groovyjay

No need to say more... Enjoy!!!

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/aw-cg...item=598298738

67HEAVEN

Would I?
Could I?
Should I?
:conehead

SuperFast80

There is just NOTHING on the face of the Earth that could satisfy me more than that car. :crazy: That's right, I said NOTHING.

Bob, if you are interested, I'll pitch in in if it guarantees me a ride or two! ;)

Steve Straus

Stunning. For once a nice Vette on ebay. I'm not sure about the asking price, but if it really is a real L-88 (and it looks convincing) then maybe it's about right.

For my money I'd rather find a nice NOM ragtop and build one that looks just like it. for about 30K less I'd have one that I can actually drive and not worry about.

03whitecoupe

What I wouldn't give to drive that for a day! Awesome car.

rainman69

So, not trying to burst a bubble or anything...but what the heck is a "TT" code motor? Aren't L-88 manual transmission cars "MR?"

Why does it have a heater hose coming off the intake? And why is the VIN for a coupe?

I'm just a skeptic, I guess...

:smash:

groovyjay

Good points made.... You have to be very careful when you are buying online and talking about large amounts of money! :confused:

Chris Fowler

Anyone wanna buy it for me? :D

thanksgiving present. :yesnod:

Allan71

Sharp eyes there rainman. You are difintely right about the VIN, it should begin with 19467... for a convertible. Don't see how the car could have been awarded a Gold Certificate with a non-standard VIN. I guess it could be a typo because there are obviously (or maybe not) other typos in his ad.

The TT suffix is probably IT which was the 1968 L-88 code. Again we are supposed to assume that he has now made another typo in an add for this valuable of a car? I don't know but it seems strange. I can only guess that the very early 1969 L-88s could have used the late leftover 68 engines and would have carried the 68 code since the engine assembly date is 08/29/68, but this is too big a guess to take with a car this expensive. I would need to find out what the deal is for sure. Anybody know? One other thing on the codes, the early 69 M-22 L-88 was coded LO. Around Feb of 69, the M codes appeared to denote the presence of Transistor Ignitions on those such engines. Since TI was required on the L-88, the new codes were MR for manual or MS for automatic.

The heater hose configuration off the intake looks funny, but is correct.

Maurice

I agree!!!! I think that is the way to go, less worries that way. I would be scared to leave a real L-88 in a parking lot somewhere.

rainman69

Hmm...I wondered about it being the '68 IT code, and the block is a 4-bolt casting by the number...well, here's an email that I got back on my questions (we'll see about more pictures):

"Thank you for your interest in my L 88. I will not be albe to get to the car until next week as I am selling it for a friend who is out of town for the holidays. The car is the real McCoy, rest assured.

I do have a copy of the Bloomington Judging sheet which I can fax to you if you supply a number.

If you care to have your questions answered quickly, please call Larry at (xxx)-xxx-xxxx. He is curretnly in Califronia and has his cell phone on. Otherwise I will get you the photos next week."

:smash:

rainman69

Oh, and other things I forgot to mention:

There should be a "T" at the beginning of the engine code...for the plant it was built in. The pad VIN doesn't seem right either...

I know there are sometimes typos, my VIN is typed wrong on the sales receipt from the original dealer. Granted, it matches the Protecto-Plate and all parts that had the VIN on them match the VIN on the pillar, but there is the typo "6" instead of "3" on the sales receipt. It also makes sense, because the salesman also made another typo and crossed it out...

Oh, and the guess on the '68 code for the engine, it makes sense as all the hose clamps are the tower design used in '68 (if I remember right). We'll see how this pans out.

I guess I'm just skeptical with high dollar cars (heck, I was skeptical with mine until I crawled everywhere on it looking for numbers before buying)...and ever since, I've been more and more pleased with the originality of my car. If it is the real thing, well I hope somebody enjoys it. I'd buy it and drive the snot out of it. :D

:smash:


[Modified by rainman69, 12:04 PM 11/22/2001]

Rowdy Rat

With a just a couple exceptions, most of the 1969 L-88s built prior to the strike that I've seen are coded "IT" (I think the "TT" might be a misprint). The only "MR" coded 1969 L-88 I've seen was a pre-strike automatic (coincidentally, it was also a red/black/white top car restored by Tim Thorpe - go figure). Just about all the L-88s built after the strike have "LO" or "LV" coded engines.

All 1968-69 L-88s had heaters. Federal regs beginning in 1968 required a defroster... so a heater became standard. 1967 L-88s on the other hand required option C-48 which deleted the heater for credit.

No clue about the VIN... Possible that it is another typo I guess. Tim Thorpe restored a bunch of L-88s over the years and I would bet that he would have caught this if it was a real problem.

As far as being a skeptic... That's the best approach to take with L-88s. :)

Regards,

kaiserbud

Skepticism should be a prerequisite during any purchase of an L88... An expert's input would be my requirement, but it does sound like the car can be traced and has plenty of credible documentation.

A good friend of mine has a real L88. Just reading the article/ad was incredible...What a car !!!! I have been taken for a ride in my buddy's - yes I needed a diaper change afterwards.

I do agree that I would rather have a car I could drive rather than one like this that could only sit. :cool:

91DRM

Good job planning ahead on wearing diapers instead of underwear! That was a plan ahead thing wasn't it? :D :eek: :lol:

QuickVet

i am going to buy it so dont bid okey guys :jester

The Wanderer

Hey.... my car looks like that one! 'Cept it has a 350 in it! But, I don't care... cuz I drive mine all the time :lol: :lol: :lol:

MotorHead

I can't believe anyone would spend that kind of money without seeing the car
in person. :crazy:

theanswriz42

I wonder what the responce would be if someone e-mailed him and asked him about all these inconsistancies (sp?).

rainman69

I posted the response already (up above). He just told me "don't worry, it's real."

:smash: