VIN Discrepancy?

[Xcudame]

Lawrence thought the door sticker was a reproduction.

 

[fasjac]

yea, gotta be sure everything is right.
Example of what I’m trying to verify now.
If this fish pans out, I’ll own it soon but, not until it’s the really that car.

 

[Xcudame]

Fasjac, I see your point. Looks like DS23V0B and I guessing this is a Cuda and not a Dodge Polara/Monaco.

 

[fasjac]

Fasjac, I see your point. Looks like DS23V0B and I guessing this is a Cuda and not a Dodge Polara/Monaco.

Ha, that’s right, v code red fish 4 speed and Dana. Could be very neat.

 

[Xcudame]

Of course a special built one of none Dodge Polara with a 440 six-pack would be a head turner! A weird forgotten prototype.

 

[pschlosser]

But wouldn't the date on the door sticker reflect the actual build date, instead of the SPD? The date on the door sticker for this car is 11-1969.

The date on the door sticker should indeed be the authority of the build date, when it passed through the assembly line, and when the VIN number was assigned.

 

[Cuda_mark]

Hi guys, I am looking at a 70 Cuda, and the build date per the fender tag is A30 (October 30 1969) Tag does look real. There is no build sheet and the door sticker is a repro (I think). So The vin sequence begins 322XXXX which seems as if the car should had been built well into 1970. Am I correct on this?

I recently sold an AAR with a 311 build date and and the Vin started 277XXXX

My car has a scheduled production date of 313 and the vin is 2765XX

 

[Lawrence Shaw]

I have confirmation that the title matches the VIN on the dash and the other places on the car.

It was brought up that The code G36 is usually seen on 71 MY cars or late 70 MY cars, the early cars call out the side view mirrors separately, (IE G31, G33) Again, not set in stone but just a “guideline”

 

[Raycuda]

Fender Tag

http://[URL]https://www.forebodieso...production-date-c-for-my-1970-cuda-340.27992/

[/URL]
View attachment 109511

I have a BS23 H0B 234 and the build date on my fender tag reads 114.

 

[Xcudame]

Cuda_Mark and Raycuda, I'm curious if your cars have Y05 (or U) in the fender tag. That would give additional credibility to Pschlosser's solution of the cars being ordered early, but not built until later so they have a higher sequence number.

 

[MoparCarGuy]

The BS23H0B322011 car for sale has a valid 322011 on the Dash VIN tag and the radiator support VIN location. The cowl VIN location is hard to make out. The 3 is there but the next digit looks more like a 6 than a 2. Same for the proposed 0 location which looks to be something else. Picture is poor quality for cowl VIN. Original Ad LINK
The repro fender tag has the wrong SPD (A30) on it. I agree that it is likely supposed to be 430 (April 30, 1970), not October 30 (repro fender tag) or 11-1969 (repro door VIN label).
Here are the pictures provided in the ad. A factory broadcast sheet would quickly clear all of this up.
Also, the Y05 is very common and only denotes the car was built to US specifications. It is on almost every fender tag.

My conclusion is this is a mid-year Cuda 340 with VIN BS23H0B322011 and a repro fender tag and repro door VIN label.

 

[Xcudame]

Good job MoparCarGuy. Now that I look at the fender tag again as a reproduction, if it was original, wouldn't it have one corner bent up and one screw (zinc plated) unpainted? At least that's how I've seen them. I still don't like the ad stating it's a November car if it's actually an April car though. And they should be forthright if the fender tag and door VIN are reproduced.
Also, looks like someone bought it for $48k.

 

[Deathproofcuda]

Good job MoparCarGuy. Now that I look at the fender tag again as a reproduction, if it was original, wouldn't it have one corner bent up and one screw (zinc plated) unpainted? At least that's how I've seen them. I still don't like the ad stating it's a November car if it's actually an April car though. And they should be forthright if the fender tag and door VIN are reproduced.
Also, looks like someone bought it for $48k.

BAT is showing that it was bid to $48,750, but no sale.

 

[pschlosser]

BAT is showing that it was bid to $48,750, but no sale.

Unrestored, it may not be worth much more than that.

 

[Cuda_mark]

Cuda_Mark and Raycuda, I'm curious if your cars have Y05 (or U) in the fender tag. That would give additional credibility to Pschlosser's solution of the cars being ordered early, but not built until later so they have a higher sequence number.

Mine does have the Y05 on the tag

 

[pschlosser]

Hey, just an FYI. I went through my collection of fender tags, last night, and I must say, the SPD and VIN sequence numbers were all over the place. I'm feeling more confident the A30 this is a non-issue. Yes, it's an oddity, but I don't see any evidence of wrong doing with those numbers.

Some examples from the LA plant

VIN Seq	SPD	Order Num	Mylar Date
123997	C05	062467	10-1969
127960	106	132454	03-1970
129284	121	108346	11-1969
131354	205	046515	12-1969
133740	223	156211	12-1969
138898	402	150503	02-1970

 

[Cuda Hunter]

Interesting.

 

[Lawrence Shaw]

Wow, pschlosser you are right those number are all over the board. But I do wonder about that tag. With no bent edge points me in the direction of a repo tag. I am no tag expert but the fonts do look good to me. I own a 69 Charger RT that my neighbor owned while I was in High School and know the car well. It has a bent edge on the tag, two different size screws and when I removed it during restoration there was a piece of foil under the tag.
The AAR I just sold, was rock solid on originality, the tag was bent large piece of foil under the tag, build sheet, original window sticker etc.
This BAT car looked fairly dry to me, and the seller really was not very helpful by not providing and pictures of the tranny and the engine in the crate. I did notice the casting date of the intake manifold being January 22, 1969 so the engine probably not original.
Does it look like to you guys the quarters had been replaced?

 

[pschlosser]

It's probably a reproduction tag. They probably added options to improve its value. It's been painted, and it looks like a proper restoration. Perhaps done so well, we may never know the truth. The seller seems shrewd. Regardless, its a nice restoration.

It's still a 340 car not worth (to me) much over its current near $50K mark. No one is going to make a profit flipping this car.

The quarter panel work is easy to spot if you know where to look, but the pictures don't show it.

 

[Lawrence Shaw]

The car is an H code car, 340.
I agree with you on the tag, and options.