COPO's and SO's - NCRS Discussion Boards

COPO's and SO's

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Steven B.
    Extremely Frequent Poster
    • June 30, 1982
    • 3978

    COPO's and SO's

    Are COPO's and SO's still in existance within GM? If not, when did they go out of existance?
  • John D.
    Very Frequent User
    • June 30, 1991
    • 874

    #2
    Re: COPO's and SO's

    Steven,

    I worked in GM car, minivan and truck plants and do not recall anything like a COPO where are car or truck could be built with other than the standard list of options and/or colors for a customer.

    There were plenty of special prototypes and pilot vehicles built but none of them were ever sold to customers. They usually had an "EX" suffix in the VIN. Most of the early low numbered VIN's were for marketing, Engineering and test fleet. If these were built with the latest approved design intent parts or could easily be retrofitted they could be sold.
    Otherwise they're eventually scrapped. Way too much legal liability otherwise.

    Can't speak at all about Corvette but I imagine it was similar. hope this helps.

    jd

    Comment

    • John H.
      Beyond Control Poster
      • November 30, 1997
      • 16513

      #3
      Re: COPO's and SO's

      The last active COPO's I remember being involved with were on the '69 Camaro. #9561 was the L-72 427/425hp engine, most of which were ordered by Yenko Chevrolet, and many of those had #9737 "Sports Car Conversion" (added 140mph speedo, 13/16" front stabilizer bar, and Z/28 15x7 rally wheels with E70-15 Goodyear Wide Tread GT tires). About 600 of these were built.

      #9560 was the ZL-1 aluminum 427 with K66 Transistor Ignition; I supervised the dress of the engines for the first 50 cars at Norwood in February of 1969. We built 69 of these.

      I believe the 1970 Camaro had a COPO for the "tall" rear spoiler introduced in 1971, but I don't recall the number. The '70 Chevelle had at least one COPO, but I didn't follow Chevelles in those days.

      Contrary to common "wisdom", 99.9% of the COPO's issued were for mundane paint and component changes on trucks, taxicabs, police cars, school bus chassis, etc.

      I recall that there were over 800 different released combinations of front, center, and rear driveshafts, yokes, U-joints, and center bearings on the Truck Line at Flint Assembly, and that wasn't enough.

      Comment

      • Jean C.
        Expired
        • June 30, 2003
        • 688

        #4
        Re: COPO's and SO's

        [quote=John Hinckley (29964);

        I recall that there were over 800 different released combinations of front, center, and rear driveshafts, yokes, U-joints, and center bearings on the Truck Line at Flint Assembly, and that wasn't enough. [/quote]

        John, that is absolutely amazing! Why on earth would there be so many operator requirements for such driveline components?
        Best regards,

        Comment

        • Dick W.
          Former NCRS Director Region IV
          • June 30, 1985
          • 10483

          #5
          Re: COPO's and SO's

          Charlie, you should have worked in parts at a dealership. Would be nothing to have 5 or 6 possibilities on a particular series of a truck. Blood Brothers, Spicer, Timken, and another manufacturer or two of joints. They would not interchange with each other. Ford, from what I understand, was the worst on driveline parts
          Dick Whittington

          Comment

          • Art A.
            Expired
            • June 30, 1984
            • 834

            #6
            Re: COPO's and SO's

            Comment

            • Steven G.
              Expired
              • November 16, 2008
              • 348

              #7
              Re: COPO's and SO's

              There is a pilot car, #6, lt-1, listed at 70' corvette registry, I consider this a "RARE " 70' corvette. Could there be others ? Steve

              Comment

              • Terry M.
                Beyond Control Poster
                • September 30, 1980
                • 15578

                #8
                Re: COPO's and SO's

                Steve,
                I remind you that those entries, as with many registries, are made by the car owner. I had an opportunity to examine 1970 #6, and while there is some evidence the car was once an LT1 -- it is far from conclusive.
                However, it is one of the 1970 pilot cars built during the 1969 model year.
                Terry

                Comment

                • Joe L.
                  Beyond Control Poster
                  • January 31, 1988
                  • 43196

                  #9
                  Re: COPO's and SO's

                  Originally posted by Steven Brohard (5759)
                  Are COPO's and SO's still in existance within GM? If not, when did they go out of existance?

                  Steven------

                  In the context of what we all think of as COPO's and SO's (i.e. special engine and performance packages), I greatly doubt that anything like it survives today. There are just too many regulatory (i.e. EPA and DOT) hurdles and too much liability exposure. Plus, given the immense complexity of current cars (mostly as a result of the aforementioned), any "special" configuration would require considerable re-engineering at a prohibitive cost and not just a "sign off" at the central office.

                  However, there must be some sort of process for certain things (the sort of things that the COPO's were most widely used for in the old days as John mentioned). Things like special paint for police cars, fleet vehicles for utilities and governments, and, even, things like Mary Kay Cosmetics "award vehicles".
                  In Appreciation of John Hinckley

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  Searching...Please wait.
                  An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because you have logged in since the previous page was loaded.

                  Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
                  An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because the token has expired.

                  Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
                  An internal error has occurred and the module cannot be displayed.
                  There are no results that meet this criteria.
                  Search Result for "|||"