am6174uh

Hey everyone! My first post as I have been searching through the forums and need help. I’m looking at a 65 convertible and the vin serial doesn’t add up. Any thoughts or help?

66jack

the rivets look wrong and there's a 'bolt/screw' holding the trim tag on...is this whats not adding up?

am6174uh

if I’m reading the serial number correct, the serial is 190596 and everything I’ve seen for the 65 is 100001 through 123564. The serial exceeds the actual number of cars made that year. Or am incorrect?

am6174uh

yes those are also concerns that I am seeing. Still waiting on more photos from the seller

ptjsk

Yea....the sequence number doesn't add up. Should be between 100001 – 123564.

What does the VIN say on the title? Maybe someone else can provide more insight.

I would definitely tread lightly on this one. Just want to be sure all is legit.

Pat

am6174uh

my thoughts exactly, the car looks great and have received videos of it running, undercarriage, and walk around. I first noticed the rivets, then started dissecting the vin and noticed the bolt/screw on the partially shown option code plate

Vet65te

Andrew - As the other guys have already pointed out, as you did too, that VIN is way off. These days, folks can buy aftermarket VIN and Trim Tags and they ones you posted look very odd.
By the way, welcome to the Corvette Forum. Not sure where you are located in Arizona but if close enough, hopefully you'll have the time to come up to the Annual Prescott Corvette Show.
Back to the 65 you're looking at, can you post up any more pics for us to decipher?
Mike T - Prescott AZ

66jack

There were a little over 23K made...

66jack

Here's mine from my 66 convertible..there were a little over 27K produced/made

am6174uh

Mike, thanks for the welcome. I’m stationed in Yuma so not too far. Hopefully I can make it up there for the show!

as for the car all add these photos and see what everyone thinks

am6174uh

exactly my concern

am6174uh

thanks for the welcome Mike! I’m stationed in Yuma so not too far. Hopefully I can make it to the show. I added more photos to the original post as I think my original reply to you was too long

66jack

The dash has screws holding them it on instead of rivets...the door 'lock' area has exposed rivets that are wrong all wrong..

67:72

There are certainly errors on VIN tags... I don't know how the stamping machine worked and whether each tag was manually entered as far as the sequence number progressed. The 9 should be a 0, and could have been human error.

If we assume the VIN is 194675S100596, this places the car in the first week of production. Cars up to about 7700 used round rivets after which the transition to rosette rivets began.

Hopefully it's got the original engine... what does the engine stamp VIN look like?
Does it have the Protect-o-plate in the owner's book?
The transmission should (?) also have the partial VIN beginning with the "S".
What does the frame stamp look like?

I'm curious about these alternate VIN stampings.

am6174uh

thank you, this is exactly what I needed to hear / know.

67:72

Addendum:
New pics posted while I was composing my reply above. I'd steer far and clear of this car. Even giving the benefit of the doubt on the VIN tag being human error, there are too many other weird things, most of all, the '64 interior. Those gauges and the textured dash/waterfall are not '65. The gauges should be flat-faced, satin black; the dash should be smooth matte finish. The seats and door panels are also the 1964 style.

I'm thinking this car has been assembled from various years and who knows what the real VIN is.

am6174uh

I am going to! Thank you for the additional discrepancies you’ve pointed out. A frankenvette is definitely not what I want to get into!

Duck916

Assuming that 9 in the VIN should have been a 0, the car is a very early build as noted above. What is the sequence number on the trim tag?

Tampa Jerry

Maybe it's me, are those gauges from a 63/64? Jerry

dcamick

That is Correct!!!