'67 COPO 427 at Bloomington Tank Sticker - NCRS Discussion Boards

'67 COPO 427 at Bloomington Tank Sticker

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Michael J.
    Extremely Frequent Poster
    • January 26, 2009
    • 7078

    #16
    Re: '67 COPO 427 at Bloomington Tank Sticker

    Originally posted by Tim Gilmore (16887)
    It's not unusual to see the production date as '66 instead of '67 if the date received is in 1966. Here's the tank sticker on the car I drove to the Judging Retreat in February. I've never seen both years incorrect like this one. [ATTACH=CONFIG]47044[/ATTACH]
    I would also hate to have to explain this to a prospective buyer.
    Big Tanks In the High Mountains of New Mexico

    Comment

    • John S.
      Very Frequent User
      • May 4, 2008
      • 424

      #17
      Re: '67 COPO 427 at Bloomington Tank Sticker

      My tank sticker off my Jan. 3rd 1967 produced car is similar to Tim's. I believe it took them a while to correct the "66" date as I have personally seen more then one. Believe others have posted about it here also. My only question is if it happened any other years. I have only seen examples that crossed over from 66 into 67. Any one else know?
      John Seeley
      67 Black/Teal
      300 hp 3 speed coupe
      65 Maroon/Black
      35k mile Fuelie coupe

      Comment

      • Tim G.
        Extremely Frequent Poster
        • February 28, 1990
        • 1359

        #18
        Re: '67 COPO 427 at Bloomington Tank Sticker

        There are numerous examples of January 1967 production vehicles with '66 being typed on the tank sticker. This is not unusual. I have lots of 1967 Corvette tank sheets in my files with this characteristic. I don't have any with December '66 listed as December '67, though.

        Comment

        • Brian M.
          Extremely Frequent Poster
          • January 31, 1997
          • 1837

          #19
          Re: '67 COPO 427 at Bloomington Tank Sticker

          My tank sticker has the same date as your's, pencil # 470.
          Originally posted by Tim Gilmore (16887)
          It's not unusual to see the production date as '66 instead of '67 if the date received is in 1966. Here's the tank sticker on the car I drove to the Judging Retreat in February. I've never seen both years incorrect like this one. [ATTACH=CONFIG]47044[/ATTACH]

          Comment

          • Michael J.
            Extremely Frequent Poster
            • January 26, 2009
            • 7078

            #20
            Re: '67 COPO 427 at Bloomington Tank Sticker

            A No Sale at $110K, guess the caveats were emptored.....
            Big Tanks In the High Mountains of New Mexico

            Comment

            • Bill H.
              Expired
              • August 8, 2011
              • 439

              #21
              Re: '67 COPO 427 at Bloomington Tank Sticker

              Originally posted by Tim Gilmore (16887)
              There are numerous examples of January 1967 production vehicles with '66 being typed on the tank sticker. This is not unusual. I have lots of 1967 Corvette tank sheets in my files with this characteristic. I don't have any with December '66 listed as December '67, though.
              Yep, here's my 67 with a 02-10-66 Exp. date:
              Attached Files

              Comment

              • Philip C.
                Extremely Frequent Poster
                • November 30, 1984
                • 1117

                #22
                Re: '67 COPO 427 at Bloomington Tank Sticker

                As the saying goes "a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing" Phil 8063

                Comment

                • Terry M.
                  Beyond Control Poster
                  • September 30, 1980
                  • 15575

                  #23
                  Re: '67 COPO 427 at Bloomington Tank Sticker

                  Originally posted by Philip Castaldo (8063)
                  As the saying goes "a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing" Phil 8063
                  And no knowledge is even more dangerous.

                  Edit add: I have been told my above post could be misconstrued as a personal reference to Phil. That was NOT my intent, Perhaps the below will clarify.

                  If a little bit of knowledge is dangerous, how much more dangerous is NO knowledge?

                  This is analogous to the statement many of you have heard me make often:

                  The only thing more expensive than a good education is no education.
                  Last edited by Terry M.; July 4, 2013, 02:39 PM. Reason: clarification
                  Terry

                  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 "|||"