Jump to content

Need input on this '70 at auction


Recommended Posts

Hey gang. Lookin at this car and considering going to Greensboro this week to inspect in person. It's an auction so I won't buy it without looking at it. Also because it's an auction, information and photos are very limited. Does anyone see any obvious red flags in any of the pics or info? I do see that it's claimed to be a 1970 but I see the rear trim from a 1972. A/C hose missing from compressor to evaporator. Steering wheel split. What do you guys see? Is there a member close to or local to the Greensboro, NC area who I could pay to look at it for me?

https://www.gaaclassiccars.com/vehicles/36462/1970-chevrolet-monte-carlo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VIN indicates it is a 70 and so does interior looks like a 70 with the 72 rear trim added.  What I am seeing is listed below:

  • After market radio but can't tell if dash has been cut/altered to install
  • Drivers seat back has been changed and does not have the stitching so doesn't match passenger seat
  • In one of the pictures of the sail panel with the Monte Script it looks like the paint is very "Orange Peel"
  • 71-72 tail light lens bezels
  • No Grill Emblem
  • Rally Center Caps are not the derby style, they are the flatter type
  • Burlwood on left side of the steering wheel peeling or chipped

in reality it is nothing that could not be corrected.  More pictures of the undercarriage would be nice.  Also, unless I missed it I don't see the mileage listed which would be nice to know.

rob

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rob Peters said:

VIN indicates it is a 70 and so does interior looks like a 70 with the 72 rear trim added.  What I am seeing is listed below:

  • After market radio but can't tell if dash has been cut/altered to install
  • Drivers seat back has been changed and does not have the stitching so doesn't match passenger seat
  • In one of the pictures of the sail panel with the Monte Script it looks like the paint is very "Orange Peel"
  • 71-72 tail light lens bezels
  • No Grill Emblem
  • Rally Center Caps are not the derby style, they are the flatter type
  • Burlwood on left side of the steering wheel peeling or chipped

in reality it is nothing that could not be corrected.  More pictures of the undercarriage would be nice.  Also, unless I missed it I don't see the mileage listed which would be nice to know.

rob

 

Thanks Rob. Great eyes. 👀 This is exactly why I need more than just my eyes on it. I noticed the orange peel in that photo, too. I didn't notice the other things you saw. I'm mostly concerned with paint and rust. Numbers matching would be a bonus. If I go, I'll take my paint depth meter and Bondo magnet. Like I said, I can't get much info out of the auction house. It's a reserve auction and they will only give me a range, which isn't too bad if it's a nice car.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, TheBMan said:

Thanks Rob. Great eyes. 👀 This is exactly why I need more eyes on it. I noticed the orange peel in that photo, too. I didn't notice the other things you saw. I'm mostly concerned with paint and rust. Numbers matching would be a bonus. If I go, I'll take my paint depth meter and Bondo magnet. Like I said, I can't get much info out of the auction house. It's a reserve auction and they will only give me a range, which isn't too bad if it's a nice car.

Hey Bryan,

If you're interested and it helps you, I was out at GAA last year.  Prior to jumping on a plane, I hooked up with a local guy whose business is car inspections to take a look at my '72 - Brian Manning at NC Auto Appraisal, (919) 606-6720.

He dinged me $400 for about 250 pictures, a video of the car running, paint/sheet metal evaluation, and a couple of phone discussions about his findings.  Not necessarily cheap, but I felt it was a fair value for what I received and that it made sense relative to my budget and what I thought the car was worth.  The biggest positive for me was that he could get into the auction house a few days early so that I could determine if it was even worth making the trip or not - for me anyway, the plane tickets, hotel, etc. were worth a lot more than $400.

I wouldn't call him a First Gen expert by any means, but it's his everyday job and it struck me that he knows what he's doing.  Note that he does not look at the seller's paperwork or verify engine block stamps/codes or things like that.  He also does not provide a written report of any type - a little weird I thought but apparently that's something he does for higher fee insurance claim inspections I guess.  Whatever, I just took really good notes when we spoke post-inspection.

PS - I have no affiliation with Brian, that was the first and only time I used him.  I found him through the interweb...

PPS - I thought the GAA "campus" was pretty cool, and would definitely go back to another auction just to look around if I get a chance.  For sure not the level of cars at BJ or Mecum, but still plenty of neat stuff.

-Bill

  • Like 2
  • Thank You! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Mopper77 Thanks Bill. I did look into an inspection service and found a local specialist who wanted $650. $400 is not insignificant, either. I'm talking myself into driving down and inspecting the car myself. It's about 6.5 hours each way and I can visit a friend nearby while there. I'm looking at it as an adventure. LOL We'll see. If one of the members here is able to do it, I may go that route because I trust the guys here. That, or for a couple of tanks of gas a day of my time, I can do it myself.

I'm very gun-shy after purchasing a vehicle recently without doing an inspection. I bought it on the seller's word (a dealer) and it bit me in the [censored]. I was lucky to get the seller to take the car back without a court battle, which is where it was heading. The car was horribly misrepresented so I think he knew I had him by proverbial throat in any kind of court battle.

If I go, while I'm there, I might be able to look at that '71 SS that will be up for auction on the same day. I'm not personally interested in that car, but the info may help someone else.

Thanks for the info, Bill. Much appreciated! And thanks for the PPS on the campus!

Bryan

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a bad looking car at all. Additionally to what was already seen and stated, the reverse light lenses are 70, the exhaust tips are not factory. Similar shape, that's about all. The heater control valve is missing. It should be in the heater hose mounted to the passenger fender well. There even isn't one at all, so hot water is constantly flowing through the heater core. Not a big deal at the moment because the a/c is not operational but if repaired, the A/C will not be cool enough. 

  • Thank You! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think somebody already posted the 71 SS, unless someone else used those radio knobs 🤣

Yea the "inspector" could save you some coin, but if your making and adventure of it could be fun. Depending what your driving down, 1/2 of the cost is gas back and forth 🙃

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, DragCat said:

I think somebody already posted the 71 SS, unless someone else used those radio knobs 🤣

Yea the "inspector" could save you some coin, but if your making and adventure of it could be fun. Depending what your driving down, 1/2 of the cost is gas back and forth 🙃

Oh yes, Joe and his knobs. LOL!

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know you stated "I'm mostly concerned with paint and rust. Numbers matching would be a bonus." but I few things I noticed are the driver's side exhaust manifold appears to be 1975 and up version which might rule out numbers matching engine. 1970 Monte would also have dual horns mounted to the hood latch support - I see the wire hanging but no horns? There would also normally be the front harness wires mounted to the driver's side fender well but they could be tucked up under the fender extension? You will also need all A/C hoses and the compressor could be questionable. Definitely need more photos/info in my opinion.   

  • Like 2
  • Thank You! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jim Boczar said:

I know you stated "I'm mostly concerned with paint and rust. Numbers matching would be a bonus." but I few things I noticed are the driver's side exhaust manifold appears to be 1975 and up version which might rule out numbers matching engine. 1970 Monte would also have dual horns mounted to the hood latch support - I see the wire hanging but no horns? There would also normally be the front harness wires mounted to the driver's side fender well but they could be tucked up under the fender extension? You will also need all A/C hoses and the compressor could be questionable. Definitely need more photos/info in my opinion.   

Dual horns were not standard. They were optional, I believe. But still a horn is missing. 

Agreed with the wires on the driver's side fender well are tucked away just like the washer reservoir hose is. Cleaner look. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Jim Boczar said:

I know you stated "I'm mostly concerned with paint and rust. Numbers matching would be a bonus." but I few things I noticed are the driver's side exhaust manifold appears to be 1975 and up version which might rule out numbers matching engine. 1970 Monte would also have dual horns mounted to the hood latch support - I see the wire hanging but no horns? There would also normally be the front harness wires mounted to the driver's side fender well but they could be tucked up under the fender extension? You will also need all A/C hoses and the compressor could be questionable. Definitely need more photos/info in my opinion.   

Great catches, Jim! I didn't notice any of that stuff (other than the missing A/C hoses). I still can't see the issue with the exhaust manifold, you must have eagle eyes! LOL Thanks so much!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, MC1of80 said:

Dual horns were not standard. They were optional, I believe. But still a horn is missing. 

It was my opinion that the dual tone horns were standard for the 70 model year but optional for 71 & 72.

rob

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rob Peters said:

It was my opinion that the dual tone horns were standard for the 70 model year but optional for 71 & 72.

rob

I poured thru the GM Heritage & Factory assembly manuals. Looked thru the standard equipment & option listings.  Can't seem to find a dual horn for 71 or 72 anywhere. Odd...? It's all old documentation though, who knows what was offered or added during production.

Electrical specifications section in the Heritage paperwork says 1970 has 2 horns, 71/72 list one horn.

A quick search shows we discussed this a little while back:

https://www.firstgenmc.com/forums/index.php?/topic/25232-dual-horn-setup/

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, jft69z said:

I poured thru the GM Heritage & Factory assembly manuals. Looked thru the standard equipment & option listings.  Can't seem to find a dual horn for 71 or 72 anywhere. Odd...? It's all old documentation though, who knows what was offered or added during production.

Electrical specifications section in the Heritage paperwork says 1970 has 2 horns, 71/72 list one horn.

It's so cool how detailed you always are, Joe. Good stuff, brother. 💪

  • Thank You! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, jft69z said:

I poured thru the GM Heritage & Factory assembly manuals. Looked thru the standard equipment & option listings.  Can't seem to find a dual horn for 71 or 72 anywhere. Odd...? It's all old documentation though, who knows what was offered or added during production.

Electrical specifications section in the Heritage paperwork says 1970 has 2 horns, 71/72 list one horn.

A quick search shows we discussed this a little while back:

 

If it's any sort of confirmation, my 72 came with one horn. I'm sure it was the original setup. That said, as you mentioned, who knows what they actually did during production. I'll tell you this... two horns is MUCH better than one. There is no mistaking the noise and volume of the two-horn setup!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TheBMan said:

It's so cool how detailed you always are, Joe. Good stuff, brother. 💪

Thanks Bryan.

I (we) all try to do our best here to find factual information or documentation to answer questions presented here. It's one of the things that differentiates this place from some of the other sites/groups (Facebook especially) that have less than accurate answers, information, deceptive sales listings, etc. Especially when it involves less than safe practices, or just plain stupid.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jft69z said:

Thanks Bryan.

I (we) all try to do our best here to find factual information or documentation to answer questions presented here. It's one of the things that differentiates this place from some of the other sites/groups (Facebook especially) that have less than accurate answers, information, deceptive sales listings, etc. Especially when it involves less than safe practices, or just plain stupid.

I don't even bother with Facebook groups, Joe. In general not worth it for the reasons you listed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, TheBMan said:

I don't even bother with Facebook groups, Joe. In general not worth it for the reasons you listed.

Yeah, it's entertaining though sometimes. Especially when someone is trying to sell a car, listed as all original and posts a build sheet with it. Happened recently where one guy did that, listed as 'rare' factory console, black interior, defroster, power windows, locks, etc.

Build sheet shows green, bench seat interior...... I tell him it's 'rare' indeed. Never saw a console with a bench seat before  :nutz:. It didn't have any of the other options listed on the sheet either. My guess, someone found a wrecked car in a salvage yard at some point and took all the good stuff, put it in this car. The guy was still deceptive the whole way. Plus it was an exterior color change that had to be dragged out of him, after pointing out the codes.

He kept reposting the ad a few times, and I kept pointing out the deceptive issues. Then it looked like some poor soul purchased it, buyer beware. It had a lot of good stuff on it, but the false info was the issue.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, jft69z said:

Yeah, it's entertaining though sometimes. Especially when someone is trying to sell a car, listed as all original and posts a build sheet with it. Happened recently where one guy did that, listed as 'rare' factory console, black interior, defroster, power windows, locks, etc.

Build sheet shows green, bench seat interior...... I tell him it's 'rare' indeed. Never saw a console with a bench seat before  :nutz:. It didn't have any of the other options listed on the sheet either. My guess, someone found a wrecked car in a salvage yard at some point and took all the good stuff, put it in this car. The guy was still deceptive the whole way. Plus it was an exterior color change that had to be dragged out of him, after pointing out the codes.

He kept reposting the ad a few times, and I kept pointing out the deceptive issues. Then it looked like some poor soul purchased it, buyer beware. It had a lot of good stuff on it, but the false info was the issue.

If you read my earlier post in this thread, I learned my lesson about 'trust but verify'. I trusted but didn't verify. It was almost very costly. 😕 Hence why I'm considering going to look at this car myself.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, TheBMan said:

If you read my earlier post in this thread, I learned my lesson about 'trust but verify'. I trusted but didn't verify. It was almost very costly. 😕 Hence why I'm considering going to look at this car myself.

Eyes on is always the best option, though not always practical or convenient.

I've looked at a couple vehicles in the past for members of othe forums, if someone here is close enough,  I'm sure they'll help you out here.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, TheBMan said:

If you read my earlier post in this thread, I learned my lesson about 'trust but verify'. I trusted but didn't verify. It was almost very costly. 😕 Hence why I'm considering going to look at this car myself.

Pictures always look better and often the description is lacking key info.,,,,  I've driven days and many miles to see cars that looked pristine in pictures only to get there and be back on the road in minutes.     I hope this is a great car and exactly what you are looking for.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, FrankOC said:

Pictures always look better and often the description is lacking key info.,,,,  I've driven days and many miles to see cars that looked pristine in pictures only to get their and be back on the road in minutes.     I hope this is a great car and exactly what you are looking for.

Thanks Frank. I have realistic expectations. You are correct... they usually look good in photos but in person, eh, not so much. As I mentioned earlier, I'm looking at it as an adventure. One day to have some fun and live a little. And if I'm lucky... 😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, MC1of80 said:

Not a bad looking car at all. Additionally to what was already seen and stated, the reverse light lenses are 70, the exhaust tips are not factory. Similar shape, that's about all. The heater control valve is missing. It should be in the heater hose mounted to the passenger fender well. There even isn't one at all, so hot water is constantly flowing through the heater core. Not a big deal at the moment because the a/c is not operational but if repaired, the A/C will not be cool enough. 

I never realized that the reverse lenses were different. Still learning. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dtret said:

I never realized that the reverse lenses were different. Still learning. 

As am I Dennis. Lol. The 70 reverse lens is a one year only style. The 71-72 share the same lens together. The difference is the 71-72 have a "bar" across the center of  lens. 

  • Like 3
  • Thank You! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, MC1of80 said:

As am I Dennis. Lol. The 70 reverse lens is a one year only style. The 71-72 share the same lens together. The difference is the 71-72 have a "bar" across the center of  lens. 

Tom is exactly right.  the 71-71 had a bar or a horizontal fin across the center where the 70 lenses only comes to a peak but where the horizontal fin is on the 71-71 the peak on the 70 is smooth.

It is crazy how expensive they are, at Lutty's they are $50 for either the 70 or 71-72 where OPGi is at $49 for the 70 and I think around $52 for the 71-72.

rob

  • Like 2
  • Thank You! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...