It used to be a 69 daytona

[JB400]

I'd have to go back and re-read the thread but there was such an insignificant amount of the original car left that I can't see it as a restoration.  To me personally that one is a clone or a recreation.  Its all semantics and if you ask 50 people you'll likely get 50 varying opinions.

At what point, to you , does a restoration end, and a recreation begin?

[Gary42]

See, that's what I'm saying. Even though this car was a documented XP29J car, it was by many experts considered beyond a restoration. Although AMD supplied all the body skins, it was still over half considered a loss. Some say restoration while the rest re-body. Dang if I can understand this  , sry for all the confusion, but I guess I just don't get it sometimes  

[JB400]

I'd have to call that one a restoration. Yes, they replaced all the skins, floor, trunk, front stub, and what not, but that car KEPT its' factory identity.   No numbers were took off another car to make this car the XP hemi.  It's taking the numbers off say a hemi car and putting them on a /6 car and calling that car a hemi car is what we're are talking about.

For those that didn't get it the first time.

[Ghoste]

We're getting way off topic now, but that isn't exactly a well documented XP Hemi either.  It MIGHT be one but there isn't any hard documentation to prove it as such. 

[moparstuart]

That car is not a rebody, glad they did it the right way!!  

The XP  ??     they cut the numbers out of the core support and the rear rail and grafted them back into new metal  , not 20 % of that car is original sheet metal  its a Rebody plain and simple .  They could have tried much harder to save original good sheet metal on the car but it was a show piece / show case for AMD 's new sheet metal so they just hacked away at that car and put all new in .  Granted that car was a rust bucket but there was so much metal they could have saved and they just tossed it for new because of there sponser for a TV show .  

[moparstuart]

We're getting way off topic now, but that isn't exactly a well documented XP Hemi either.  It MIGHT be one but there isn't any hard documentation to prove it as such. 

right it could have just been a Vin stamp error ,  there are several other vin stamp error cars out there 

[JB400]

I totally agree to an extent.  The original car kept its identity though, even if the car itself does not have most of its original sheetmetal.  Therefore, it's not a rebody, it's a restoration.  A REBODY is taking the vin off a desireable direlict vehichle and REPLACE the vin of a less desirable vehicle.  A CLONE is a less desirable vehicle that is IMPERSONATING a more desirable vehicle WHILE maintaining its less desirable vin.



WHO DOES NOT  UNDERSTAND?  I WROTE IT IN BLACK AND WHITE AND IT'S PLAIN AS ENGLISH.

[Ghoste]

Then a recreation.  They didn't keep enough of the old car to restore.

[JB400]

Then a recreation.  They didn't keep enough of the old car to restore.

RESTORATION.

[moparstuart]

 RE body  weather its a 6cy / 318 less desirable car or  AMD taiwan sheet metal Its a rebody 
  to little of the original car was saves . They could have very easily save at lease one of the doors for sure the core support , the rear trunk rails were fine  front inner fenders and much more could have been saved .     

[Ghoste]

We can do this forever and I already wasted too much of my life arguing about that particular re-creation.  We are way off the original topic and there is no way you will ever change my mind about it even if you put your opinion in capital letters, and I couldn't care less about changing yours so see it as you please.

[JB400]

RE body  weather its a 6cy / 318 less desirable car or  AMD taiwan sheet metal Its a rebody  
 to little of the original car was saves . They could have very easily save at lease one of the doors for sure the core support , the rear trunk rails were fine  front inner fenders and much more could have been saved .      

I will agree that there was probably more of the original car that could have been saved.  I don't know. I wasn't there to actually make that assumption.  The actual term we need to be using on this car is RESKIN.  Another term is REBUILT.  Whether you use reskin or rebuilt, this car is definitely a RESTORATION.  It still has the vin that it had when it left the factory.  Rebody is like taking a Dynacorn challenger and putting a factory vin off of a derelict challenger and putting it on the Dynacorn chassis.

[Ghoste]

They did a lot more than just replace exterior sheet metal though, there was very little and nearly none of the original car left.  Semantics.

[Nwcharger]

I know there was no insurance company that totaled the car out. The last registered owner simply abandoned it where he parked it in the 70s. I found a picture of the purple 71 hemi cuda convertable that was restored and if all that left was the core support/inner fenders/fire wall and windshield frame then I can guarantee that I have much much more than that to work with. I still have no plans for a rebody. This I exactly why I want mark and his crew to do this. Not only would it be on tv but it would prove that it's possible.

[JB400]

That I agree with. I watched the show. Basically, it was just a firewall, inner roof frame, and inner rockers.  That is why I previously mentioned the term rebuilt.  Agree or Disagree.  No change was made to the vin except to put the numbers back on the core support.

[JB400]

My opinion on this particular Daytona, it's going to be a rebody.  Basically, all that's there is a vin, a floor pan, and a few key pieces that identify the remains of the car as a Daytona.  Best way to do it, is to get another car and put the vin on it. I'd talk with someone that is certified to do it.

[DC_1]

I'd talk with someone that is certified to do it.

And who might that be? Because unless this is 1969 and the car is running down the line I don't think anyone is "certified" to VIN the car

[JB400]

Re: It used to be a 69 daytona

« Reply #109 on: Today at 10:20:10 AM »

QuoteModify


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You'd have to have some title history done to verify if it's original or a chop shop ordeal.  Ghoste is right and wrong.  It is illegal to switch vins, unless you are licensed as a rebuilder.  If you are, than you can take something like one of these derelict Daytonas and swap the numbers over to another rebuildable chassis.  But there is a lot of paperwork that has to be done.  I know a guy outside of my town that has a wrecker service.  When the car becomes his legally, he'll rebody the car if he has the parts.

[DC_1]

Re: It used to be a 69 daytona

« Reply #109 on: Today at 10:20:10 AM »

QuoteModify


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You'd have to have some title history done to verify if it's original or a chop shop ordeal.  Ghoste is right and wrong.  It is illegal to switch vins, unless you are licensed as a rebuilder.  If you are, than you can take something like one of these derelict Daytonas and swap the numbers over to another rebuildable chassis.  But there is a lot of paperwork that has to be done.  I know a guy outside of my town that has a wrecker service.  When the car becomes his legally, he'll rebody the car if he has the parts.

I may have misunderstood what you originally said.

To clarify, I think it is possible to re VIN a repaired vehicle with a new identification number that is unique but different from the original. But if you are saying it is possible to simply transfer the OEM tag to anoter body i would have to disagree with you. As far as I am aware no person or company can legally take an existing VIN plate and transfer it to a donor body. From what I have always ever known is illegal in both the U.S. and Canada.

[Gary42]

Re: It used to be a 69 daytona

« Reply #109 on: Today at 10:20:10 AM »

QuoteModify


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You'd have to have some title history done to verify if it's original or a chop shop ordeal.  Ghoste is right and wrong.  It is illegal to switch vins, unless you are licensed as a rebuilder.  If you are, than you can take something like one of these derelict Daytonas and swap the numbers over to another rebuildable chassis.  But there is a lot of paperwork that has to be done.  I know a guy outside of my town that has a wrecker service.  When the car becomes his legally, he'll rebody the car if he has the parts.

I have always been led to believe that this practice is "illegal" here and in Canada. If by some chance you felt the "need" to re-body a car, how do you become "certified" in order to do so: and if so, then why do more people not do the same to cars that are barely holding together by "pieces" of original sheet metal? Isn't this the same discussion here about re-body earlier and how it is illegal to do so? If this Daytona is perhaps able to be -re-bodied, then what will it be considered? Restored or Re-bodied. Just wondering if someone has an answer.

What I do know is this: had a great afternoon at Larry's house. Rode in a "real" Superbird, played with "real" Cuda's/Challengers, and wished Joe would just let me drive is "real" Daytona just one time  . A "real" numbers matching, 4 speed (dana) Daytona..........hummmmm......yup I guess I wouldn't mind having it in my stable 

[Indygenerallee]

You don't it's illegal you can't be "certified" to swap them.

[Indygenerallee]

You don't it's illegal you can't be "certified" to swap them.

[Gary42]

You don't it's illegal you can't be "certified" to swap them.

Haaaaa.......got it, thanks for clearifing that  I was wondering how someone could become "certified" to move or re-body any vehicle.

[JB400]

Borrowed a little something from For B Bodies Only.  Obviously, this topic does not just pertain to this car, or us, but the whole industry.   Reading other forums and what not, this discussion as it did today, this topic goes both ways.  Your DMV will tell you if it's legal or not to rebody a car or not.  Here it is:
I would imagine that I posted maybe this on the other frum you are referring to, if not here are both sides of the "ETERNAL REBODY ARGUEMENT."

I will do my best to present all I know to be the OPINIONS and FACTS of BOTH sides of this controvery, so that in the future anyone interested in the subject can read this in the archives and let this post do the arguing for them.

Here we go.

FOR THE PEOPLE THAT BELIEVE REBODYING IS WRONG

Many people in the hobby feel that there is a big difference in the way people "restore" a car, ESPECIALLY a unibody.

They believe that the unibody is the core or soul of the car.

They believe that when the car was created by the manufacturer, that the numbers that were assigned to that particular unibody, and the assortment of parts that were assigned to and installed on it to create the model they were disignating are sacred. That no one else outside of the manufacturer has the right to do a V.I.N . switch (which did happen when these cars were new before they ever left the final assembly line) on any of these cars for any reason.

They believe that IF the car is what they consider to be salvagable by repairing existing body parts or installing new, reproduction, or good used parts, that is the only legal/ethical way to restore the car and maintain the heritage/originality of the car that the original manufacturer built.

They feel that when a car is rusted/damaged to the point that there is little left of the original unibody that the car should be scrapped and taken out of existence.

They believe this is not just a matter of legalities but also a matter of ethics.

They believe that even if it IS legal on a Federal level and in many States, that it is still unethical and morally wrong.

They feel that restoration by rebody is NOT a restoration at all but rather a fraud created on the hobby and any line of ownership after the rebody takes place.

They feel that even when disclosure is made by the party that did the rebody, to the next person that purchases the car, that it is still unacceptable. They feel that it is all to likely that somewhere down the line in years to come with the ownership changes of the car that this will NOT be disclosed to future buyers.

Many are adamant about their belief that switching V.I.N . tags to another similar car/unibody and associated hidden I.D. numbers is just plain wrong, legal or not. Regardless of how CORRECT the car may appear, with all of the correct componants that the factory would have installed on a like unibody, it is not the same as when the factory did it, and that THEY (the original manufacturer) are the only ones that had the right to do so.

They consider all rebodies to be nothing more than a clone with the identity numbers from another car.

They believe that a registry of any KNOWN rebodies and any SUSPECTED rebodied should be kept for any future buyers to be aware of to aid in their buying decision.

Before we go to the other side of the arguement, the below information needs to be considered.



THE CATCH 22

Most feel the real problem is that there is no definition of where the line is with regards to the restoration of a unibody car.

At what point does the car cross the line from what has been described above as a restoration rather than a rebody?

How much of the original unibody has to be left for new, reproduction, or good used parts to be attached to?

How big of a CHUNK of a donor car can you use in this restoration before it is considered a rebody?

Does the simple act of removing the V.I.N . plate from one car or part of the car constitute a rebody?

What about removing the V.I.N . plate because the part of the car that it is attached to is damaged? Does this constitute a rebody?

Does a car that was front or rear "clipped" by a bodyshop 30+ years ago constitute a partial rebody?

If a car was first FRONT clipped and a year later REAR clipped, does this constitute a complete rebody?

All good questions with no answers that probably any two people will agree on.

This is why so many people have mixed feeling about the restoration/rebody arguement.



FOR THE PEOPLE THAT BELIEVE THAT A REBODY IS AN ACCEPTABLE FORM OF RESTORATION

These people do not believe the car or unibody has a soul, or that the car is sacred. They do not hold the manufacturer in a Godly manner and assume that none of the factory line workers were any kind of Saints.

They believe that the base unibody is the same for a given car line (e.g. "A", "B", "C", or "E" body) and it is just an assembly of parts added to this base unibody that creates the particular price class. These are terms that Chrysler created for their cars.

These people believe that IF the manufacturer had the right to switch V.I.N.s of a car that they built, that an individual has the same right, provided that they legally own both cars involved in the rebody.

The manufacturer did this in the interest of "saving" a car, rather than scrapping it, for purely financial reasons. If they mistakenly built a car that somehow did not meet the criteria of what the V.I.N . model designation indicated, they took the path of least cost to convert it to a different model and made a V.I.N. plate switch that reflected that. Did you ever wonder why the HIDDEN V.I.N. numbers don't have the FULL V.I.N. stamped in them? It left flexability for the manufacturer to make V.I.N./model changes when the car was near completion.

The people that believe in rebodying, do so for the same reason, because it is financially less costly.

These people also sometimes do so in the interest of safety when they have a car that they want to save that may have serious body deformation or serious rust problems in the unibody.

These people believe that they are also saving the heritage of the car by doing so.

These people feel that it is better to have a donor car that is as the factory built, and without damage, to transplant the parts that were factory installed specific parts that made up the identity of the car they want to save.

They believe that it is legal on a Federal level and cite the Federal Law  from the Cornell University Law Library in the link below as their proof.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/h...1_18_10_I.html


These people argue that in a State that considers rebodying a car is illegal, don't think that State law would hold up against an appeal to a higher court.

They believe it would be pretty obvious that if a State court ruled it illegal when the person that did it OWNED both cars legally, the defending party would arguing "intent," indicating that if the State law was upheld in this case, that it would be appealed to a Federal court. With this information in front of a judge (who is certainly smart enough to understand the "intent" of the law was to thwart chop shops) would rule in favor of the person who did the rebody. It would certainly be overturned in a Federal court. Not to mention, it would have to PROVEN that the rebody was DONE in the a State that it was against State law, and have an eye witness that actually saw the numbers switch take place in order to "prove" that the seller actually did it. It probably would not even get to trial and would be thrown out at the initial hearing. Court systems are overloaded throughout the US with trials that are far more important that someone doing a restoration (rebody) of a car that involves a donor car that the parts could have been switched in either direction. The whole thing is way too subjective with regards to where the line is, as indicated in the CATCH 22  section above.

They believe what you are talking about here would be a criminal suite, not a civil action. Anybody can sue someone and get a trail for a civil suite, but it is a whole other story when you are talking a criminal action.

These people believe that the people on the other side of this controversial subject, do their best to impact the value of a rebodied car in a derrogatory manner. This leads to it NOT being disclosed in most cases and will continue to be the case until such time that these cars are not looked down upon by some, but not all, in the hobby.

[Nwcharger]

does anyone have any info on this cuda? i cant seem to find much info about it. was this all that was used to build off of the call restored and not rebodyed?