Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

COPO,
Yes,in part I was referring to Ed's Web sight as some other members added up the numbers of cars sold and used that as absolute info, but I also have copies of some of the famed Inventory hand written sheets which show Yenko Chevrolet as the selling dealer when it wasn't.

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

I've read that artical a long time ago.Was just wondering if anybody has had their car checked with a gigercounter to see if any of that radio active stuff that was in the back lot was still in the car? [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/no.gif[/img]

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

Stefano;
I'm sure there were some cars sold out of other dealers when the inventory sheets say Yenko, but there are also several cars sold out of Yenko when the sheets say other dealers (Yunkers for eg). So, although not completely accurate as to the selling dealer, the info suffices for this discussion.

The rough count that I did for the cars sold out of Douglass showed all but one were X66 cars, therefore it appears that he got one of the first shipments like we have all agreed on, but not many more - in fact, the non X66 car may be a replacement?

Who knows, one thing appears clear, Douglass Chev. was not a high volume Yenko SportsCars dealer when compared to other dealers in the network - I didn't count Yenko Chev. when I listed the other higher volume dealers, maybe I should! Douglass certainly had the potential to be one of the higher volume dealers, but he decided to sell COPO cars instead [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

To the buying & driving public in Chicagoland Marlin,if they were sold as Yenkos they were YENKOS. These cars found their way into all parts of a very large market area, and were seen by a large portion of the target audience, including me. That's all that counted from a market penetration, and, advertising standpoint. I'm not going to guess whether he did or didn't count them, but, he was justified in doing so if he chose to. Knowing how marketing oriented he was, the tendency of that mindset is to inflate the figures using any justification possible. With that in mind, Don may not have been totally happy with the arrangement, but, once that was the only way to get his product into Chicago, it would make sense to enjoy the benefits, and, take full credit for the cars being sold as "HIS" products.
Let's not forget that most business deals are based on mutual benefit, but, where neither party is totally satisfied with the terms.

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

Tom....the key word in my sentence was Chicago....it's logical that JD sold the most COPO's in Chicago.

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

I understand the marketing side of things, and agree that showing a particular number of units sold can be used to show popularity of a given product. However, for someone to attempt to read that silly sign as an inclusion of these JD cars is a super stretch! We know that Don pumped up his numbers for a variety of reasons, which is why we go back to the written records - although not perfect, they are better than anyones memory.

Mike, are you suggesting that because the driving and buying public in Chicagoland believed that these cars were Yenko's - they are indeed Yenko's? I'm not sure what you meant with that statement, so can you clarify?

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

Yes, I can clarify what I said all along. I think that's about 18 or more thread pages ago. I believe that if a car was sold as a Yenko by Douglass, with some evidence of that fact, that car should be recognized as a "Yenko Camaro" or, at the very least, a Douglass*Yenko Camaro.
Now, I have said my peace, presented my thoughts on the arrangement, and, clarified my position. There will never be a consensus on this subject, so, why do we insist on rehashing this subject over & over? I think we all respect each other's right to an opinion, so, why can't we just leave it at that? I for one, am finished discussing this subject. Again.

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

Ok, settle down, I was just hoping to have swayed you a little bit, but we are where we began - which is just fine, just two different perspectives.

[img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif[/img]

It is bound to get interesting when various pieces of memorabilia are being utilized to support a particular side of this subject. I think the non-confrontational dialogue of this post is a step forward, makes for better reading and easier understanding of the two views.

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

[ QUOTE ]
it's logical that JD sold the most COPO's in Chicago.

[/ QUOTE ]

Am still curious how you can say this, without some sort of documentation to back it up. This is not to say that it is not true, but until we get access to Chevy's records, I see no way of knowing for sure. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif[/img]

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

If Douglass cars are not "real" Yenkos, because the stripes/badges (as supplied by Yenko) were installed at Douglass, then maybe Cannonsburg cars are not "real" Yenkos, unless Don personally installed the stripes/badges. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

I don't know if any exist, but would a stripe delete Cannonsburg Yenko be just a COPO? That is not a slam against COPOs, just meant as a differentiation.

Anyway, I'll bet that Don is still pi$$ed at the employee who left the COPO paperwork in that first batch of Douglass-bound Yenkos!!

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

Mike (and others) do you feel that ALL Douglass COPOs received Yenko trim, and thus should be listed/restored as Yenkos, thus no Douglass COPOs?

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

It is kinda of strange that JD only sold early cars. If I was Don, I would have scrambled to find a new Chevy dealer to sell my cars in one of the largest markets in the country. Unless I knew they were still being sold by JD. Yes this is only speculation.

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

Tom, is there any other truth than JD sold the most COPO's/Yenko's in Chicago? Who else was selling these cars in the Chicago Metropolitan area back in 1969? Im not talking anywhere else in Illinois. Just the Chi-town metro area.

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

I think a lot is being read into a silly sign from '69 and an interview from '87...that was conducted a full 20 years after Don had built the cars that are in question. The fact that the 350th unit built sign was photographed on BOTH a Camaro AND a Chevelle on the same day shows that neither car could really be THE 350th unit built, whether he meant to include '67s and 8's in the count, or Chevelles and Novas or whatever. Don was a bullsh*tter, this is pretty clear. Claiming he installed Yenko serial plates on all 69 cars, even saying he added headers, removed and upgraded the stock shocks and sway bars, claiming the Chevelles were SS396 engine swap cars or even suggesting that there were more than a few 427 Novas built in '68 are all statements that actual evidence of existing cars contradicts. Maybe he recalled incorrectly, I mean it was 20 years earlier. Maybe the 350th sign was just a marketing promo, or maybe it was made to impress the big whigs at Colonial Chevrolet, a sizable network dealer who Don wanted to make feel special. Maybe it was to fool the NHRA into thinking he was well on his way to builing enough cars for them to be race legal, or maybe it was just a made up number that sounded reasonable and gave Don a little ego boost. I've also seen Don's personal photos of Glen Campbell standing beside a Yenko Deuce in the Colonial showroom, which was surely a publicity deal. Don was a salesman, and he wanted his cars to SELL, whether it meant inflating a few numbers or having a country & western singer appear beside his product. I think Don was all about making a big to do about his cars, himself, his ideas, and rightly so, he was a revolutionary individual in a lot of ways, but I certainly don't think he was above stretching the truth a little. To take the numbers that he apparently claimed on a sign during the time he was actively building and selling the cars, or even the numbers he recalled some 20 years later and try to make them add up, counting *Douglass cars, Canonsburg cars, Chevelles, Camaros, Novas however you want to try is surely an exercise in futility. They just don't add up, cuz they're BS...just my opinion, I'm sure many will disagree. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/bs.gif[/img]

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

Very interesting info about the pictures. As you said, pretty much rules out using that sign as a gauge of how many Yenkos were produced.

And makes this whole thread meaningful, if nothing else then to get valuable information about what most people had thought for years was a vital piece of eveidence concerning the number of Yenkos produced. To me, discovering this type of info makes this board worthwhile, and unique. Thanks to you and Brandon for sharing it.

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

Supercar kid this isnt all about the sign. This has been a on going discussion for a while. Tom according to Jack he paid a fee for every one of the copos to be sold as Yenkos. wheter or not they were sold as Yenkos we dont know. Since most cars retain its original tail panel that is about the only way to tell for sure. I dont know of any JD copos found that do not have the holes for the Yenko emblems in the rear tail panel. So at this time I think it is safe to say they all can be restored as Yenkos.

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

John, I don't find that strange at all. Apparently, the first few batches of Yenko Camaros sold pretty well, for most of the participating dealers. If Jack had 6+/- of the X66 cars on his lot, then ordered up another 22-25 COPO cars on his own, he had plenty of cars to move, and didn't buy anymore from Don. By the time they dissolved their prior agreement of Jack being the exclusive Chicago dealer for sYc's, the insurance problem was in effect. It is understandable that few if any of the other Chicago dealers would have been anxious to get their hands on some distressed merchandise. Once the Deuce was loose in '70, several Chicago dealers were on board - except Douglass.

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

Marlin you take little segments of the dicussion to make each argument look like your right. There is a whole picture here to be looked at. You are calling JD a liar. I would like to know why JD said it happened what does he have to gain by it, and why Don mentioned it happened. We should throw all that away because you think it didnt happen. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

[ QUOTE ]
So at this time I think it is safe to say they all can be restored as Yenkos

[/ QUOTE ] .

John, to me that creates up a very interesting situation, with a blanket statement like that, not only are we liable to see Yenkos in all colors, with all kinds of rare options, ones not normalaly asscoiated with Yenko built cars, but we may very well see a Yenko Camaro convertible, Yenko El Camino, Yenko Corvette, etc. You see, I am sure JD was no different then any other dealer of that era. If a customer was willing to pay the $$$, it was built, including putting Yenko trim on ANY car they had in inventory. I do not feel that this is a stretch of the imagination to believe this happened.

Thus, I feel there are two options. 1. since JD had an agreement with Don and had the trim in hand, acknowledge all Douglass cars as Yenkos, or 2. require documented proof of any Douglass car before it is allowed to have the name Yenko associated with it. To me, this is easy, as we require documentation of all other supercars before they are accepted as legit.

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

Mr Clary I am still waiting to hear who else in Chicago was selling Yenko/COPO cars in 1969. If not then in fact JD was the leading COPO/Yenko dealer in Chicago.

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

[ QUOTE ]
If there was a post about bottled water somehow the JD cars would be brought up.

[/ QUOTE ]

Belair, what kind of bottled water do you drink over there? I bet it's not as good as the crystal clear pure water of the North West. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] Oh, but maybe they ship our water over there. You don't be putting stripes on that bottle now! Hmmm! [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

John, I do not think anyone is calling JD a liar. More like questioning what/how he remembers from the past. And, in this hobby, this is not unusual. I have spent many hours visiting with various supercar personalities from the past, and how found all to be very honest and in sincere in what they say, but when compared against known facts, at times come up short. I have read more then one supercar personality interview , including, but not limited to Don Yenko's, that was "a little off". Remember, is was over 30 years ago when this all took place.

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

John,
The 'little segment' you are referring to is actually from your 'little' post! Way to make friends!

We have been over the big picture before, this little discussion is about a silly sign that some people are attempting to claim included the Douglass * Yenko COPO cars. Inherent in that claim is the basis of the original discussion, that Jack and Don had an agreement for Jack to stripe his COPO's as Yenko's. My contention is that the sign is insignificant, and cannot be construed to include anything more than a marketing ploy of some sort.

I am not calling Jack a liar, I'm simply asking for more solid proof. To me, his recollection of what happened over 30 years ago is insufficient. Don was a certified genius, and couldn't remember what he did only 17 years later during the MCR interview. The 'estate document' only states what happened, Jack used the stripe kits to make his COPO cars more saleable. There is nothing in that document about an pre-arranged agreement. I like paperwork, others can do without it, both positions are fine for the particular individual.

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

If we are talking Yenkos, then yes JD. If COPOs, I don't know. Maybe Nickey? They sold a few "hot cars".

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

[ QUOTE ]
You see, I am sure JD was no different then any other dealer of that era. If a customer was willing to pay the $$$, it was built, including putting Yenko trim on ANY car they had in inventory. I do not feel that this is a stretch of the imagination to believe this happened.

[/ QUOTE ]

This may finally answer my question that has gone unanswered on here as to the 1969 LeMans Blue Impala with Yenko stripes I looked at in approximetaly 1976. Car was a 427/425 4-speed and was advertised in the Star Tribune. Could this have been one of JD's cars that he striped? I may never know. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif[/img]
Rick

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

Interesting. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/scholar.gif[/img]

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

Kevin we drink heavily chemicaled Lake Michigan water....the water bottles can be striped because there was a deal with King Neptune to allow it .Keep your yucky NW water...it's probably loaded with chemical fallout unlike our pristine lakes in the midwest. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggthumpup.gif[/img]

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

Charlies dog drinks California toilet water! [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

This post has turned into a rehashing of the "Should Yenko trimmed Douglass COPOs be considered real Yenkos?" debate all over again. I think the number issue has become a round about way of arguing whether or not Don considered these cars as his own or not. It's obvious that Don Yenko didn't pay particularly close attention to the number of cars he was preparing himself, let alone ones that may or may not have been prepared at Douglass Chevrolet with or without his permision. Don was far more concerned with selling as many sYcs as he could than he was with counting each and every one, which may be why he didn't feel the need to add serial plates to the '69s or even partially why he made the agreement with Jack to allow him to produce sYcs on site. Fortunately Don Yenko kept pretty decent records of the cars he was converting at his dealership and selling and or transferring to other dealers, which is where much of the FACTUAL numbers that are accepted today have their origins. Were all Douglass COPOs sold in Yenko trim? Apparently no one knows for sure. But why try to group them together with the ones Don trimmed at his own Canonsburg dealership? I think if I owned a Douglass COPO and had some sort of believable evidence that the car was originally sold new with Yenko trim, then I'd restore it and show it that way, and explain that it is a unique instance in Yenko history where a COPO car was trimmed Yenko style by a network dealer, perhaps with permission, perhaps not, but sold to the original owner as a sYc 427 car. The unique colors and options only make them more unique. Trying to lump these *special cars in with the Canonsburg prepared cars only seems to be a way of making them out to be something they aren't. These are very unique and very desirable cars in their own right, whether Don accepted them as his own back in '69 or whether anyone else excepts them to be "real" Yenkos today, they are certainly an exception to the rule and should be recognized as such, don't look at an * as a badge of shame, look at it as a distinguishing mark or recognition that sets the Douglass prepared cars apart from the rest, for better or worse, that's to be determined by the buyers and sellers of these unique cars...dare to be different. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif[/img]

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

[ QUOTE ]
This post has turned into a rehashing of the "Should Yenko trimmed Douglass COPOs be considered real Yenkos?"

[/ QUOTE ] .........
[img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/worship.gif[/img] debate all over again.
.......

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

My Dogs ain't big enough to reach the Toilet. And now you are on their list....... [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/no.gif[/img]

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

This is getting a bit far-fetched. Jack's Memory and Story have remained intact many years prior to the internet ,this web sight and this subject getting national attention, There was a time when only two of his cars had been found and not very many people even knew there was a difference between the two order method Yenkos, even hear in Chicago, it just didn't matter!

Jack never stated that he striped and sold any other direct order cars as Yenkos, other than the Camaros and Chevelles.

His story has proven very accuarte as time unfolds and it certainly is not appropriate to compare an article or written interview when you have the first person(s) (numerous people) accountability, to answer any questions you may have.

I still ponder(Tom and Marlin.. ect) if you do indeed seek accuracy and truth in your statements why you have not picked up the phone and called Jack. I had private e-mailed both of you his telephone number once I received permission to do so, in the last go around.

Do you really care about furthering the Hobby of all Super Cars or just protecting the value of your own private cars/collections?

I do not currently own a Douglass Yenko, but do own several Yenkos sold out of Yenko Chevrolet and the, Douglass cars do not detract one bit of historic significance or value, from my other cars, in fact they enhance them!

Most Douglass Yenko owners also own other significant muscle cars and Super Cars.

It is not only Jack Douglass,but Family members, his General Manager Tom Dumass and Several of his dealer colleagues and friends who confirm his story, as well as the cars themselves.

There exists to this day no other dealer who has come forth as a part of the Yenko Network to have direct ordered cars and sold them as Yenkos.

There have been no cars found with stripes and badges from day one or no original owners who have come forth and proven they had purchased such a car from another dealer.

It is utterly ridiculous to believe that in 1969 Jack Douglass had to charge 12-15% more for his cars to even sell them. I would agree that Don's own choosen words are how he wanted the situation to be remembered. IMO He was covering his assets and that is the way he intended his story/article to read and be remembered.

This would be the equivalent of purchasing a New 2002 SLP Camaro SS for $35,000.00 and agreeing to pay almost $3,500.00 to $5,000.00 more just for stripes and badges, it just wouldn't have happened that way.

If Jack was to have skirted Yenko, it would be prudent to see that it would have been much easier to sell a cheaper Super Car.


Look at the time line and build of the Cars Douglass sold. We have very early casting and stamping dates on original drivetrain cars which would indicate the order was placed early in the year and support Jacks statements of what took place. If you choose believe that Don Yenko found it prudent to only have one single dealer order 8-12 sYc's as Tom stated, and be happy with that arangement in the top three car markets in the USA ,at the time ,then that is your prerogative.

I recently showed my COPO Chevelle at the Chicago Vette Fest in a Super Car display along with a Douglass Yenko and a Cannonsberg Yenko.

All Super cars were displayed and represented for just what they are. I am proud to have been a part of that display and happy to have met new friends in the process and this is really what it is about to me.

Allow individuals form their own opinions about the Douglass cars.



Love and Peace to all,

Stefano

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

[ QUOTE ]
Do you really care about furthering the Hobby of all Super Cars or just protecting the value of your own private cars/collections?


[/ QUOTE ]

Stefano, Sorry that you felt the need to get personal. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img] I thought bigger of you.
Guess I was wrong. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

Tom, this whole topic has taken a terriable turn. I wish I had not brought it up. I have one last question on this matter though. With all of the controversy and heated debates surrounding this topic why didn't you or Marlin ever call Jack and speak to him yourselfs. Tom you are always mentioning a new supercar "personality" that you have spoken to or supercar location that you have visited. Why not talk to or visit the most controversal one of all?

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

Frank all you did was ask to see an article you never saw before.....and someone was able to scan it for you...its a cool article...looks like innocent comments turned into another Douglass discussion is all.

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

Frank, weeks before SCR5, through a mutual friend, I extended an invitation for Jack to attend the event, at my expense. Not for sure why it did not materialize. As I have said numerous times, I have absolutley nothing against Jack, his cars or their owners. I would love to visit with him some time. Monday night I spent over 2 hours on the phone with a Douglass owner, discusing numerous things, including each others thoughts about JD and DY. I even went as far as to check my records and numbers, for not only Douglass, but Yenko info as well (at no cost). I even faxed him a copy of the DY, JD document. In addition, for the past two weeks I have been communicating with another Douglass owner in regards to his car and related paperwork. This dialog may be helpful in clearing up some of the Douglass puzzle. My point is this. If I did not respect Douglass cars, why would I bother. I certaintly have plenty of other things I could be doing.

In closing, as the Douglass owner and I talked about Monday, why is it so important to link the cars to Yenko? If I were an owner of a Douglass car, here is what I would do. The same as I have done with Yenko, and others have done with Gibb, Harrell, Berger and Motion. I would collect all of the info, pics, doucments and related memorabilia as I could related to Douglass. Then I would display this collection with my car any time I could. I would go on various web sites and explain who and what JD Chevrolet was. My goal would be to make the JD name as well known as the other well known supercar dealers. Can it be done, I think so, but will never happen as long as they carry the Yenko *. Douglass cars deserve, should and can stand on their own. And, I would think this is how Jack would like to be remembered, not as an * to Yenko.

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

Tom if people were questionong JD about how many cars he sold as Yenkos, or what color they were, or what options they had, or exactly how much he paid Don, yes there might be a variation on those issues. If people dont believe he sold them as Yenkos then they absolutely think he is lying. There is no way a guy could pay say 400.00 a car at 22 cars 8800.00 or there about in 1969 and not remeber it correctly . It isnt just the money but also what ever dealings with Don there also was.
If I owned a McDonald franchise and found out where to buy the hamburgers direct and so did, and then McDonalds found out and had to pay the franchise fee back, did I not sell a McDonald hamburger. Jack was to a degree a Yenko franchise.
I am not normally an argumentive person and dont know why I decided to even get involved with this topic. I could have bought a PA Yenko but bought what I believe is a JD order and sold Yenko. The key here is what I believe. I would have liked to bring it to the reunion for what it is but probably wont. If this topic gets so out of hand on the board could you imagine the sh-t it would start at the reunion.
Hopefully we can end this discussion right here before things are said and taken the wrong way. I cant talk for Steve But I dont think he meant much buy what he said.

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

Frank, I have not spoken with Jack about these cars, not that I have anything against the guy, I just didn't see where it would benefit me. I trust that Steve, Mike and others who have dealt with Jack have relayed his words accurately. I am only asking to see some supporting documents, that's all.

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

ssl78
[ QUOTE ]
If this topic gets so out of hand on the board could you imagine the sh-t it would start at the reunion.


[/ QUOTE ]

You guys are going to fight about this JD & DY thing forever. Saw a show on the History Channel the other night that would be the answer. Men in the old days solved their disagrements by a Duel with either swords or pistols.

Kinda liven up SCR6 wouldn't you think? The old wheelbarrow race and spark plug changing contest would never be the same.

Re: 1987 Muscle Car review article with Don Yenko
 

[ QUOTE ]
Saw a show on the History Channel the other night. Men in the old days satisfied their disagrements by a Duel with either swords or pistols. Kinda liven up SCR6 wouldn't you think?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that would liven up SCR6, but I think it would have a negative effect on the attendance of SCR7... [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]