Gorgeous '69 Chevelle #s L78 4-sp Convertible

[Mr70]

The L code was used on Kansas City Mo. Leeds Assembly plant tags,not Baltimore,as this one has.

[scuncio]

Yep, that’s what I get for posting too late at night.

[GotGrunt]

Originally Posted by ls6owner

I thought the L was only on Leeds cars?

Oliver

Originally Posted by Mr70

The L code was used on Kansas City Mo. Leeds Assembly plant tags,not Baltimore,as this one has.

1969 Chevelle Baltimore tags also had the L code for SS equipped cars. 1969 only.

[scuncio]

Man, I thought so too. So, the BM would become BL, correct?

[GotGrunt]

Originally Posted by scuncio

Man, I thought so too. So, the BM would become BL, correct?

Exactly

[wayoutz]

Originally Posted by GotGrunt

1969 Chevelle Baltimore tags also had the L code for SS equipped cars. 1969 only.

so is this trim tag correct for this car?

[65blackcoupe]

This probably deserves its own post, but is there enough evidence now to conclusively say an "L" on Kansas and Baltimore 69 tags denotes SS? Just as we are with X codes on 69 Camaros. IMO I believe so on Kansas cars, unsure on Baltimore as I haven't seen as many Balt tags as Kan tags, but there are far better minds here than I.

[GotGrunt]

Originally Posted by Mr70

I was referring to Ls6owners Q about the single letter "L" on the bottom used in '70.

Different L, same meaning.

Originally Posted by wayoutz

so is this trim tag correct for this car?

I still think the tag looks too crisp but would like others to chime in with opinions.

Originally Posted by 65blackcoupe

This probably deserves its own post, but is there enough evidence now to conclusively say an "L" on Kansas and Baltimore 69 tags denotes SS? Just as we are with X codes on 69 Camaros. IMO I believe so on Kansas cars, unsure on Baltimore as I haven't seen as many Balt tags as Kan tags, but there are far better minds here than I.

IMO, the 1969 Baltimore L is just as conclusive and the one found on 1970-72 KC cars.

[Bill Pritchard]

Originally Posted by wayoutz

so is this trim tag correct for this car?

My guess is that the TT is original to the car, but the car has been cloned into an SS396. The only 'evidence' the seller is relying on to try and justify it being an SS396 is a non-pictured engine block stamping, and I think we all know what a risky assumption that is. Cloned or real, it is indeed a nice looking car with a number of common 'restoration' mistakes that are fairly easily corrected.

[wayoutz]

Originally Posted by Bill Pritchard

My guess is that the TT is original to the car, but the car has been cloned into an SS396. The only 'evidence' the seller is relying on to try and justify it being an SS396 is a non-pictured engine block stamping, and I think we all know what a risky assumption that is. Cloned or real, it is indeed a nice looking car with a number of common 'restoration' mistakes that are fairly easily corrected.

I dont feel anything is correct but beautiful car.