$65K for questionable 69 daytona

[nascarxx29]

Saw this on the other board




**Inactive Link Removed**

[tan top]

Hmm... missing the fender scoops also

[hemi68charger]

That's the Daytona I bet that Jude was looking at that John warned me about being a real C500, not a Daytona..


Troy

[dads_69]

Thats funny. If that is the car Jude was talking about, then its not even a real 500 correct? A fiberglass rear plug let alone the nose cone. Unless the vin says its a 500 or Daytona, then I wouldn't argue w/that, but I knew something was up w/the car from the get go. And now its priced at $65 grand. What an even bigger joke.
Mark

[nascarxx29]

Propbably same car that was discussed on here

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I saw this car advertised somewhere .while back and saw the vin was very odd as being low in sequence for a daytona.And this is whats come up about this car..
And the numbers as evidence .So in my opinion and others this is not a daytona.You want to spend big bucks on


.XX29L9B155758 = title = altered
XP29G9B155758 = original car

Car is in CA, being advertised as Daytona.   Has fiberglass nose and wing.   Owner says it's "all correct and original, and all Daytona's were made that way".   Car has no fender tag, broadcast sheet, or dash plate.   Car is not even a Charger 500; it's just a total fraud.

http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php/topic,23116.0.html

[dads_69]

Bravo nascarxx29.  I thank you for your effort to solve the mistery of the  Daytona/500 charger wanna be. No further comments.
Mark

[70charger_boy]

thank you nascarxx29  It's people like you that gives a little hope that not all are pricks.  You think I should email the seller and call him on his bullsh.t?

[gregn96cuda]

Propbably same car that was discussed on here

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I saw this car advertised somewhere .while back and saw the vin was very odd as being low in sequence for a daytona.And this is whats come up about this car..
And the numbers as evidence .So in my opinion and others this is not a daytona.You want to spend big bucks on


.XX29L9B155758 = title = altered
XP29G9B155758 = original car

Car is in CA, being advertised as Daytona.   Has fiberglass nose and wing.   Owner says it's "all correct and original, and all Daytona's were made that way".   Car has no fender tag, broadcast sheet, or dash plate.   Car is not even a Charger 500; it's just a total fraud.

http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php/topic,23116.0.html

I was the one who posted the photos of the fake Daytona. I thought the car was a 69 Charger R/T, how do you know that it was a 318 car originally? The guy that had it last year must have forged a vin verification, and used that to get a title. The DMV checks the body stampings and the VIN tag when you get a verification at their office, but you can get any police officer to fill out the form to do the same thing. You can not get a verification without a dash tag. I was hoping someone who knew a CHP investigator would go and get him to check out the car so somebody doesn't get burned.

[Just 6T9 CHGR]

Looking at the original VIN # XP29G9B155758 it would have been a 383 2 bbl car originally... (G)

[BigBlockSam]

 

[johntpr]

Car # U166242 =  with "miraculously matching numbers" = fraud
Car # 174597 = TX car partially in club files = Ruben Garcia
Car # V179697 = rebody car formerly parted out = Fraud = EV2 021; TX car
Car # XX29L9B155758 = total Fraud

[gregn96cuda]

My mistake I was thinking G was a 318 like in 1970, but how did you get the original vin#? When i saw the car the tags were already gone. Was this car listed as a wing car years ago? Just wondering where that vin # came from.

[nascarxx29]

This is a car to beware of I was thinking .Then I realized I did mention this car in a earlier post http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php/topic,7475.0.html .Whenever a car that I had recieved or had first hand knowledge of .With knowledge of it being non existant.From being parted or destroyed are on my red flag list.We have a superbird remains in a envelope that will never have a car built around it.And a car that I seen that only exist as that .When they surface as a unrestored or just found discovered car I can disclose its past history.As I did on my old 2 superbirds 166242 as I bought as a body.Became numbers matching 2 owners and years later .And my 6 pack car 179697.I torched into kindling size pieces.So any wing cars I happen to see rise from the dead.I can attest to the first 3 .I owned and have documentation to those cars.166242 I bought as a rolling body.174597 I got from the guy who got it from Ruben Garcia.The 179697 I piloted into non existance.After being in a bad accident with it.

[69_500]

Darn it and here I was hoping to add another 155xxx vin to my list. But if the last 3 are in the 700's then they aren't close to any other 500's.

[nascarxx29]

This surfaced on the other board posting by gregn96CUDA

[69_500]

Just curious but where did the VIN indicating that its a 383 car come from? Is that from the thread that was locked and posts eliminated?

[hemigeno]

Just curious but where did the VIN indicating that its a 383 car come from? Is that from the thread that was locked and posts eliminated?

No, I just took a peek, and the "eliminated" replies do not contain any information that will be missed on the board... at all... 

I don't know where that G9B VIN number came from.  There have been a couple of instances where a VIN gets thrown out in a thread, and because it gets referenced on one thread it becomes "fact".  I'm not saying that the G9B is the right or wrong reference for that car, as I had gone through the Moparts thread and all the threads here and never did find where it came from originally.  The closest I can come is the thread from 2005 where Dave/nascarxx29 said that he saw that VIN in an advertisement.  I wouldn't doubt Dave's memory when it comes to a VIN number ( ), but that's where the trail ends from what I can tell.

[Charger Aficionado]

Someone did just throw it out there.  I am sure however it can be researched through Ca DMV records though.  I would look w/ a F and H codes too... 
Car still looks like a total fraud just from the rear window plug (after hearing info from people that actually looked at it). 

[69_500]

If it was 155978 then I'd say it could be a 500. But 1557xx doesn't fit with any 500's.

[dougc426]

or=70charger_boy link=topic=23486.msg255353#msg255353 date=1169472645]
thank you nascarxx29  It's people like you that gives a little hope that not all are pricks.  You think I should email the seller and call him on his bullsh.t?
[/quote]

This guy theodore is a con artist,dont trust him I asked him what happened to vin and he said that it was stolen.Now i asked him that he just told me he didn't know mopars and then i said why you just said that you dont know where the vin tag is..Watch these people real close dont trust..

[1966hemi]

Chargerboy, I like your icon photo of Jimi Hendrix! I am a huge Hendrix fan. That Charger is just that, and not a Daytona or 500.