Questions about 1970 door VIN decals

[TUFCAT]

Does it bother you that you have a "Fake" paint job?  Does it bother you that you have "Fake" Interior Upholstering or use "Fake" replacement Carpeting?  What about the "Fake" Engine components that are used to rebuild the Engine or the "Fake" Suspension Components that have been used to make the vehicle ride like new again?  I could go on but I'm sure you get the point.....

I disagree.

Most people don't use the term "fake" to describe reproduction parts.

The word "fake" on this forum generally draws attention to a vehicle's documentation or its credentials.  A better term other than "fake" would be counterfeit, forgery, or falsified.  Would you feel better if we used any of those terms?  

Sometimes a whole car can be considered "fake"...  

I suppose parts could be considered "counterfeit".

[ECS]

I disagree.......

......and you certainly have the right to do so! 

[Davtona]

I disagree.

Most people don't use the term "fake" to describe reproduction parts.

The word "fake" on this forum generally draws attention to a vehicle's documentation or its credentials.  A better term other than "fake" would be counterfeit, forgery, or falsified.  Would you feel better if we used any of those terms?  

Sometimes a whole car can be considered "fake"... 

I suppose parts could be considered "counterfeit".

Per Websters Dictonary the definition of fake.


"not true or real : meant to look real or genuine but not real or genuine"



I'd say that could be used to describe reproduction parts also as they are meant to look as genuine originals (which they usually do not) but are not real or genuine originals.

[Dodge Don]

Whats the magic number you have to document in order to not be accused of pushing a personal agenda of alternate reality? 

Funny. I have no predisposed assumptions or agenda...I just lay the data out and see where it leads....maybe nowhere...maybe somewhere  

I realize that because we focus exclusively on 70 Chargers that we are a minute part of the universe...and I assume that at times there are differences from assembly plant to plant....all 70 Chargers were built in St. Louis plant so I would imagine the models built there would generally follow the same format. As a start it would be interesting if ECS were able to mine it's database to look for all 70 built models at the St. Louis assembly plant where the SPD is known and a picture copy of the original door decal is on file...then lay it out in order to see if a pattern exists.

[ECS]

As a start it would be interesting if ECS were able to mine it's database to look for all 70 built models at the St. Louis assembly plant where the SPD is known and a picture copy of the original door decal is on file...then lay it out in order to see if a pattern exists.

In order to investigate an unknown, there has to be a specific focus that guides the investigation.  What "pattern" are you trying to disclose?  What criteria would the Manufacturing Plant have for creating a differentiating "pattern" for VIN decals?  Was there a problem on the Assembly Line during that time period of manufacturing?  Did the Factory or Corporate purposely require VIN labels to be manufactured in an unorthodox manner for only certain vehicles?  Other than the variations in fonts, what mandate for these Federal Labels was the St. Louis plant under that did not apply to any other manufacturing Facilities?  Was it a self imposed change in protocol?  What reason would there be to initiate a VIN change from one month to another and the benefit for such a change?  You might be investing something that was simply the result of a temporary problem that had no protocol or deliberate reason for its process "pattern".

[ECS]

One thing I noticed on the door VIN decal was the month was denoted as "2 - 70".....every door decal I have for a 70 Charger for February 1970 was denoted with "2 - 1970". This format appears to remain until mid-March at which point the format changed to the "3 - 70" format. ECS may have thoughts on this.

So this does not ring a bell, ECS? If you have a original one in the ex "1 - 70" format for a 70 charger built at SPD prior to mid march, Post One!  You said you had dozens of examples

Why not end this little charade right here and right now.  Guys like you and tufcat think you're so clever trying to find fault and say something without actually saying it.  You're still trying to point fingers and insinuate "fraud" regarding why I made the one for the green Charger.  I have already explained the scenario in depth.  If someone wants to order a VIN decal and they use a Title for documentation instead of an Original photo of their VIN, I will use the default format unless they request a variation for their printed characters.  If they asked for me to print the entire word "MARCH" on their 1971 March built vehicle (even though I have never documented one printed that way) I would do it per their request.  There is no Federal/DMV mandate where the "Date" has to be spelled out versus using numeric characters.  I have Customers who provided their original VIN tag for documentation but wanted their characters to be centered in the spaces, rather than be crooked like their Original.  Some have had their "-" between the Month & Year omitted on their Original but ask that I include it on their replacement.  Those are things we are allowed to do because it does not change the validity of the information represented on the decal.  

Some of you might have imaginary rules that you think I need to adhere to when manufacturing these items.  I allow the Customer to chose what they prefer as long as it is in compliance with the Vehicle Manufacturer and NHTSA/DMV/SAE specifications.  If you took the time to read the facts I have plainly stated, instead of trying to find a "GOTCHA" moment in your Witch Hunt again me, you would have already understood the specifics for everything that I just re-explained.  

[ECS]

This whole 70 Charger door tag subject to you has been to prove ECS wrong again.

It is IMPOSSIBLE to prove me wrong about that decal.  I made it from a Title that was used for documentation.  No original picture of the printed "date" was ever provided.  We have no way of knowing when a REAL Title has been issued under false pretenses.  In this particular case, the DMV Facility issuing the Title becomes the weak link in the chain of events.  If the guy wanted his initials listed after the "Date", I would have printed it that way for him!  

As long as the pertinent information is present on the decal, the rest is a moot point.  I work with the DMV & NICB and "hide" symbols on our products so they can be easily identified in case of theft.  We know where they are hidden but no one else does.  Those small markings are not on the originals but it does not change the validity of the vehicle data.  We have even CORRECTED information on Chrysler passenger vehicles that did  to meet the wording specifications written in the bylaws.  Chrysler had to change their primary printing because they had left out verbiage that should have been listed on their Factory Trucks.  

Chrysler started incorporating the Penta-Star Holograms on their Factory VINS per our request to keep the boot loggers from being able to easily reproduce them.  If the Mopar Police want to come get me for such actions......bring it on!  Turn me in!  I can't wait for them to re-direct your complaints back to my Company  to explain it and provide you with the facts.  

[bill440rt]

Huh... 
I find the whole date discrepancy thing fascinating. Really. 
I'd like to know when/why there were changes as well.

Mine's a May '70 car though, decal reads 5-70. Repro decal on the car now. But I have the original, in a binder.

[ws23rt]

One thing I noticed on the door VIN decal was the month was denoted as "2 - 70".....every door decal I have for a 70 Charger for February 1970 was denoted with "2 - 1970". This format appears to remain until mid-March at which point the format changed to the "3 - 70" format. ECS may have thoughts on this.

So this does not ring a bell, ECS? If you have a original one in the ex "1 - 70" format for a 70 charger built at SPD prior to mid march, Post One!  You said you had dozens of examples

Why not end this little charade right here and right now.  Guys like you and tufcat think you're so clever trying to find fault and say something without actually saying it.  You're still trying to point fingers and insinuate "fraud" regarding why I made the one for the green Charger.  I have already explained the scenario in depth.  If someone wants to order a VIN decal and they use a Title for documentation instead of an Original photo of their VIN, I will use the default format unless they request a variation for their printed characters.  If they asked for me to print the entire word "MARCH" on their 1971 March built vehicle (even though I have never documented one printed that way) I would do it per their request.  There is no Federal/DMV mandate where the "Date" has to be spelled out versus using numeric characters.  I have Customers who provided their original VIN tag for documentation but wanted their characters to be centered in the spaces, rather than be crooked like their Original.  Some have had their "-" between the Month & Year omitted on their Original but ask that I include it on their replacement.  Those are things we are allowed to do because it does not change the validity of the information represented on the decal.  

Some of you might have imaginary rules that you think I need to adhere to when manufacturing these items.  I allow the Customer to chose what they prefer as long as it is in compliance with the Vehicle Manufacturer and NHTSA/DMV/SAE specifications.  If you took the time to read the facts I have plainly stated, instead of trying to find a "GOTCHA" moment in your Witch Hunt again me, you would have already understood the specifics for everything that I just re-explained.  

I've been following this topic in this thread but it is a topic from many other threads.

It is a sensitive issue when the authenticity of a collector car is in question.

You --ECS-- have chosen to supply where there is a demand.  I do not question the legality of what you do.  Legality is a political issue and to get into that could get this thread blocked.

My personal opinion is that when vehicle identification and documentation is tampered with it leads down the road to a dilution of the value of original document identification of all vehicles.  As this becomes more common place the future owners of the cars will view these items to be of less and less value.  I see 20-30 years from now that remade stickers and the like will come to mean little or nothing as to establishing a cars value in that collector market. It may well be a prized find to see a readable original tag.

I for one don't have imaginary rules for how this should be addressed.  What I do want to do is bring this topic up over and over again to talk about it.

This seems to be as good a place as any to have this all out.  If the general consensus is that this is not important for the future of the hobby than so be it.  At least it's on the record that some of us had a concern and expressed our views.

[ECS]

You --ECS-- have chosen to supply where there is a demand.........My personal opinion is that when vehicle identification and documentation is tampered with it leads down the road to a dilution of the value of original identification of all vehicles.  As this becomes more common place the future owners of the cars will view these items to be of less and less value.

I completely respect your opinion and understand the premise for where it comes from.  Keep in mind however that the same linear logic can be used towards any process that assists in the Restoration of a vehicle.  It is certainly the discretion of the Owner to do as they choose with their vehicle.

On a separate note, I want to Thank Mike (Dayclona) for having the ability to see through the instigating antics that tufcat always starts.  He has been an obsessed stalker because of the Concept Car we are building and latches on to any subject he can to perpetuate a fight.  It's always hilarious for people like him try to play the victim after they are confronted with their pathetic attempts to start trouble.  Too bad he doesn't have the guts to just come out and admit the "games" and confrontations he tries to initiate.  I guess the "tuff" part of his screen name is every bit as bogus as the "fake" things he claims to despise.  Poor guy!  It must be difficult hating who he is!  

[ws23rt]

You --ECS-- have chosen to supply where there is a demand.........My personal opinion is that when vehicle identification and documentation is tampered with it leads down the road to a dilution of the value of original identification of all vehicles.  As this becomes more common place the future owners of the cars will view these items to be of less and less value.

I completely respect your opinion and understand the premise for where it comes from.  Keep in mind however that the same linear logic can be used towards any process that assists in the Restoration of a vehicle.  It is certainly the discretion of the Owner to do as they choose with their vehicle.

On a separate note, I want to Thank Mike (Dayclona) for having the ability to see through the instigating antics that tufcat always starts.  He has been an obsessed stalker because of the Concept Car we are building and latches on to any subject he can to perpetuate a fight.  It's always hilarious for people like him to play the victim after they are confronted with their pathetic attempts to start trouble.  Too bad he doesn't have the guts to just come out and admit the "games" and confrontations he tries to initiate.  I guess the "tuff" part of his screen name is every bit as bogus as the "fake" things he claims to despise.  Poor guy!  It must be difficult hating who he is!  

I appreciate your acknowledgement of my point of view. I also agree that their are many other areas in car restoration that are similar in nature to this topic. But to bring them up as if to perhaps justify the topic at hand is not helpful.

It is indeed at the discretion of the owner what they do with their cars and I hope they can with easy research find out what will help them as well as what may harm them. That is the whole point of these conversations.

[ECS]

Uhhh. A original 70 charger door vin decal built before mid march at the SPD plant in the format ex 1 -70.  You said you had a dozen of them.

Remember you asked?  Don't go all raped ape crazy like you did earlier!  It is just a question.

I said I had dozens of original February built 1970 Charger VIN examples.  I don't recall ever saying that I had dozens which had a "format ex 1-70"!?!  I certainly don't mind checking my original examples and would be happy to do so.  

Could you please explain the significance of whether a 1970 Charger may have had its date printed with a 2 digit year code versus a 4 digit year code?  Why the controversy or interest between the 2 different variations?  Do you have a 1970 Charger built in February that is missing its Door VIN and need the information for a replacement?

[hemi-hampton]

Pictures of my mint original door decal. Have you ever seen a original door bottom so solid. My SPD was 330. LEON.

[ECS]

Pictures of my mint original door decal. Have you ever seen a original door bottom so solid. My SPD was 330. LEON.

Absolutely Gorgeous!  Also one of the best original VIN decals I have seen.  Thanks for sharing your photos Leon. 

[hemi-hampton]

Thanks to my car being a unrestored unmolested original survivor with original paint & original 24,000 miles & 100% rustfree has kept the door decal & other stuff in good condition. THANKS, LEON.

[ECS]

It is indeed at the discretion of the owner what they do with their cars and I hope they can with easy research find out what will help them as well as what may harm them. That is the whole point of these conversations.

Another aspect to this topic are the many changes that have occurred over the past 46 years.  The laws that Govern the Safety Certification Labels actually became law in September of 1966.  I think most Classic Customers want them replaced on their vehicle because it is the ONLY Federal Mandated decal that was on the vehicle at that time.  It is now a liability for a vehicle not to have this Label.  It lists pertinent information that provides safety data that is valuable to the Owner.  Now-days, if a repair Facility does not put the label back on the vehicle, it might cause vehicle safety issues due to insufficient information.  Because of this aspect, the Manufacturers are also providing an addendum label that is specific just to tire pressures.  Some Manufactures however use the VIN label as the sole source for safety data such as Tire Pressures.  

Below is a short video that the Directors at NACE had me do which explains some of the pitfalls for not replacing these labels.  This of course applies more to the 1990 & later vehicles and not the ones built prior to that date.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMYi1nQ24is  

[moparnation74]

Thanks to my car being a unrestored unmolested original survivor with original paint & original 24,000 miles & 100% rustfree has kept the door decal & other stuff in good condition. THANKS, LEON.

Leon, was your car built at or after mid march? Apparently, prior to mid march the format was different.  It would be nice to have earlier examples to clarify that idea.  Hey, at least you were willing to share your single example!

[ECS]

It would be nice to have earlier examples to clarify that idea.  Hey, at least you were willing to share your single example!

As I said earlier MN74, I have quite a few variations.  The "older" VIN decals I have records of are archived differently than the computerized current models that we manufacture.  Either I or one of my Employees will have to spend a significant amount of time going through hundreds of prints to randomly locate and separate the ones you are interested in.
 
Before investing that amount of effort and time, I would like to know if you would share or "clarify" the significance of whether a 1970 Charger had its date printed with a 2 digit year code versus a 4 digit year code?  What or where does the controversy exist between the 2 different variations?  Could you please reference the thread or comments that have prompted your interest in the 2 different styles?  Before spending the time to sift through and locate these variations, it would be helpful to know why the need to research them exist.  Do you actually own a 70 Charger that falls within the build date in question?  

[lukedukem]

You spend more time dancing around the question than answering it.  Why don't you simply give an answer to the question?  What "discrepancy" has you so obsessed with trying to find if a pre-March 1970 Charger used a 2 digit vs. a 4 digit year code?

I'm not choosing sides, just trying to help close this discussion out. after reading this whole thing, i think this is what the original question was Dave.

One thing I noticed on the door VIN decal was the month was denoted as "2 - 70".....every door decal I have for a 70 Charger for February 1970 was denoted with "2 - 1970". This format appears to remain until mid-March at which point the format changed to the "3 - 70" format. ECS may have thoughts on this.

some are asking for pictures to see if this statement Don is asking is true. the point which the format changed. if this is true, then the sticker for the car in this thread is not correct, it suppose to be 2-1970. that's what i get out of all this. hope this helps

Luke

[lukedukem]

i'm posting again because i think i have found an answer, maybe. bare with me:
1st bold sentence: if this is true then the one in this thread is not correct, but...
underlined sentence: this could make it correct if the original was used to format from. maybe, i didn't see if it was used.
2nd bold sentence: even if the first bold sentence is true, the owner wanted it this way and ECS is honoring their request, even if
it is not right, (according to the 1st bold sentence)

does this make any sense to anyone, or am i outta my league here?
listen, I'm not trying to add fuel to anyone's fire, i love learning about these cars, even if its not the year i like (69 is best, lol) but IMO, if there is not proof of exactly when mamopar started changing the date, then i think we are lost.
and I'm going cross eyed.

.......up until mid-March 1970 where it switched to "3 - 70" or "4 - 70" etc. I imagine Dave at ECS may possibly have more original examples on file given the nature of his business but would have to somehow cull out just 70 Chargers from St. Louis plant to do a direct compare....I imagine he has better things to do with his time like running his business.

Hi Don.  If you ever need assistance with documentation please feel free to ask and I will be more than happy to provide you with what I have accumulated.  I don't claim to have "proof" of everything ever made but our database has well over 200,000 examples of various makes & models ranging from 1969 to present day.  Every Car Manufacturer we work with has told us that we collectively know more about their VIN program than they do.  Chrysler just turned over their entire (internal) GLOBAL VIN program to us this past month!  This has been a 4 year effort in the making.  We are now the main replacement supplier for both Fiat & Chrysler.  

Regarding the 2 versus 4 digit date, that is another area that has no defined protocol.  March 10, 1970 was the day that all vehicle manufacturers had to comply with the new Emissions Standards that were mandated by the SAE.  For whatever reason, that also happened to be the same approximate time that the 2 digit date started being used. I have even seen original Chrysler VIN decals that still used the 4 digit date as late as May 1970.  If a Customer does not have an original to format from, we inform them of the approximate times when the changes occurred.  If their vehicle production falls around that March 10th date, we allow them to decide if they want a 2 or 4 digit date for their production month.  If they want a 2 digit date in February or a 4 digit date in April and do not have the original to use as a format, we will honor their request since it does not change the registration or specific information of the vehicle.  

I wanted to make one other statement as it relates to the verbiage being used throughout this thread.  (Not directed at you Don.)  It seems that a few Members here constantly refer to certain reproduction items as "Fake" and do so with a negative connotation.  When many of you have your vehicles restored to Factory condition, does it bother you that you have a "Fake" paint job?  Does it bother you that you have "Fake" Interior Upholstering or use "Fake" replacement Carpeting?  What about the "Fake" Engine components that are used to rebuild the Engine or the "Fake" Suspension Components that have been used to make the vehicle ride like new again?  I could go on but I'm sure you get the point.  We manufacture authentic/real VIN replacements for those who want to restore their vehicle back to Factory/Showroom condition.  We do this with the proper credentials and licensing from the original Vehicle Manufacturers.

[ECS]

i'm posting again because i think i have found an answer, maybe. bare with me:
1st bold sentence: if this is true then the one in this thread is not correct, but...
underlined sentence: this could make it correct if the original was used to format from. maybe, i didn't see if it was used.
2nd bold sentence: even if the first bold sentence is true, the owner wanted it this way and ECS is honoring their request, even if
it is not right, (according to the 1st bold sentence)

You obviously have the intelligence to understand what I have written and are 100% correct with your assessment.  If the question asked by tufcat and MN74 originated from the decal that I made for the bogus 70 green Charger, then this entire thread is nothing more than a waste of everyone's time.  I have CLEARLY STATED MANY TIMES that an original example was not used to format that VIN decal and the date was issued at the Customers request.  I was just talking with Gene Lewis on the phone and he heard the conversation I just had with one my Employees about this topic.  I asked my Employee (Charlie) how long it would take him to filter through the examples we have in order to find a specific style VIN decal.  His exact words were that "it would be like finding a needle in a haystack".  He said we have "thousands" that would have to be sifted through.  

I don't mind searching for the information but there is no reason for doing so if the green Charger "replacement" VIN decal is the focal point of this instigation/charade.  As Davtona stated in a previous post, the real reason that tufcat & MN74 have been so obsessed with the subject matter, is listed in his quote below.  They are simply on a Witch hunt!  I guess I should be flattered that they are obsessed with following everything I do and every move I make.  

This whole 70 Charger door tag subject to you has been to prove ECS wrong again. More than what is correct on a 70 Charger door. I have a 70 6 pack Charger and follow this thread in the hopes I maybe learn more about them. Your personal vendetta is getting in the way of that.

[JB400]

I doubt that he knows the answer.

[ECS]

Many people have reposted the same question over and over.  Stay on topic please if not move on.

You and tufcat continuously have been the ones asking about a 2 year date for a pre-March 1970 Charger.  Why the concern for this particular topic?  Why did this subject matter become a point of interest for you 2 guys?  What is the premise for the question and the exact example that has caused the controversy for you?  Why do you continue to be so evasive in telling about the 2 digit code decal that has caused the need for your investigation?  Where did you see a pre-March 2 digit year decal that has perked your interest?  Those are very simple questions to answer when requesting a massive effort to find the information you're asking for.  

[ECS]

I doubt that he knows the answer.

Sure I do!  They made a handful of 2 digit date codes in February of 1970.  They also made a handful of 4 digit date codes as late as May of 1970.  Now the next thing you guys are going to ask is for me to post PROOF of an original.  Before I even entertain the thought of doing so, tufcat or MN74 will provide an explanation for why they want the information or I will not waste a moment of my time to locate and post them.  That's real simple to understand.....isn't it?

[JB400]

I still have my doubts