67 California delivered JC code

[Charles A.]

Re: 67 California delevered JC code

Thanks everyone for the input. I am about a year away from having it Judged but I plan on presenting everything to the Judges and see what they think? I am tryong to run down past history of the car but my guess is whoever bought it my have taken it to a neighboring state and titled it or someone in Calif. did not care. It was not a race car but had power brakes, steering etc. Anybody know if Bliss and Paden chevrolet in Los Angelos is still around or kept any records? The original owner was R.H. Walker, 4262 Arcola Ave. North Hollywood, Calif anyone have any knowledge of him?

[Gerard F.]

Re: 67 California delevered JC code

I think on the issue of K19 on a 67 car, it would depend upon where the car was first registered rather than where it was delivered. The issue of a smog certificate would have come up upon CA registration, and would depend upon where the car was first or previously registered.

I brought my Penn. 67 with Virginia plates to CA in 1969. When I registered it in CA, I had to get a smog certificate. Since it was an out of state registered car, I had no problem without the K19. But I keep the smog certificate preserved in plastic.

Also, I think it was a practice in the 60's and 70's to register a CA car in Nevada to avoid the taxes due with registration. I think they eventually passed a regulation or law against this.

So Charles, I don't think they are going to check your POP if you try to register it in CA.

[Joel F.]

Re: 67 California delevered JC code

Charles,

Zabasearch brings back a large number of R. H. Walkers in CA. For a number of them it gives the year of birth, so you can omit anyone born after say 1950 (what a lucky 17 year old that would have been!)

http://www.zabasearch.com/query1_zab...le=1&tm=&tmr=1

If you are feeling bold, you might let your fingers do the walking. Otherwise you could try mailing a number of letters, but I'd say it is a long shot in either case.

Joel

[John H.]

Re: 67 California delevered JC code

I plan on presenting everything to the Judges and see what they think?

I'd recommend just presenting the car, be cordial, and stand back and let the judges do their thing without bringing up any non-judged peripheral questions that may confuse the issue and invite further scrutiny.

[Joe L.]

Re: 67 California delevered JC code

Thanks everyone for the input. I am about a year away from having it Judged but I plan on presenting everything to the Judges and see what they think? I am tryong to run down past history of the car but my guess is whoever bought it my have taken it to a neighboring state and titled it or someone in Calif. did not care. It was not a race car but had power brakes, steering etc. Anybody know if Bliss and Paden chevrolet in Los Angelos is still around or kept any records? The original owner was R.H. Walker, 4262 Arcola Ave. North Hollywood, Calif anyone have any knowledge of him?

Charles-----


I've lived most of my life in California, although virtually all of that has been in northern California. Still, I've spent a lot of time in southern California since all of my mother's family lived or lives there. I've never even heard of Bliss and Paden Chevrolet. It must have been a small dealer as once were quite "prolific" in southern California. I can tell you, for sure, that they are not still in business, at least not under that name and I don't think they've been in business for a LONG time.

[Joe L.]

Re: 67 California delevered JC code

I think on the issue of K19 on a 67 car, it would depend upon where the car was first registered rather than where it was delivered. The issue of a smog certificate would have come up upon CA registration, and would depend upon where the car was first or previously registered.

I brought my Penn. 67 with Virginia plates to CA in 1969. When I registered it in CA, I had to get a smog certificate. Since it was an out of state registered car, I had no problem without the K19. But I keep the smog certificate preserved in plastic.

Also, I think it was a practice in the 60's and 70's to register a CA car in Nevada to avoid the taxes due with registration. I think they eventually passed a regulation or law against this.

So Charles, I don't think they are going to check your POP if you try to register it in CA.

Jerry-----


In the 60's, as well as today, the vast majority of cars were ordered by dealers for stock. In 1967, if a dealer in California ordered a car for stock, it would have been equipped with K-19 if it was required to be so equipped in California. There may have been some provision for omitting this requirement if the dealer was specifically ordering a car for an out-of-state customer, but I doubt it. It would have been more trouble than it was worth. In this case, though, there doesn't seem to be any doubt that the car was originally sold by a California dealer to a California resident. Whether it was originally ORDERED by that dealer only the build sheet will reveal.

In the latter case, the only way that I can see that a car could have been sold without K-19 (AND with a non-K-19 engine code) is if the car was dealer traded from a dealer out of California. That practice was very common. As far as getting the car "past smog", it was nowhere near as complicated and difficult as it is today. Plus, if there were any ways "around it", I'm sure the dealers would have been completely "in the know" as to what needed to be done. To make a sale, dealers will often "jump through a lot of hoops", especially if it's a full MSRP sale. So, if a customer in North Hollywood buying a car from Bliss and Padden Chevrolet wanted a a Corvette equipped a certain way and a dealer in, say, Las Vegas was the closest one that had such a car, the folks at Bliss and Padden Chevrolet would find a way to get it. Dealers ALWAYS want to get a customer in a car as soon as possible rather than ordering one since the customer might change his mind between the time of ordering and the time an ordered car gets there.

The other possibility is that Bliss and Padden Chevrolet had a Corvette that a dealer in, say, Las Vegas wanted. In that case, Bliss and Padden would have gotten a Corvette from from the Las Vegas dealer in exchange for the one they had. In that period, dealers were only allotted so many Corvettes, so they didn't want to "give up" a Corvette to another dealer without getting a Corvette in return. They were much more "flexible" when "giving up" other types of cars that they could order as many as they wanted of.

I'm very confident that if Bliss and Padden Chevrolet had a non-K-19 equipped Corvette as a result of a dealer trade, they would have found a way to sell it in California without retrofitting K-19. If they had to do the latter, it would have taken all the profit out of the sale.

[Wayne M.]

Re: 67 California delevered JC code

Just an aside (not to highjack), but was it only Calif. in 1966 and '67 where A.I.R. was mandatory ?

In Canada (Ontario dealer ?) there was a loaded '67 coupe ordered (and I suppose delivered) with K19, when exhaust emissions were not an issue in any province, AFAIK.

VIN 6008, Coupe, BLK/blk L, tint, headrests, shoulder belts, A/C, 400hp 4sp, posi, T.I., A.I.R. [02K19GB], side exhaust, P/S, whitewalls, radio, extra antifreeze protection.

[Jack H.]

Re: 67 California delevered JC code

Other variations on the theme Joe recites might include:

(1) Buyer is in California, but intends to register & garage the car at his second home on the Nevada side of Lake Tahoe.

(2) Buyer is in California, but is purchasing the car for his son who's in the service, based in Hawaii.

I can probably dream up a few other scenarios that could/would fit the facts, but does it really matter? Often legislation is written tightly to read on cars manufactured for sale after XX/YY/ZZ in the State of AAAAA as well as cars newly delivered/registered in the State of AAAAA.

So, sometimes it takes a close reading of the particular statute to fully understand what 'loopholes' were originally embodied....

[Joe L.]

Re: 67 California delevered JC code

Just an aside (not to highjack), but was it only Calif. in 1966 and '67 where A.I.R. was mandatory ?

In Canada (Ontario dealer ?) there was a loaded '67 coupe ordered (and I suppose delivered) with K19, when exhaust emissions were not an issue in any province, AFAIK.

VIN 6008, Coupe, BLK/blk L, tint, headrests, shoulder belts, A/C, 400hp 4sp, posi, T.I., A.I.R. [02K19GB], side exhaust, P/S, whitewalls, radio, extra antifreeze protection.

Wayne----


I believe that K-19 was only required for California-delivered cars and not required for cars delivered anywhere else.

GM ordering information of of 1966 stated with respect to K-19: "Approved by the State of California and exclusive to California vehicle registration only".

The above implies that only California-delivered cars could be ordered with K-19 although the reference to "vehicle registration" is somewhat ambiguous since there's no way, on ordering, anyone at GM could know, for certain, where the vehicle was going to be initially registered. However, as a practical matter, I suspect that if K-19 had been ordered by a dealer in any state or country, the car would have been built as-ordered with little or no question. For one thing, GM would have no way of knowing if a particular dealer, regardless of where located, might not have a customer in California that ordered the vehicle. Dealers have always been free to sell cars to customers in any state or country. However, I kind of expect that GM would not have shipped a car without K-19 to a California dealer regardless of where the dealer said the car was going to be initially registered. I suspect that they'd think there was too much chance for "hanky-panky" that could get GM in trouble with California authorities. But, it's possible they would have done it.

[Charles A.]

Re: 67 California delevered JC code

Thanks everyone for your thoughts I think one of your responses is the answer to the riddle.

[Jack H.]

Re: 67 California delevered JC code

The Black Book has a footnote associated with the K19 option to the effect it was not restricted to California cars and available to any/all ordering dealers...

[Steven B.]

Re: 67 California delevered JC code

Thanks everyone for your thoughts I think one of your responses is the answer to the riddle.

Charles, search the Sept. 2nd, I believe, Rich DeSanna post and replies which cover RPO NA9. Alot of good info there!

Steve

[Dennis D.]

Re: 67 California delevered JC code

Just an aside (not to highjack), but was it only Calif. in 1966 and '67 where A.I.R. was mandatory ?

In Canada (Ontario dealer ?) there was a loaded '67 coupe ordered (and I suppose delivered) with K19, when exhaust emissions were not an issue in any province, AFAIK.

VIN 6008, Coupe, BLK/blk L, tint, headrests, shoulder belts, A/C, 400hp 4sp, posi, T.I., A.I.R. [02K19GB], side exhaust, P/S, whitewalls, radio, extra antifreeze protection.

wayne midkiff (3437) where did u get your info on car 6008 thanks

[Wayne M.]

Re: 67 California delevered JC code

wayne midkiff (3437) where did u get your info on car 6008 thanks

GM Canuck -- Monthly Shipping Report .

[Dennis D.]

Re: 67 California delevered JC code

GM Canuck -- Monthly Shipping Report .

never herd of that . this car was orderd by a ont dealer and did have the smog on the car for about a week or so. how can i get a copy of that report . this is my car