Appraising a rare muscle car

[Guest mystarcollectorcar.com]

Makes me glad that my collection is comprised mostly of Studebakers. For $40 you can request a copy of the build sheet from the Studebaker National Museum and it will show exactly how the car was built. Unfortunately, there are no records for any of my horse drawn vehicles (nor do they have VIN's).

Yet another strong case for Studebaker-they had nothing to hide I guess.

[Guest mystarcollectorcar.com]

I thought about this a little more and I think what really killed the fun in collecting was the monetary side of the options.

If a guy ticked off some kind of weird option list 40 years ago then suddenly the value went through the roof in the 21st century-with documentation.

Then suddenly you had a cottage industry that "aged" documents to fit the car so now you need a full compliment of forensic evidence to document a car.

That sure sucks the pure joy out of the hobby.

Edited November 11, 2009 by mystarcollectorcar.com
spelling (see edit history)

[ted sweet]

mopar VINS after 1966 tell exactly what size etcengine was installed, not just a or 8

How so? For the sake of this discussion, the vin reveals that the car was equipped with a V8, not which one.

Getting back to my original question, if it's unprovable, wouldn't its value be no more than that of a clone?

[1937hd45]

I'll make some popcorn before reading all the expert advice.

I was just asked for my opinion on the value of a 1970 muscle car, perfectly restored. No documentation. I told him the value should not exceed that of a clone. Was I incorrect?

[West Peterson]

A person can spend a lot of money trying to make a clone look like a true muscle car but it is still a clone. No ifs ands or butts

A clone is as good as the real thing, except in value (forgetting about any fraud that may be involved). So, depending on your perspective, a clone may be better.

[West Peterson]

If it is a Chevy and it still has the original drivetrain there is a good chance it can be proven to be an original Muscle Car by an appraiser who has experience with the specific marque. In the Camaro world many high dollar cars are "certified" without any documentation which makes them much more valuble than a clone when sold. My 1969 Camaro has no documentation, but by checking things like the pad stamp on the engine that I have attached, it has been certified as a real muscle car with "born with" drive train. Worth much more than a clone. Of course engines can and are "restamped" to try and fool a buyer. A good expert knows how to spot a restamp.

Billy

Yes. As it turns out, this car was a Chevy (not a Camaro). And I've just found that my appraiser friend did not tell me all the information. The numbers on the engine pad, as Billy has pointed out, do match, and they didn't appear to have been re-stamped. Just no paper documentation.

So my answer on value would have to change. Certainly an authentic paper trail would be good, but as Mystarcollector pointed out, even "aged" documentation exists. sic transit gloria mundi

I think I'd rather just go out and buy a known clone for a fraction of the price, because it would be a whole lot more fun.

[alsancle]

I was just asked for my opinion on the value of a 1970 muscle car, perfectly restored. No documentation. I told him the value should not exceed that of a clone. Was I incorrect?

Yes. You don't mention if the numbers all match (which if taken literally is very hard to do). A fully documented muscle car (especially Mopar or Chevy) is worth more then a numbers matching but not documented car. But a numbers matching car is definitely worth more then a clone car.

Edited November 11, 2009 by alsancle (see edit history)

[Guest Bluesky636]

Yes. As it turns out, this car was a Chevy (not a Camaro). And I've just found that my appraiser friend did not tell me all the information. The numbers on the engine pad, as Billy has pointed out, do match, and they didn't appear to have been re-stamped. Just no paper documentation.

So my answer on value would have to change. Certainly an authentic paper trail would be good, but as Mystarcollector pointed out, even "aged" documentation exists. sic transit gloria mundi

I think I'd rather just go out and buy a known clone for a fraction of the price, because it would be a whole lot more fun.

I'm puzzled as to why you have not stated exactly what the car is supposed to be (other than it is not a Camaro.) Someone may know other ways to tell exactly what the car really is. There are often hidden stampings and unique components that people miss when building a clone.

I once had a lengthy conversation with Greg Donahue regarding a supposed "R" code 1964 Ford Galaxie. He told me all the secret places to look that would verify if the car really was an "R" code. Most of these things would be unknown to someone hoping to replace a 390 with a 427 and pass it off as an "R" code. Sure enough, upon closer examination by the prospective buyer (who I had passed Greg's info on to), the car turned out to be a fake. A good one, but a fake none the less.