Roadrunner or Not

-
Something sure does come up every time a picture of the stamped number is asked for. Jes sayin.

It never hurt a thing to get more eyes on something. That is, unless there's a reason.
 
I don't see how you have a California issued title, when the numbers that you claim are on your title, (bogus fake numers) start with RM..... I think state issued VINS have nothing in common with factory numbers. This whole thing sounds mighty fishy!
 
This is a bogus car...

Already said it in previous post.

Some people have already said it as well.

Your title that you insure to drive MUST correspond with the vehicle as well. No matter what country or state.

The fact that all numbers on engine, trans, and car are also difficult to read... Been tampered with.

How about this Dianne. If you get in an accident...which we never plan to get in an accident...you WONT BE COVERED! Simply because your title and insurance are not connected in any way.

You could lose your house...savings...everything.

This goes a lot deeper than playing the dumb or ignorance card!

Sorry, on the contrary to the people saying " just drive it". YOU SHOULDNT.

Contact the police and the previous owner. Try and work at finding where the titles and vin don't match an actual mopar vin for that type of car, and where the vin tag on the car disappeared to.

I hope this works out...and if there is no vin on the car that is legible it can't be traced to anyone.

But to clear your name as to tampering with evidence, what better way that to post all #'s that are on the car to prove they don't match or are not recognizable.

Sorry for the post, it's honest truth.
 
I don't see how you have a California issued title, when the numbers that you claim are on your title, (bogus fake numers) start with RM..... I think state issued VINS have nothing in common with factory numbers. This whole thing sounds mighty fishy!

Correct. A California issued ID# will look like what I posted before, it would be DMVxxxxxCA.

Or at least, that's what they used to look like, because I have one. And the title would have to match that number, and the tags with that number would be permanently attached to the frame.

The CA ID# on the title would not resemble a VIN.
 
Something sure does come up every time a picture of the stamped number is asked for. Jes sayin.

It never hurt a thing to get more eyes on something. That is, unless there's a reason.
I agree. This mystery should be solved by now and I think we are zeroing in on it
 
Correct. A California issued ID# will look like what I posted before, it would be DMVxxxxxCA.

Or at least, that's what they used to look like, because I have one. And the title would have to match that number, and the tags with that number would be permanently attached to the frame.

The CA ID# on the title would not resemble a VIN.

I don't believe it has a California DMV issued VIN number! I think what she means is that it has a clear title, the car came from California, and the VIN on the title was cleared as not stolen! Of course we all know that VIN is not correct, and is not on the chassis of the car unless it was stamped on by the inventor of that VIN! Stamping that VIN on the car would be very difficult to do, the trunk lip is really thick and almost impossible to hand stamp, which I don't believe the factory did! Same with the rad support!!

If it were my car, I would be taking a pencil rubbing of those body numbers, getting the casting date and the numbers off the pad and pan rail of the motor if it has it, and the number from the trans! It would drive me nuts not knowing what year motor is in the car and whether it could be original, as well as the trans! It would sure narrow things down to know theyre origin!!
 
This is a bogus car...

Already said it in previous post.

Some people have already said it as well.

Your title that you insure to drive MUST correspond with the vehicle as well. No matter what country or state.

The fact that all numbers on engine, trans, and car are also difficult to read... Been tampered with.

How about this Dianne. If you get in an accident...which we never plan to get in an accident...you WONT BE COVERED! Simply because your title and insurance are not connected in any way.

You could lose your house...savings...everything.

This goes a lot deeper than playing the dumb or ignorance card!

Sorry, on the contrary to the people saying " just drive it". YOU SHOULDNT.

Contact the police and the previous owner. Try and work at finding where the titles and vin don't match an actual mopar vin for that type of car, and where the vin tag on the car disappeared to.

I hope this works out...and if there is no vin on the car that is legible it can't be traced to anyone.

But to clear your name as to tampering with evidence, what better way that to post all #'s that are on the car to prove they don't match or are not recognizable.

Sorry for the post, it's honest truth.

I just asking this question for info if nothing else: if I have a 68 car, the only numbers that mean anything really is the dash vin, the vin # are not on the fender tag or the body, there is no law saying you even have to have the fender t ag. ???????? is there a law that will state you have to have the dash vin there????

if I wreck my insured old car, will someone (insurance co), ask for my title and inspect the wreck???? just wondering???

now in Missouri, where a vehicle is inspected. maybe they should inspect the vin # on the car and record that on the inspection. here .,,, the local guy will simple write the vin off the title if I bring it with me. just wondering.

you have a very VALID point, about you better be legally covered with liability insurance!!!!! sometimes its easy for us to say, "just drive it!" maybe an insurance guy will give some info.
 
If it were my car, I would be taking a pencil rubbing of those body numbers, getting the casting date and the numbers off the pad and pan rail of the motor if it has it, and the number from the trans!

My last '68 had the VIN or portion of it on the lip that attaches to the bellhousing on driver's side. Later cars have it on the oil pan rail pad.

Good point on the insurance issue. A sharp claim inspector would verify via VIN the car was the one insured, unlikely they would pay if they saw no VIN or a fake one. The agent could be asked up front but you might not want to hear the answer.
 
is there a law that will state you have to have the dash vin there????

This is verbatim current federal law (49 CFR 565), I'm sure it was similar in 1968-
"The VIN for passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, low speed vehicles, and trucks of 4536 kg or less GVWR shall be located inside the passenger compartment. It shall be readable, without moving any part of the vehicle, through the vehicle glazing under daylight lighting conditions by an observer having 20/20 vision (Snellen) whose eye-point is located outside the vehicle adjacent to the left windshield pillar."

Basically says all cars must have a clearly visible VIN seen through the driver's side windshield. Federal law supersedes state law.
 
Early A's do not have a VIN number visible through any glass.
 
My last '68 had the VIN or portion of it on the lip that attaches to the bellhousing on driver's side. Later cars have it on the oil pan rail pad.

Good point on the insurance issue. A sharp claim inspector would verify via VIN the car was the one insured, unlikely they would pay if they saw no VIN or a fake one. The agent could be asked up front but you might not want to hear the answer.

It's my understanding that early production 68's had no vin on the engine. My 68 RR has no sign of, or provision for a vin on the block behind the left head. 68 383 identified on pad by distributor. Glad I have all tags!
 
It's my understanding that early production 68's had no vin on the engine. My 68 RR has no sign of, or provision for a vin on the block behind the left head. 68 383 identified on pad by distributor. Glad I have all tags!

My post was meant to point out all of the locations a VIN could be found on a "B" motor! There is talk that it's a 383, but with no casting date, not checking ALL of the locations a VIN could be stamped on a motor, you're just guessing! Just by the casting date alone, that will tell you what model year the block is from! Then you simply have to know where to look for the assembly stampings and assertain what the motor is! The casting part number on the left of the block will show the displacement, further narrowing the possibilities of where the motor came from!! Hey, best case scenario, the motor is a 68 383, possibly making it the original motor!

Same with the trans number, it will tell you the application of the trans according to the number! If it's a 68 B body trans, it could be original, if it's from a 72, not so much!! Things like this I would be doing like right now to help clear up this should the need arise!!! Geof
 
Maybe us early A Body owners need to move our vin tags to the dash - NOT!
 
Early A's do not have a VIN number visible through any glass.

The law I quoted applies to current manufacture of cars & more or less goes back to 1968. Pre-68 laws require more research than I choose to look into but the VIN is not required to be visible from outside. The current Federal laws are searchable easily online. The quantity of laws regarding new cars is mind boggling, the car companies must need a stadium full of lawyers to decipher it all.
 
The farther this thread goes and the farther the OP post`s things they are posting makes me believe it is a stolen car. It has a VIN stamped on the core support then it does not. The car has a California assigned Vin then it does not. The VIN is a make believe VIN and so forth.
 
This is verbatim current federal law (49 CFR 565), I'm sure it was similar in 1968
"The VIN for passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, low speed vehicles, and trucks of 4536 kg or less GVWR shall be located inside the passenger compartment. It shall be readable, without moving any part of the vehicle, through the vehicle glazing under daylight lighting conditions by an observer having 20/20 vision (Snellen) whose eye-point is located outside the vehicle adjacent to the left windshield pillar."

Basically says all cars must have a clearly visible VIN seen through the driver's side windshield. Federal law supersedes state law.


Maybe not similar or even there?

§ 565.2 Application.

(a)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, subpart B of this part 565 applies to passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, buses, trailers (including trailer kits), incomplete vehicles, low speed vehicles, and motorcycles manufactured on or after October 27, 2008 whose VINs have a letter “A” or “B” in the 10th position, and to passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, buses, trailers (including trailer kits), incomplete vehicles, low speed vehicles, and motorcycles manufactured on or after April 30, 2009. Vehicles imported into the United States under 49 CFR 591.5(f), other than by the corporation responsible for the assembly of that vehicle or a subsidiary of such a corporation, are excluded from requirements of §§565.13(b), 565.13(c), 565.13(g), 565.13(h), 565.14 and 565.15.

(2) All motor vehicles identified as model year 2009 or earlier vehicles by their manufacturer must comply with subpart C of this part 565
(subpart C appears to only affect cars back to 1980, see wiki quote-adriver)
(b) Subpart B of this part 565 applies to vehicles manufactured on or after April 30, 2008 and before April 30, 2009, whose vehicle identification number (VIN) does not have a letter “A” or “B” in the 10th position of the VIN and that are not identified as model year 2009 or earlier vehicles by their manufacturer.

[73 FR 28370, May 16, 2008]



[73 FR 23379, Apr. 30, 2008, as amended at 73 FR 28371, May 16, 2008]



http://www.vintageautomotive.net/?tag=vin-tampering
In the United States, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (effective January 1, 1968) mandated certain safety requirements on vehicles to be sold in the USA such as side marker lights, safety belts and Vehicle Identification Numbers (VIN) visible on the dash through the windshield. (not CFR 565 then?)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_identification_number
From 1954 to 1981, there was no accepted standard for these numbers, so different manufacturers used different formats.

In 1981, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration of the United States standardized the format.[1] It required all over-the-road-vehicles sold to contain a 17-character VIN, which does not include the letters I (i), O (o), or Q (q) (to avoid confusion with numerals 1 and 0).




http://www.martiauto.com/faqfocus.cfm?qid=245
If you encounter a DMV agent who starts questioning your car because of that, have his/her supervisor called immediately and point this out. I have known of overzealous agents who impounded the vehicle and removed the "offending" tag. It was replaced by a state-assigned VIN. This will affect the value of your vehicle (and I don't mean positively).
 
Wow, I'd be seriously pissed if some DMV clown impounded my car because of lack of knowledge about VIN laws.

Muscle-era mopar VINs are really great in that you know exactly what you have just by looking at the 1st 7 digits. If you ever tried to figure out a non-mopar of similar era you know the VINs don't contain nearly as much info & you really need docs to find out what you have. Maybe a misinformed GM guy fabbed the VIN? They obviously didn't do their homework.
 
I just asking this question for info if nothing else: if I have a 68 car, the only numbers that mean anything really is the dash vin, the vin # are not on the fender tag or the body, there is no law saying you even have to have the fender t ag. ???????? is there a law that will state you have to have the dash vin there????

if I wreck my insured old car, will someone (insurance co), ask for my title and inspect the wreck???? just wondering???

now in Missouri, where a vehicle is inspected. maybe they should inspect the vin # on the car and record that on the inspection. here .,,, the local guy will simple write the vin off the title if I bring it with me. just wondering.

you have a very VALID point, about you better be legally covered with liability insurance!!!!! sometimes its easy for us to say, "just drive it!" maybe an insurance guy will give some info.


Yes by law you must have a VIN on the vehicle that matches the vin on the title or registration for said vehicle. And as stated allready... The vin on 68 or newer must be visable through window on dash.

If you wreck your car you can bet your *** the insurance co will ask for your title to match against the car. And someone said you would need to have a sharp insurance agent...NOT...that's standard procedure. The title or registration is what is insured...and that piece of paper ( title) MUST. Have a vin that matches the cars vin.

A vin is like a fingerprint for a car and this fingerprint is what makes the vehicle 100% unique and able for the insurer to know what vehicle it is insuring....or what vehicle you are buying for that matter.

Why do you think vehicles without titles are so much cheaper than an exact same vehicle with a clear title?!?!? Your title vin that matches you vehicles vin is what makes your vehicle your vehicle...otherwise all you have is a bunch of parts bolted together and a piece of Detroit muscle yard art!.

I feel for the OP...and odds are they should be able to keep the car because it sounds like the vehicles vin ( fingerprint) are long gone.

Right now Dianne I wouldn't drive it...it's not covered.

You all should know insurance companies stay in business by NOT paying out. And will find and use any reason not to pay out. This is such an easy out for them.

Would you drive any other vehicle with expired tags? No insurance? You might as well drive around with your insured blue tacomas plates and title on the RR. Because your tittle is about just as useless to your RR as the blue tacomas title is to your RR. There is no connection to each other.
I rest my case
 
-
Back
Top