69 L89 At Barrett-jackson

[Tom M.]

350 original miles, restored?? why ? bill of sale only .,, do you guys have any info on the car ? Thanks & Merry Christmas to all..

http://www.barrett-jackson.com/Events/Event/Details/1969-CHEVROLET-CORVETTE-L89-CONVERTIBLE-179899

[Tom M.]

Re: 69 L89 At Barrett-jackson

http://www.barrett-jackson.com/Events/Event/Details/1969-CHEVROLET-CORVETTE-L89-CONVERTIBLE-179899

[Patrick B.]

Re: 69 L89 At Barrett-jackson

350 original miles, restored?? why ? bill of sale only .,, do you guys have any info on the car ? Thanks & Merry Christmas to all..
http://www.barrett-jackson.com/Event...ERTIBLE-179899

If it still has the original MSO, it means it has never been titled. The MSO is like a title from GM to the dealer. It is turned in to the state DMV when the first purchaser gets a title. In this case, the owner would not have a title so a bill of sale is the only form of ownership he can convey. Hopefully, your state DMV will not question a 45 year old MSO if you try to title it.

Doing a frame off restoration on a 350 mile car would devalue it today, but maybe that wasn't the case 30 years ago.

[Tim G.]

Re: 69 L89 At Barrett-jackson

I heard about this car last weekend and there were lots of questions and not many answers. I'd be concerned about buying a car on a bill of sale only. I'd think someone could question your ownership. Why the restoration? Lots and lots of questions, but maybe it's a legitimate good car.

[Mike F.]

Re: 69 L89 At Barrett-jackson

I saw this car at the Heart of Ohio Judging Meet in April 2014. I believe it is from Tennessee, Danny something or other(?). IIRC the car just sat for years and years, wasn't stored properly. Again, IIRC most if not all of the parts on the car are original to it, just restored as needed. He even had the original tires it was delivered from St. Louis with. Paul O. and John B. were two of the Judges that weekend.

[Michael F.]

Re: 69 L89 At Barrett-jackson

ask your dmv before you go, sounds fishy about restoring a low mileage car but in todays world who knows.

[Tim G.]

Re: 69 L89 At Barrett-jackson

Wow, very pretty and probably all there.

[Dave S.]

Re: 69 L89 At Barrett-jackson

[QUOTE=Tim Gilmore (16887);729819]Wow, very pretty and probably all there.[/QUOTE

Why would've the seller have obtained a title prior to consigning it to BJ.?
Seems it would have saved a lot of speculation.

[Philip A.]

Re: 69 L89 At Barrett-jackson

Interesting the BJ photos show side exhaust versus the above. If not originally a side exhaust car, why would you add to such an original documented car? It would only hurt value.

[Rich G.]

Re: 69 L89 At Barrett-jackson

Stupid question from me: my 68 L71 has no coolant expansion tank and this 69 does. Was this a change from 68 to 69 or because it's an L89?

Rich

[Bob H.]

Re: 69 L89 At Barrett-jackson

I would want to see photos of the car before restoration. Surely, they would have taken many of the car.

[John C.]

Re: 69 L89 At Barrett-jackson

Stupid question from me: my 68 L71 has no coolant expansion tank and this 69 does. Was this a change from 68 to 69 or because it's an L89?

Rich

Rich

It was a change from 1968 to 1969. 1968 L71/L89 used the direct fill radiator with no expansion tank, in 1969 they switched to the indirect fill radiator with expansion tank.

John

[Rich G.]

Re: 69 L89 At Barrett-jackson

John

Thank you

Rich

[Gene M.]

Re: 69 L89 At Barrett-jackson

Why would side pipes be added to a car that has less than 400 miles? The entire front of the engine has gobs of orange paint applied, again why? Too much under the hood that does not look 45 years old. Such things as the master cylinder cover and wiper canister look fresh as hell. A arm cup washers and bolts has no black? Exhaust manifolds cast sprayed? Not a truthful surviver as too much looks fussed with for 400 miles.

[John D.]

Re: 69 L89 At Barrett-jackson

To me it looks like a fully restored car...there's no patina in that engine compartment. Definitely not a 350 mile Bowtie candidate.