Wow, what a nice car. Gotta love the tow tabs in the trunk!

Does anyone know the build date?

The trim tag date is 02D

In the video, Patrick talks about the car’s engine being dated the first week of March while the car’s built date was the fourth week of February. He speculates that the car was likely held up at the assembly line due to the rare parts being unavailable. With this car, and it’s condition, I must say that I’m not questioning the legitimacy of the motor being the original born with. Has anyone seen any other documented or bullet proof instances of born with motors that are dated after the car’s assembly date? That opens up a whole other can of worms...

I sure look forward to seeing more details about this car like the engine stamp, etc.

Yeah, little confused on Patrick not mentioning any vin stamping on the block. And my understanding was the tag date was established before the body was bucked, not a "projected build date" like mentioned.

I Don't agree with the statement that rare parts not available and the line held up. There are tons of jan and feb 842s[nov dec 68 as well] made, and 3 or so dates in each month, hard to believe with those cast dates and only so few cars made theyd run out of heads...… The heads on the car would have to be march or close dated if they weren't available when the car was built. As far as the build date on pad,who knows......if you combine that with the fact I have 6 sets of feb heads with zero plugs,that tells me probably the plugged head is not feb or march, but earlier

The way I understood it was that the Fisher date for the body was the last week of February (02D) but the VIN sequence of the car falls within an early March build. It may have been possible that the body shell was delayed during assembly @ Fisher. The block was assembled March 7th so that would have to be a very long delay in production.

If true,you'd think it would have affected more then just one car during that time period.
I've looked at a few 1969 L78 Chevelles with the L-89 head option,and none of them had a lapse like this one,that he's trying to rationalize. :hmmm:

I agree. He usually shows close-ups of the numbers and stamps in his videos, but not on this one. I just can’t put much faith in his word after the whole “unconverted” Yenko nonsense :D

No mention of VIN on block, trans. or any codes on rear. Those numbers should be easily readable on a 2200 mile car that lived inside. Never say never, but I’m scratching my head on this one. I will say that this is the first car I’ve heard of where the engine, if in fact original, has a build date after the body.