Roadrunner or Not

-
mrtires24 said:
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.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the advice. I've already visited the insurance company and the Dept of MV. The fact that the SO #s are hard to read and may have been tampered with is no longer the issue as the State of CA issued a new VIN tag for it. My issue is that the VIN # seems to have a discrepancy in it.

I'm working with an expert in Detroit and have been sending him the numbers I can decipher and pictures of those numbers that show up. He just called me a few days ago to let me know the State of CA had just called him about another 68 RR whose numbers were illegible. They were working on issuing a State issued VIN for it as well.

Yes, my curiosity is peaked about the car and I'll continue to dig but for now I'm insured and registered and have a valid State issued VIN #.
 
carcrazyguy said:
You are working with someone in Detriot to figure out how to post a picture of the VIN stampings? A picture of all the VIN stampings that you can see, will tell enough that the people that deal with Mopars can answer what you are looking to know.


Starting to think this thread is a bit of "fishing"........
Click to expand...

Nope, I'm pretty tech savvy and know how to post a picture. Have been advised by the people I'm working with not to do so.

At this point, I don't want to share it with you. How's that for fishy?
 
Diana's Dart said:
Here is a pic of the State of California tag.
Click to expand...

Your car is fine with that, there may be still a question of exactly what it is but not a question of ownership. I hope you aren't put off by some of the seemingly harsh responses here, people can be jerks on the internet where they would never be that way face to face. I think the breakdown on this thread came from the use of terms and acronyms. Some people may not know the jargon exactly and end up talking past each other.
 
I'm a bit confused. I have read the whole post since it started.

In the beginning you had a title but no vin number on the car that matched the title.
Now there is a CA vin on it that matches the title.

Someone here posted that CA vins all start with CA...yours does not.

If your title matches the CA vin, that's good and makes it legal to drive. However I'm wondering why CA would make a different vin only for your car and attempt to follow mopar vin codes. It doesn't make sense.

If you do in fact have a title that matches the cars CA vin, you can drive it...but that isn't what you asked about earlier. Did I miss something?

And your CA vin in the pic you provided was in California's data base?
 
Has California always issued VINs the way described or maybe a long time ago they just tried to 're-issue the original VIN? I would guess they used to just 're-issue and then problems like a mistyped here occurred so they switched to the current system of unique VINs.
 
Diana's Dart said:
Here is a pic of the State of California tag.
Click to expand...

That is all you needed to show us in the beginning. It makes the car legal and I have seen Ca issued VIN tag such as this in the past when the dash VIN is missing. Thank you for finally clearing this up.
 
chryslerfat said:
That is all you needed to show us in the beginning. It makes the car legal and I have seen Ca issued VIN tag such as this in the past when the dash VIN is missing. Thank you for finally clearing this up.
Click to expand...

I shared the VIN # from the title early on. Since this CA issued VIN tag has the same #, I didn't think this would clear anything up. Good to hear and makes me feel better just hearing you say that.

I'm still interested to know what happened with the VIN # on the tag and title as it still looks to have a wrong letter/#. Trying to get that part cleared up.

I have tried calling State of CA Dept of MV for several days and so far they haven't had a real person that I can talk to. Will keep trying.
 
mrtires24 said:
I'm a bit confused. I have read the whole post since it started.

In the beginning you had a title but no vin number on the car that matched the title.
Now there is a CA vin on it that matches the title.

Someone here posted that CA vins all start with CA...yours does not.

If your title matches the CA vin, that's good and makes it legal to drive. However I'm wondering why CA would make a different vin only for your car and attempt to follow mopar vin codes. It doesn't make sense.

If you do in fact have a title that matches the cars CA vin, you can drive it...but that isn't what you asked about earlier. Did I miss something?

And your CA vin in the pic you provided was in California's data base?
Click to expand...

State applied VIN tag matches the title but I'm trying to figure out if car is a RR or Satellite. State applied VIN tag and title show it to be a RR with a 318. There is no such thing. From there it went to me having a bogus car, get rid of, part it out, and so forth. No wonder you and I got lost in the real reason I piped up in the first place with the question about whether I have a RR or a Satellite!

I'm still trying to decipher that question and should I find the real answer, I'll be happy to share it with you!
 
Diana's Dart said:
State applied VIN tag matches the title but I'm trying to figure out if car is a RR or Satellite. State applied VIN tag and title show it to be a RR with a 318. There is no such thing. From there it went to me having a bogus car, get rid of, part it out, and so forth. No wonder you and I got lost in the real reason I piped up in the first place with the question about whether I have a RR or a Satellite!

I'm still trying to decipher that question and should I find the real answer, I'll be happy to share it with you!
Click to expand...

that's one thing nobody will ever know. unfortunately , the original VIN and fender tag are long gone and those were the only pieces that could tell you other than the build sheet. there always a chance in hell you could come across the BS with the SO numbers
 
Diana's Dart said:
Here is a pic of the State of California tag.
Click to expand...

Interesting. Haven't seen one like that, kinda surprised they even bothered trying to replicate an original VIN. But I'm not at all surprised they got it wrong. :violent1:

My car with the state issued VIN may have been different because it never had an actual VIN tag, just a factory ID number because it was a 1956. Or perhaps CA DMV decided to change how it was doing things.

Hard to say, my experience here at the DMV has been that even if you show up with the same question, the answer is pretty much always different.

If you've got that tag and the title matches it, you should be legal and good to go. But, yeah, good luck finding out if it was actually a real RR. That ship probably sailed a long time ago.
 
Diana's Dart said:
Actually the State of California issued a VIN plate for the car back in 2003. I believe that is when the error occurred. It appears they may have transposed one of the letters/numbers and that's what we're trying to figure out.
Click to expand...

Actually there are 2 numbers on that VIN that are impossibilities as stated previously:
RM23F8R245761
F = 318
R = Windsor, Ontario plant

Highly unlikely the CA DMV made 2 errors on same VIN, again obviously a fabricated number.

Good luck with your research, no insult intended!
 
I actually love the car, beautiful paint and chrome .Whether it has a dash vin or not still very good looking car .If it was mine a nice set of Magnums,or road wheels ect , and a proper set of exhaust tips , get inner and go .
 
396 Signet said:
Actually there are 2 numbers on that VIN that are impossibilities as stated previously:
RM23F8R245761
F = 318
R = Windsor, Ontario plant

Highly unlikely the CA DMV made 2 errors on same VIN, again obviously a fabricated number.

Good luck with your research, no insult intended!
Click to expand...

Thanks. No insult taken.

I did mention that point to the man at mmcdetroit but he said that is incorrect - there were Satellites and RRs built at the Ontario plant in 1968.

So, it appears that the M (if indeed car is a Satellite) is incorrect or the F (if indeed car is a RR) is incorrect.

This may always remain a mystery.
 
kt340sport said:
I actually love the car, beautiful paint and chrome .Whether it has a dash vin or not still very good looking car .If it was mine a nice set of Magnums,or road wheels ect , and a proper set of exhaust tips , get inner and go .
Click to expand...

Agreed. I do not much care for these wheels. As soon as we can afford it, we'll trade these out. Will look at the exhaust tips also.

Thanks!
 
dusterglenn said:
Most likely typo would be M instead of H. RH23F8R245671 makes more sense.
Click to expand...

Very likely. So hoping to get it straightened out one way or the other.

Will keep you all posted with any new developments.

Thanks to all for your useful tips and advice.
 
72bluNblu said:
Interesting. Haven't seen one like that, kinda surprised they even bothered trying to replicate an original VIN. But I'm not at all surprised they got it wrong. :violent1:

My car with the state issued VIN may have been different because it never had an actual VIN tag, just a factory ID number because it was a 1956. Or perhaps CA DMV decided to change how it was doing things.

Hard to say, my experience here at the DMV has been that even if you show up with the same question, the answer is pretty much always different.

If you've got that tag and the title matches it, you should be legal and good to go. But, yeah, good luck finding out if it was actually a real RR. That ship probably sailed a long time ago.
Click to expand...

That's so true. I really do not believe too many people at the DMV know anything about the old classics. Hoping to get lucky and actually find someone who does.

Again, I'll keep you all posted of any new developments.
 
396 Signet said:
Still not possible, no B-bodies came out of Windsor.
Click to expand...

You are correct. The State issued VIN # is all jacked up. Dave with mmcdetroit confirmed that there were no B bodies manufactured in Ontario in 1968.

I have yet to be able to get anyone on the line with the CA DMV department. I'm getting a bit discouraged.

Again, will keep digging and let you know if I find out anything new.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top