Go Back   The Supercar Registry > Dealer Specific Discussion > COPO - United States


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-17-2010, 02:49 PM
Kurt S Kurt S is offline
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 3,084
Thanks: 2
Thanked 781 Times in 363 Posts
Default Re: COPO 9737

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY</div><div class="ubbcode-body">COPO's were available to any dealer, and could be had by themselves is desired. </div></div>
I question whether that is true. COPO's could have dependencies on other options, just like some options had dependencies on other options.
If you don't order J52, you couldn't order Z28. In 69, L78 required Z27 first.
I suspect the same is true on 9737.
__________________
Kurt S - CRG
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-01-2010, 09:04 PM
YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY's Avatar
YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY is offline
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: PA
Posts: 13,097
Thanks: 720
Thanked 360 Times in 144 Posts
Default Re: COPO 9737

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Kurt S</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY</div><div class="ubbcode-body">COPO's were available to any dealer, and could be had by themselves is desired. </div></div>
I question whether that is true. COPO's could have dependencies on other options, just like some options had dependencies on other options.
If you don't order J52, you couldn't order Z28. In 69, L78 required Z27 first.
I suspect the same is true on 9737. </div></div>

Sorry, my comment was aimed more at the '70 version of #9737, before I realized the initial question was specific to '69 Camaro's.
__________________
Marlin
70 Yenko Nova-350/360, 4speed M21, 4.10 Posi (Daddy's Ride)
69 SS Nova-396/375hp, 4speed M20, 3.55 Posi (Benjamin's Ride)
67 RS Camaro-327/250hp, 2speed Glide, &amp; 3.08 Open (Danny's Ride)
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-18-2010, 04:01 PM
William William is offline
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: New Berlin WI USA
Posts: 2,648
Thanks: 252
Thanked 2,873 Times in 803 Posts
Default Re: COPO 9737

Yes later Yenkos had the factory tach. My conclusion that 9737 included it later in the run is based on existing shipper copies for those cars, some of which are in circulation. The price for 9737 was raised to $184.34, U16 does not appear on the copy and the cars have tachs. As far as I know only 06A and later Yenkos were configured this way.

Not all early Yenkos had the S-W tach. The earliest known car N578693 had no tach.
__________________
Learning more and more about less and less...
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-19-2010, 01:48 AM
Unreal Unreal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA
Posts: 1,335
Thanks: 1
Thanked 77 Times in 48 Posts
Default Re: COPO 9737

William,
Thanks for the information. Does your research indicate that, prior to 06A, Yenko exclusively installed SW tachs (on tach equipped cars) as opposed checking RPO U16? Just curious if any cars, prior to the inclusion of tachs in 9737, were ordered with factory tachs.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-19-2010, 06:58 PM
William William is offline
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: New Berlin WI USA
Posts: 2,648
Thanks: 252
Thanked 2,873 Times in 803 Posts
Default Re: COPO 9737

I'm fairly certain U16 did not exist as an option prior to January '69 as it is listed as a change in the 1-2-69 rev of dealer ordering info. The first and second orders Yenko placed were prior to that; 202xxx body numbers were ordered early Nov '68; 219xxx ordered later that month.

The famous COPO service letter states that 9737 &quot;Incorporates a Fuel Gauge Assembly and four related service replacement items applicable to the Camaro 12437 Series vehicles only.&quot;

There is a chart that notes 9737 is “Used as a Vehicle Combination [underlined] with COPO option 9560/9561.”
__________________
Learning more and more about less and less...
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-20-2010, 02:39 PM
PeteLeathersac's Avatar
PeteLeathersac PeteLeathersac is online now
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: O' Canada
Posts: 12,381
Thanks: 18,522
Thanked 5,612 Times in 2,405 Posts
Default Re: COPO 9737

<span style="font-style: italic">&quot;...There is a chart that notes 9737 is “Used as a Vehicle Combination [underlined] with COPO option 9560/9561....&quot;</span>

Obviously that part applies to the '69 cars only...is it dated?.
All above is cool info!.
Is there any factory paper you can share w/ regards to the 9737 equipped 1968 cars?.


[img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/beers.gif[/img]
~ Pete
__________________
I like real cars best...especially the REAL real ones!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-20-2010, 07:13 PM
William William is offline
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: New Berlin WI USA
Posts: 2,648
Thanks: 252
Thanked 2,873 Times in 803 Posts
Default Re: COPO 9737

The COPO service letter was written early January 1969 and revised July 25, 1969. So it applies to 1969 models.

The first draft states no units had been built under the COPO #s listed. The July rev states about 700 units have been built which includes Chevelle.
__________________
Learning more and more about less and less...
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

O Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.