Vintage Mustang Forums banner

VIN number anolmaly

3K views 25 replies 10 participants last post by  22GT 
#1 ·
I own a 1967 Convertible that has a strange quirk. The title to the car (the last three titles to the car, including the original, used the warranty/serial number for the VIN. Strangely, the number/letter combo 7T11A111111 is stamped on the visible drivers side apron (stamped twice there, in fact) and the same combination is stamped in the "hidden" area under the passenger fender. The car is all original, and virtually rust-free. The front clip has most definitely not been replaced at any time in its life. The door data plate is original, intact and reads 7T03C1*****. The buck tag is fully intact and readable, with the stamp matching the door data plate. The detail from the data plate, the buck tag and the Marti report all match the car exactly. I know all about the possibility of human error with using the stamp machine at the time of the build. I know sometimes a letter or a number got goofed up. But the entire VIN? I have searched all over the internet for someone who has seen car with this quirk. I know mine isn't the only one. A search turns up one posting from 2004 that identified the same identical stamp on 67 coupe, but nothing came of the thread. One thing that I am certain of is that don't have a 67 four door falcon with a premium fuel 289 disguised as a convertible Mustang. I am also certain the car was not stolen or altered. One curious thing that we discovered about the car with the teardown was that blue paint (maybe brittany blue, maybe columbine blue) was sprayed on the car and hen for some reason it was stopped or repainted summertime yellow. We also found traces of the blue also underneath the factory yellow paint. Its a C-code all original car, p/s, a/c car with the limited slip 3.00 rear.

Any theories?
 
See less See more
#3 ·
"Legal" VIN is the one stamped on the aprons, plain and simple. Depending on the State in which you are titling, registering and whether or not there is another vehicle already registered/titled with the same VIN they may require a State-issued VIN.
 
#6 ·
An anomaly for sure....one thing in your favor with such a weird stamping vin # is that ford will not have a record of having built that vin, but they do have a record of the vin that was assigned to your car. No one ever checked under the hood when buying the car back in the day.Why would they do anything other than check the door plate at best? I owned my 66 fast back for almost 30 years before I noticed the apron vins had 07 for coupe, while the door tag had 09 for a fastback.
 
#7 ·
IMO it's not surprising you have consecutive titles with the door tag number. First it's common for the DMV person to accept the VIN on previous title. Second many accept the door tag number as VIN even though
it says for warranty only. Also who would take an A code and try to fake it as a C code.

It's just plain weird that three consecutive digits could be typo'd. Don't have the answer off hand but it's
probably widely known were Falcons being built in the Dearborn (T) plant at the same time. Then it would
be possible the wrong VIN info could have gotten to the VIN stamper(s).
 
#8 ·
Send both VINs to Marti and see what they say. $25 per number, IIRC, not a lot to possibly clear up a mystery.

If the door/tag number matches the car (assuming its not been overly modified/"restored" (as in the color, interior, options line up) it sorta clears it up as a really wild mis-stamp. Maybe even ask if they have any thoughts ont eh odd number.

As the "111111" looks like an "initial setting" of a stamping tool, maybe its a day 1, first run and then they realized they forgot to reset the tool!
 
#9 ·
I thought that I would follow up here in case anyone is interested in what came about so far with this situation. I contacted the state license and theft division of the DMV. I spoke with an inspector and made an appointment for my car to be inspected by the DMV. The inspector that came to my house was exceptionally nice and pleasant. We had a great conversation about cars and some of the quirks that exist with them. The inspector carefully examined my car and and ran both versions of the VIN through the national theft database. The title VIN is absolutely clean and the misstamp VIN is, not surprisingly, fictional. We discussed some the practical realities of dealing with possible purchasers in the future and the inevitable insurance questions.

His determination was that first, this is clearly an all original vehicle that has not been tampered with any manner. Secondly, the fender stamp is an obvious factory error or aberration and is not a VIN in any form. He also noted that because I had a valid title to the vehicle with the VIN that clearly was intended for the car (based on the other evidence of the buck tag, door tag, sheet metal stamp continutity, etc) that there was no matter for the DMV to address.

However, at my request, he could process the car for a reassigned state VIN, which of course is not preferred, and mark the same with state issued VIN stickers beside (not over) the existing fender skirt stampings) He felt the explanation would be self-explanatory with all of the evidence that exists (being the copies of all the prior titles and the clearly visible stamps), but agreed that there is a large segment of the vintage car world that will crucify the car for this change and will use treat the car negatively without reasonable justification. I contacted my insurance company, who, in turn, posed the situation to the major well known classic car insurer for instruction and guidance on how to document and insure the car with this situation. Believe it or not, the insurance company suggested that I leave the title alone, not convert it to a state issued VIN and that they would insure the car for full stated value as long as we properly include the documentation of the error with application for the policy, including photographs of the stamp, buck tag, door tag and prior titles. I felt better after getting this news. I realize that its not a perfect situation for sure, and there are those among us that will always look for the conspiracy about the situation. I am heavily invested in this thing (as everyone here knows about very well) and I really just want to enjoy a lifetime dream car without it becoming a nightmare!
 
#13 ·
Agreed about the union thing...I am disappointed that most US factories also have eliminated workers themselves right along with worker error--but that is is different topic altogther..

My car was the 33rd car down the line on Friday, December 9, 1966. I guess it will always be a Friday car....... I am betting whatever 32 cars rolled out that day before mine have one thing in common--that stupid stamp!
 
#20 ·
Vehicle Identification Number: VIN. Just saying.
Stan
 
#21 ·
If only modern factories could eliminate styling errors
Well, to be fair, doing it manually back-in-the day led to some real duds too.... computers and high tech don't compensate for poor judgement. They just let you make mistakes faster....

Early Mustang Prototypes




... and "factories" build the design, they don't do the styling... that is long before the tooling and assembly is done! :wink:
 
#23 · (Edited)
Well, to be fair, doing it manually back-in-the day led to some real duds too.... computers and high tech don't compensate for poor judgement. They just let you make mistakes faster....
"....... and "factories" build the design, they don't do the styling... that is long before the tooling and assembly is done! :wink:
It was a tongue in cheek thing, but it would be nice if the line workers could make the stylists see the light.

Styling Duds back in the day were rare, these days style is lacking across all model in some lines, and sometimes persists for decades. But as duds go, I'd rather have an Edsel vs. an Aztek. Even the Gremlin beats out the Aztek and the popular but ugly Maverick, Pinto, Vega, Musang II, and '80's Taurus.

Z
 
#24 ·
Styling Duds back in the day were rare
really? I'd tend to disagree... but style is in the eye of the beholder.


Pacer (a.k.a Moon-mobile, add in the AMC Hornet, Eagle see below, and almost anything but the Javelin, which some don't like.. )





Corvair


Mustang II


Most Citroens


Matador ... stylish and appealing... :surprise:



early 60s valaints





I'm not too excited about any of these "stylish" cars from the pre-modern-factory "golden era" of design! :wink:


The list goes on... but is totally subjective as some people like red and some like blue as "the best color"....


If you limit it to Nova's, Camaros, Firebirds, GTOs, Corvettes, etc from the late 60's early 70s obviously most here lean to that era's styling. but there were lotsa duds all along the path of automotive design....
 
#26 ·
I agree. The near total lack of styling today is disquieting. The Cube is ugly, but at least it has styling. The front, rear, and sides were obviously designed by the same person or group, and it doesn't look like every other car in the lot. The Aztek is ugly because it's a styling-free zone, the "designers" simply took features families wanted and glued them together, design by committee. Not only does the front look nothing like the rear, it looks as though the people designing them never even met.



 
  • Like
Reactions: aslan
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top