Would this car be considerd a COPO

[Zedder]

I assume you are talking to me??? If the RS story is news to you, you need to do your homework. It has been known for about 15 years by the general Camaro public that are into Pacecars that the Canadian SB cars were RS's. In fact, I think that Donna Crispino wrote about it in her book. As for my car, I was 17 when I bought it in 1979 and didn't know it was anything special...I have had the story on my web site for 7 years...

As for the owner of the BB car - he's owned it for 37 years and couldn't care less about numbers and registries. This is common practice for many original owners of these cars that are not on the Internet often or are just private people who don't care to share their business with the world. I know at least 6 owners of 67 Z's who do not share their info publicly.

[coke69Z11]

This discussion is getting verrrrry interesting. I realize it might be tough for some to consider allowing another class of car into the COPO fold, but Jeff is making some points on his end that seem to outweigh points on the other side. We do have some very knowledgeable members on this site that really need to chime in here, get on this horse and ride it. Giddy-up!

[70 copo]

Well lets see. Chevrolet created the COPO system to get cars built a in a manner that allowed for production processes to be modified by the addition of cars that were engineered to an extent. I think these early IPC's cars were built COPO in 67.

Now the issue for Tom and the SYC is to determine if participation will be permitted, - say at the reunion?

Since Member's rides are already in a section for neat or historically significant cars, these 67 0-1 built COPO IPC's would add flavor and tell somemore of the facinating Chevrolet COPO story, and how Chevrolet used it early on.

Charlie--Can you bring the great #92 to the next reunion? If there ever was an example of a special "reverse engineered" car that is one of them. Chevy put significant effort into that car. Value--Priceless....


Phil

[Zedder]

For the record, since I seem to be the only "other side" in this thread. Although I think they are neat cars, I'm not into COPO's, so I'm not protecting any teritory here. Quite possibly these cars may have been ordered using the COPO process, but until that is proven I doubt anyone will consider them COPO's as we commonly think of them. In fact, even if it was proven, I doubt the majority of the collector car community will view them any differently. Should Tom allow taxi cabs ordered through the COPO process to attend the reunion too?

Only Tom can speak to whether they should be allowed at the reunion, but I don't think that a 325hp Camaro would be considered a "Supercar". Again, this is just my opinion and I really don't care one way or the other. The cars that I am into aren't Supercars either by the definition used by this site, but I like them just the same Different strokes, for different folks I guess.

[70 copo]

Mark,

Your posts are getting a little dry. I will assume that I and others may be taking them wrong... Your comparison of a 67 0-1 IPC to a taxi Cab is a little insulting - don't you think?

As Who thinks of them? Some 427 COPO Guys years ago may have looked down on a Yenko 350 Nova... and some of the other COPO's... If it was built a COPO - then it was a COPO.

Your comment above pertaining to COPO's:

"Quite possibly these cars may have been ordered using the COPO process, but until that is proven I doubt anyone will consider them COPO's as we commonly think of them"

As who thinks of them?? Either they were built COPO by Chevrolet or not...

Please keep an open mind here....

Phil

[Jeff H]

I have to agree with Mark on his point of view and obviously that's what it is, a point of view or opinion. To me, the term COPO is special in that it represents the 1969 Camaros or Chevelle that were factory built with the 427 engine. That makes them a supercar and a special vehicle to me. There were a ton of other COPO vehicles built but for the most part those vehicles aren't really supercars(maybe the 68 Novas with the L78/auto). If a 67 Camaro went through a COPO process to be ordered up as a Pace Car replica, that's some pretty cool history but not a supercar in my mind. If it was done through a COPO process then it could be considered a COPO. But the term COPO is now being overused to try and hype the value of cars when the option(s) added could be pretty basic. Once again, to me a COPO is a 69 427 Camaro or Chevelle.

[Zedder]

Thanks Jeff...at least someone understands me

Phil, the comparisson between taxi cabs and IPC's was made earlier by someone else to prove a point that all COPO's are not 427 cars as the term has come to represent by many enthusiasts. Again, I could really care less and just got into this discussion to express MY opinion, which I believe I am entitled to. I do not want to get into a pissing match with you or anyone else regarding this matter - it just doesn't mean enough to me to argue about it. Frankly, the only reason I even got involved was because it involved the Canadian cars of which I owned one and have paperwork for all of the others. That's the extent of my interest.

You have your opinion and I would never try and deny you that. It is my belief that this thread is attempting to tie some extra value to the IPC's because they are COPO's and I don't agree with that. I think they have value for what they are and that's that. But if others think differently that's fine with me. I am out of this discussion now as I have nothing further to add