[alfagtv74]

anyone have any ideas on this Bobcor 69 gtv?


http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Alfa...020QQitemZ300160956296QQrdZ1QQsspagenameZWDVW

 

[papajam]

Chassis number is a 1969 but someone went to some trouble to make it appear to be a 1971. Wonder why? Possible 71-up rear clip as it has large taillights. Wrong sidemarkers and no Bertone badge indicate additional bodywork. Not sure what the thing in the center of the rear bumper is. Lots of other mods too especially the interior.

 

[tiger0529]

Not a bad car if it's priced at 800-9000 range

Well, I do see bunch of non-stock items all over the car but if I think it's not so difficult to make it look like a '69 again. Replace bumpers, taillights and side markers (the last two do require some bodywork) with the ones from a '69 and the car will not look so strange (apart from the weird green paint and unattractive interior). Judging from the positions of the side markers (on the US S2 1750GTV and the US 2000GTV the front side marker sits closer to the press line right above), it's still using the large round opening for the round side markers for the US S1 1750GTV so all you have to there is to fill small holes for mounting studs of the markers. Heck, it even has the back up light for the 105/115 coupes w/ smaller taillights!! Filling the extra opening for the larger taillights is not a hard job either (we've had my mother's US S2 converted to Euro look).

Oh wait. I just found that the car has the glue-in type windshield. Oh well.

 

[Pat Braden]

Bit of a Confusing 69 GTV for Sale

Chassis number is a 1969 but someone went to some trouble to make it appear to be a 1971. Wonder why? Possible 71-up rear clip as it has large taillights. Wrong sidemarkers and no Bertone badge indicate additional bodywork. Not sure what the thing in the center of the rear bumper is. Lots of other mods too especially the interior.

Considering the car is located in Walnut, California; I'm assuming it has a California title, which is indicated on the e-bay listing as "salvaged." In California that means the car was "totaled," bought back from the insurance company, and repaired. That would explain the hodgepodge of pieces and why it appears to be originally a 1969 by vin number and a kind of 1971 in appearance. If the rear appears to be 1971, my best guess, is that it was involved in a rear end collison so you might want to check the interior trunk for crushing, squareness, or repair, depending on how the clips were used or welded in place; and determine if the doors open properly, but the impact of the collision may not have shoved it forward enough to affect them, where it would be more likely to be readily apparent on a sedan. Depending on how skilled the weld was you may be able to find the weld marks of the clip(s); a poor job you'll be able to see, a better job you may be able to feel as you run your hand along the car. By all means, if you're already suspicious of the car take a magnet and check for bondo, you may discover that it has been repaired in other places than the obvious based on appearance.

There is nothing wrong with a "salvaged" title, but you need to know if you purchase the car and live in California that the title will be transferred to you as a "salvaged" title. If you intend to keep the car, not a problem. If you intend to resell it at some point, you may have trouble finding a buyer that is willing to accept a "salvaged" title. It just depends on how well the repair was done and what your plan for the vehicle is.

 

[cat7195]

Some states have very strict guidelines for salvage titles. The Texas document for salvage title is 174 pages.

 

[Pat Braden]

Bit of a Confusing 69 GTV for Sale

Some states have very strict guidelines for salvage titles. The Texas document for salvage title is 174 pages.

I agree, there are probably other reasons that California issues "salvaged" titles but that is the primary and predominant one.

I find this highly suspicious and suspect that the seller is reading this thread, because the title has been changed from "salvaged" to "clear" now on e-bay since this discussion was posted this a.m. I certainly would want to see the title before bidding on the car under the current circumstances, if it's important that you don't get stuck with a "salvaged" title and especially with what others have pointed out about the inconsistencies between the 1969 vin. number and the actual physical appearance of the car.

I would proceed with caution on interest in this vehicle as things are unfolding.

 

[jimcra]

I have an Idea about this car! If you don't like it, don't buy it! It has always amazed me the number of people on this BB bagging on a car they have NEVER seen. We are not talking about a $200,000 car here folks. We have bagged on Bobcor on and on. Time to move on. I was personally slammed in the past for saying DON"T BUY ANYTHING WITHOUT SEEING IT. DON"T SEND MONEY WITHOUT SEEING IT! I stand by my words today. I can only say, again, like I said over a year ago, look at the car. If you don't like it, don't buy it. Personally, I could care less if Bobcor "restored" the car. I could care less if Mr. Stephens (who has a great reputation) rebuilt the engine. I want to see it with my own eyes. I have seen plenty of cars that have won plenty of awards that were left for dead. A salvage title is mostly an insurance issue. Half the cars in Akitamans shop would qualify for salvage junk until he is done with them. The "scratches" from the pictures look more like paint shrinkage to me, but what do I know. Only been around collector cars for 35 years.

 

[Dan Walker]

Whoa- I didn't think there was anything wrong with discussing a car for sale or it's merits or detractions- I thought it was an interesting discussion on "Salvage Titles", which I know very little about but now I learned something- isn't that what these forums are about? I agree, buying a car off eBay is a chancy venture, no matter who is selling it, or worked on it, etc. Physically inspecting the car is always the best way to buy, but a lot of people do buy cars from eBay, Craigs List, etc. without knowing a lot about the car or what is correct and what is different. Personally, I wouldn't ahve known the difference between a '69 taillight on a GTV and a '71. so here's another thing I've learned. Keep up the lively discussions, I say!

 

[Pat Braden]

Bit of a Confusing 69 GTV for Sale

I have an Idea about this car! If you don't like it, don't buy it! It has always amazed me the number of people on this BB bagging on a car they have NEVER seen. We are not talking about a $200,000 car here folks. We have bagged on Bobcor on and on. Time to move on. I was personally slammed in the past for saying DON"T BUY ANYTHING WITHOUT SEEING IT. DON"T SEND MONEY WITHOUT SEEING IT! I stand by my words today. I can only say, again, like I said over a year ago, look at the car. If you don't like it, don't buy it. Personally, I could care less if Bobcor "restored" the car. I could care less if Mr. Stephens (who has a great reputation) rebuilt the engine. I want to see it with my own eyes. I have seen plenty of cars that have won plenty of awards that were left for dead. A salvage title is mostly an insurance issue. Half the cars in Akitamans shop would qualify for salvage junk until he is done with them. The "scratches" from the pictures look more like paint shrinkage to me, but what do I know. Only been around collector cars for 35 years.

I agree with you totally, you should never buy a car, whether for $500 or $200,000, sight unseen or without having someone you trust inspect it for you by your criteria and standards, which to me means you have to know that person pretty d*mn well.

I thought the bb was here for people who are seeking advice and/or solutions and answers to their questions. I was not, personally, bagging on Bobcor or anyone else and I don't believe the others in the thread were either; simply offering what we saw based on the facts and questions as posed or presented. As you stated I don't care who owns the car, but I do care if they are not ethical and are misrepresenting what they're selling, which the change in title status indicates to me, and that I have been able to verify outside of the bb community. But having said that, ethics are far reaching and they affect the entire Alfa community, not just the bb members, the ARA members, or the AROC members. To that end, we need to help each other with what are acceptable ethics as related to buying and selling cars, specifically, Alfas.

Nor am I suggesting that a "salvaged" title is not something that can be worked with, but the buyer needs to know up front; it should not be a surprise or unknown sprung as the title is turned over. I've posted previously that I've owned and still own "salvaged" titled vehicles; but there are hinderances to them that there is not with a "clear" title.

As far as paint shrinkage, I'm no expert, but I'll bet dollars to donuts that the car has been hit, and a clip or clips put in place to repair it. As my signature states I'm not an expert nor authority on anything, just been around a lot of Alfas and people buying and selling them, some of them ethical and some not by a long shot. There is something about this deal that "smells as fishy as Denmark" to me. (No offense meant to Danes reading the bb.)

 

[papajam]

I've come into some information about this car that a previous owner (not the seller or Bobcor) modified the external appearance of the car to that of a 1971 model year by choice, not out of necessity. This means that the rear valance was modified to accept 71 & up tail lights. There was also evidence of body repair on the left rear quarter. This vehicle was a theft recovery which perhaps could account for the salvage title?

 

[Pat Braden]

Bit of a Confusing 69 GTV for Sale

I've come into some information about this car that a previous owner (not the seller or Bobcor) modified the external appearance of the car to that of a 1971 model year by choice, not out of necessity. This means that the rear valance was modified to accept 71 & up tail lights. There was also evidence of body repair on the left rear quarter. This vehicle was a theft recovery which perhaps could account for the salvage title?

I concur. I am also in possession of the above information that I received a couple of days ago, but I was in hope that someone else would post it. Thank you. I was also told that when this person owned the car the title was "salvaged" and he sold it with a "salvaged" title; since the car is in California the title is still "salvaged." My question, has anyone notified e-bay that the title is indeed "salvaged" and not as indicated as "clear" on e-bay now, in case the bidders are not bb readers?

That is still unethical to show a title as "clear" when, in fact, you know it is "salvaged" and was changed based on the postings on this thread.

 

[papajam]

Just a thought here but couldn't the term 'clear title' simply mean that there are no liens on the vehicle?

 

[jimcra]

papajam is correct. "clear" could mean there is no lien holder like a bank or credit union. "Salvage" could mean it was stripped to the point where it would cost the insurance company more to put it back together than it was worth. Especially when these cars were not worth a whole lot. It could have also been hit with enough damage, the insurance company felt it cheaper to total it rather than fix it. A few years back, that wasn't alot of money. Always best to personally see the car, get the story from the owner and then decide if the story "feels" right.

 

[Pat Braden]

Bit of a Confusing 69 GTV for Sale

papajam is correct. "clear" could mean there is no lien holder like a bank or credit union. "Salvage" could mean it was stripped to the point where it would cost the insurance company more to put it back together than it was worth. Especially when these cars were not worth a whole lot. It could have also been hit with enough damage, the insurance company felt it cheaper to total it rather than fix it. A few years back, that wasn't alot of money. Always best to personally see the car, get the story from the owner and then decide if the story "feels" right.

In this case the car was a stolen vehicle recovery, the rear of the vehicle had been modified, but it was also broad-sided in the rear side panel and repaired.

I'm not going to dispute the definition of "clear" title not meaning secured by someone else or some institution -- however, in this case the title was originally listed as "salvage," which is correct for this car; while this car may have a "clear" title as far as financial interest not secured by some other party, the title is not clear in the salvaged sense and never will be in California. When the salvage certificate is issued the "clear" title and registration is revoked permanently.

By California law once a "salvaged" titled car is identified, it can never have a "clear" title; please note that California considers it fraud to advertise a vehicle with a "clear" title when it is, in fact, a "salvage" titled vehicle:

"Resurrecting a Salvage Vehicle
In some cases, a salvage vehicle can be driven again. Certain types of damage that will cause an insurance carrier to "total" a vehicle (meaning pay off the value rather than repair it) are actually fixable. The insurer might not think the repair costs are worth it, but someone else might see only possibilities.

Oftentimes, used car dealers will purchase totaled vehicles at auction, repair them, and then resell them to the public. When a salvaged vehicle is repaired to streetworthiness, the Salvage Certificate is exchanged for a special title so it can be legally sold. This title says "Revived Salvage." At this point, the vehicle may be reregistered.

How to Spot a Salvage

According to California law, all vehicles that have been totaled must be issued a Salvage Certificate, and their title and registration will be revoked. By taking away the title, California is protecting consumers against buying a salvage vehicle without knowing it (a common fraud).

Once a vehicle is legally rebuilt and inspected (see below), it will be issued a title with the words "Revived Salvage" clearly displayed―every time a new title is issued. This is called a "branded title" because once a vehicle has been salvaged, it will never receive a clean title again. While a rebuilt salvage might be a great car, the law is designed to let you at least know about its past before you decide to buy it."

Source: http://www.dmv.org/ca-california/salvaged-vehicles.php

 

[1166]

My friend had a 72 GTV that was a 'salvage' car. Why...the seats were slashed and it would have cost more to recover them than the car was worth in the mid 80's...

 

[jimcra]

1166, that was my point exactly. Many times it is a financial decision by the insurance company. In the 70's and '80 many a 356 Porsche were "totalled" when these cars were worth $2K and $3K. Like I said before, many of the cars being restored in Akitamans shop would be "totalled" by an insurance company. There are many degrees of "salvage" titled cars on the road today. The hard part is getting an insurance company to insure it. I do agree, the owner should be pointing this fact out in the ad.

 

[lowmileage]

This would be enough for me to buy it sight unseen

"3. She handles like a dream."

 

[randyleepublic]

Insurance, we don need no stinkin insurance!

The hard part is getting an insurance company to insure it.

If you are talking full coverage, i.e. theft and collision, IMO you are totally wasting your time and money getting any car more than 10 years old covered by a regular carrier. They now have so many exclusions that if, say, the car is stolen, your payment would be in the neighborhood of $5000 on a restored GTV!

The only sane way to insure any older car is with an Agreed Value carrier. Those guys would, I am almost sure, have no qualms about salvage or no salvage. They are going to inspect the car anyway.

The only exception to the above is with an older car that is completely stock and has always and only been serviced at the dealer. Not really possible with an Alfa, I guess! In that etremely rare case a regular carrier could probably be muscled into paying something like the car's actual value if you had a claim.

Liability coverage, on the other hand, should not be a problem to get.

 

[Pat Braden]

Bit of a Confusing 69 GTV for Sale / Salvage Title

If you are talking full coverage, i.e. theft and collision, IMO you are totally wasting your time and money getting any car more than 10 years old covered by a regular carrier. They now have so many exclusions that if, say, the car is stolen, your payment would be in the neighborhood of $5000 on a restored GTV!

The only sane way to insure any older car is with an Agreed Value carrier. Those guys would, I am almost sure, have no qualms about salvage or no salvage. They are going to inspect the car anyway.

The only exception to the above is with an older car that is completely stock and has always and only been serviced at the dealer. Not really possible with an Alfa, I guess! In that etremely rare case a regular carrier could probably be muscled into paying something like the car's actual value if you had a claim.

Liability coverage, on the other hand, should not be a problem to get.

I concur, Pat and I never had any trouble getting insurance coverage on our "salvaged" title vehicles through our regular insurance carrier, Farmers; however, I looked long and hard for an agent that understood how often we switched cars and how many we had. Furthermore, we did not carry comp, collision, fire, and theft on each vehicle; it was included in the umbrella policy since the only Alfas we ever had "stolen," as in removed from our property without permission, were parked at our house; not out on a public street or public parking area. It takes all kinds, and yes, we did get them back, not exactly in the same condition, though.

 

[randyleepublic]

however, I looked long and hard for an agent that understood how often we switched cars and how many we had.

Oh, yes Ma'am, you said a mouthful there! Only now the state cries "havoc" if every single car that you own is not covered, whether you are driving it or not. My green Spider was trailered to my garage and has been up on jackstands since I bought it. Now, they are threatening to "Suspend" my registration.

Never mind that I have valid coverage on 5 vehicles. I might drive the one that is not covered, right!?

Oh, yeah, and I tried to get it put on non-op status. You can't. Not until you renew.

Whatever!!!