401
- Reaction score
- 56,544
- Location
- Hanover, Pennslyvania
The OP's car is a '68. How could it be the last 1969?
Not the last 69, the last 68. It has a serial number that started the 69 model. Serial numbers "start over" with the new model year. His car got stuck in the 69 serial number sequence. Its still a 68. There is 100% no way that car was built in August of 1967. Superbee wasn't even a thought until the Roadrunner started selling out. The "prototype" was a white car with the superbee logo missing so nobody would fine out what it was. The developer himself said he wrapped that around a tree in Sept or Oct of 1967 testing it. Then it debuted in Nov 67 at the Detroit auto show. Many times, cars on the line get next years upgrades. Does this make sense? The original owner of the 100740 ordered the car in August of 1968. The car was made as the new orders for the 69 model year started. It probably showed up at the dealership with 1969s and the owner said, I want that hood. That happens ALL THE TIME. Wheels, seats, AC stuff, emblems, decals all get swapped at the dealership to satisfy the buyer. Heck, you can go to a dealer today and say I want that car but with those wheels and they will swap them for you.
There's tons of negative feedback out there. My personal experience was a relative wanted to have his factory original car documented, even though he bought the thing new in 1968 and could tell you everything he ever did to the car
..when they finally made contact they said it will be 3-4 months, took the money and after over 2 years of hassle relative finally got his stuff. And we're not the only ones. If you're a high-dollar collector type I hear he treats you a little better... point is nowadays the information is out there to be had, sometimes it just takes some work to find it..
moobster
Well-Known Member
Wow!!! that statement certainly won't carry well the numbers matching, correct bolt head, guys.
Moobster, everyone knows the LA plant was...unorganized. The original engine would still have the VIN stamped where the head goes etc... Why do you think that is not possible? It is 100% not possible that it is August of 1967.
fc7_plumcrazy
Well-Known Member
no, it is not a 68 model that got stuck into the 69 model year. Oh boy.
moobster
Well-Known Member
The remarks regarding, hood changes, wheel changes, A/C added, decals applied and such. All these things do happen. The salesman wants to sell a car, so he'll do what ever it takes to make a sale. The number cruncher, fender tag readers, don't like to hear this stuff. Not just the LA plant, all plants ,no matter what make, run under mass confussion. As a contractor, I've worked in all the Ontario car plants and have seen a lot of mismatched parts go into all kinds of vehicles. The line stops for nothing. Every 56 secs a car comes off the end of the assembly line, they throw whatever part thats in the bin on it. Motors included.
fc7_plumcrazy, I am 1000% sure that it is not an August of 1967 car...1000% sure. Superbees were not a thought until AFTER the Roadrunner. So, how would you explain that serial number and/or sequence number?
fc7_plumcrazy
Well-Known Member
so you think they produced in august 68 when the 69 models were in full building progress already since the beginning of the month a model which looks completly like a 68 model including sidemarker and co. They even gave it a VIN from a 68 model stating "8" and not "9" in the VIN. And they made a fender Tag looking like a 68 instead of a 69 fender tag.
IMHO this car simply has a fraud VIN and fender tag probaly using originally a 1968 model WL21 car to start with
Ahhhh....that could be. It really is a coronet or coronet 500 and someone messed with it to be a superbee. So, it was born in August of 1967 as a coronet and then someone cloned it to be a superbee and then changed the vin number along the way. hmmm...both are crazy stories.
fc7_plumcrazy
Well-Known Member
couldn't be a Coro 500 as they were not available as 2dr sedans.
As Super Bees were not built at that time (aug 67) as you completely correct stated it means they had a "WL21x8A100740" Coro. A new VIN tag was made by just swapping out the "L" against an "M" and the engine code from what ever it had to an "H".
Against the law but known to have happened before
Yep...I'm leaning that way now. I did look at the pics though. Whoever did the conversion, did a great job. That certainly looks like a superbee throughout. The numbers stamped on the rad support and in the trunk under the weatherstrip...is that the sequence number or the vin number?
69Coronetrt
Well-Known Member
FC7....sweet Jesus thank you for the heavy lifting.
I saw posts 62 and 66 and had a melt down.
I saw posts 62 and 66 and had a melt down.
And how stupid would you feel if something like that actually happened 69Coronetrt? Unless you worked on the line as that car goes down it, then and only then will you know what happened. I have heard spectacular stories about what happens on the line. So, instead of have having a melt down, be part of the solution. Thank you to FC7 for posting another theory about the car.
Don't know how i missed the begiining 3 pgs., but i conversed with Mr.G soon after Al Gore 'invented' the internet and he told me to get in touch if I ever wanted to sell mine. (Never), but i can kinda see all the happenings happening. Crazy things happen all the time. I go along with 'moparedtn' though. I'm file# 315 on the registry(I think?)..
69Coronetrt
Well-Known Member
Did you read any of my prior posts?
I was trying to be the nice guy and get the OP to realize this is a bogus car on their own.
FC7 finally came out and said it in 73 and 75.
Posts 62 and 66 defy logic and what is known.
GG knows a lot but he doesn’t know everything. There are plenty of people in the hobby with extensive records and knowledge. They choose not to be as well known as GG and frequently find flaws in his work.
There is absolutely positively 100 percent no way to know a first or last car built. Production doesn’t work that way. You may have the lowest or highest VIN known to any one person but cars were not produced in VIN sequence number. Car 100001 may have been built after car 100002.
- Status
Similar threads
