COPO BE rear on craigslist

[SS427]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 70 copo</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> What I will say is that the obliteration marks are consistent with a known manufacturing plant correction technique as recalled to me by the spring and axle line workers. It is troubling that segments in hobby keep calling most everything with a stamp deviation that does not fit a narrow interpretation fake. </div></div>

You make a good point Phil. With as many inspections that I do every year it has almost gone the other way. When the stamps look too perfect I start to worry. I wrote off a CRV 3.31 rearend as being a restamp about 2 years ago and actually bought it and put it into my inventory. I thought it was fake as you could clearly see that the face had been hastily ground off and restamped in the stamp area of the axle tube. Fast forward 2 years and I get another LS6 in the shop. While inspecting it I see the same exact thing while forgetting about the other rearend. I was going to write it off as a restamp as well but something kept nagging me. I finally remembered the other rearend and bingo, almost identical and within 5 days of the car in the shop. I conferred with Chris White who also confirmed that he felt it was real. Never say never! This is also why documenting these types of anomalies are so important.

[ds1]

Mistakes like that can be a black ball on a car. And the EXPERTS are the ones to blame.

[camaromb]

My low mile LS6 also had a ground axle stamp area, not typical thats for sure. I will post pictures of the BE in question after the paint was stripped. The oxidation is very consistent in all the stamps. I think it is just a non-typical stamp, especially since it has a very difficult to find dated BE posi in it.

[Kurt S]

Here's a better pic. It is not an 'anomaly', IMO.

If the collective wants, I will stop giving opinions on stamps. It's low pay anyway....

[Day2_69Z]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: camaromb</div><div class="ubbcode-body">My low mile LS6 also had a ground axle stamp area, not typical thats for sure. I will post pictures of the BE in question after the paint was stripped. The oxidation is very consistent in all the stamps. I think it is just a non-typical stamp, especially since it has a very difficult to find dated BE posi in it.</div></div>

So, you're saying the internals are COPO ? The carrier internals &amp; R&amp;P are correct ?

[SS427]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ds1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Mistakes like that can be a black ball on a car. And the EXPERTS are the ones to blame. </div></div>

I disagree with you and it is often times the EXPERTS do the homework and research to prove that an anomaly is in fact a factory defect. Case in point.

[Steve Shauger]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Kurt S</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here's a better pic. It is not an 'anomaly', IMO.

If the collective wants, I will stop giving opinions on stamps. It's low pay anyway.... </div></div>

Kurt your expertise and opinion is welcomed and appreciated.

[ds1]

It is a double edged sword. We look to them for answers to our questions. They are necessary. But because one says with Authority something is a fake when it may not, there is a dog pile against it. And it depends on the expert. One expert here in the east has a bad reputation because of his making mistakes and his ego. He is attacked on this site regularly. Galen Govier has tarnished his reputation passing off bad cars. Personally I think the rear in this topic looked bad or suspicious. I followed this topic to see where it went. You pointed out that it looks like one you have and others have said it looks like established practices to repair mistakes. I want to learn by being informed and not be told if something does not fit into a narrow margin of what is established as being correct. A point made earlier in this topic. These were production built. No two alike. We have a 67 GTO my uncle bought in 69 with the ugliest firewall. Turns out it has an AC firewall on a car that never came with AC. How, Why? It was just built that way. I was a little hard on the &quot;experts&quot; in my first post. My point is that when they give their opinion it is hard to change mindset after making their opinion known.

[camaromb]

This rearend in question has a E 9 J dated posi with correct side gears, round spring plate, etc. The gear set is not original, Richmond.

[SS427]

If not for the &quot;experts&quot; (which I am by no means not one) many people would have been screwed at auctions and private sales. To my knowledge no one has ever gotten a bogus car by me though it will happen some day, I am only human. In the meantime I have saved many people hundreds of thousands of dollars by not making big mistakes.

Unlike some other inspectors, I will NOT certify a car. Reason being, if I were not an honest man I guarantee I could build a totally bogus LS6 convertible and sell it for many hundreds of thousands of dollars and no one would be the wiser. If I can do it, so can someone else so there is no way I am going to certify a car as being real because today that is nearly impossible. I will write a report with my best professional opinion on real or built but that is it. This is one of the reasons I am SO against re-manufactured or &quot;tribute&quot; paperwork as it will SOMEDAY get into the wrong hands. Mark it as a reproduction or make a list of VIN's public if you want to help the hobby.