1969 Camaro Z/28 w/Special Order Paint

[William]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Charley Lillard</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Posted by Clem.. &quot;because jerry reputation as a Camaro expert is at stake here . why do you think his buddy william keep posting he did not see any EO paint when they looked at the car ????&quot;

Clem. Jerry is not allowed on this site for other reasons. His reputation is not at stake here. I believe William is defending his position because that is what he believes he saw. My personal opinion is the car was some other color than Silver and that William missed noticing it. Joe Blow off the street would look at the pic with the mags on it and say &quot;Silver&quot;. Not unless the Orchid color is brought up do you notice the off color.

</div></div>

Not quite what happened Charlie. All we knew going into this was the car was - B paint. We saw the car late 2010. Clem was not involved at the time and we had not seen the photo. Once again after two hours of examination there was no question all we saw was silver. Only after Clem became involved did the EO claim become a factor. JM emailed me June 17, 2011 and stated: &quot;No way this is Evening Orchid.&quot; One of his neighbors growing up in Baltimore had an EO '65 Impala SS convert, 396 4-speed. It is an instantly recognizable color.

When the owner later posted photos of the car dismantled it was obvious even to me there was a slight lavender tint to the OE paint. EO is hardly 'slightly' lavender. Close up GM code #81 looks silver; from a distance the tint becomes apparent. It is nowhere near as dark as EO.

I was there. EO would have been obvious.

[clem]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: William</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Charley Lillard</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Posted by Clem.. &quot;because jerry reputation as a Camaro expert is at stake here . why do you think his buddy william keep posting he did not see any EO paint when they looked at the car ????&quot;

Clem. Jerry is not allowed on this site for other reasons. His reputation is not at stake here. I believe William is defending his position because that is what he believes he saw. My personal opinion is the car was some other color than Silver and that William missed noticing it. Joe Blow off the street would look at the pic with the mags on it and say &quot;Silver&quot;. Not unless the Orchid color is brought up do you notice the off color.

</div></div>

Not quite what happened Charlie. All we knew going into this was the car was - B paint. We saw the car late 2010. Clem was not involved at the time and we had not seen the photo. Once again after two hours of examination there was no question all we saw was silver. Only after Clem became involved did the EO claim become a factor. JM emailed me June 17, 2011 and stated: &quot;No way this is Evening Orchid.&quot; One of his neighbors growing up in Baltimore had an EO '65 Impala SS convert, 396 4-speed. It is an instantly recognizable color.

When the owner later posted photos of the car dismantled it was obvious even to me there was a slight lavender tint to the OE paint. EO is hardly 'slightly' lavender. Close up GM code #81 looks silver; from a distance the tint becomes apparent. It is nowhere near as dark as EO.

I was there. EO would have been obvious. </div></div>when you guys looked at the car first you said it was Cortez silver with stripes delete and never said it was special paint. I am not good at going back on computers but some can bring up the original posts on www.camaro.org

[William]

Stripe delete IS special paint.

In the previous post I stated my thinking changed when I saw the car disassembled. GM code #81 is still silver; all we saw was silver. Both of us are quite familiar with EO having seen many original examples over the years. EO would have been immediately obvious. It obviously wasn't.

The first two photos accurately depict what was observed-silver. First photo taken 2012; second one 1970. Paint finish looks the same despite the years. EO is seen in photos #3 &amp; #4 and is not remotely close to #1 &amp; #2.

[DW31S]

Brian, is there any evidence that the '68 Z/28 you introduced was painted, even partially so AFTER some assembly? And was that particular color one that was included in the pallet of GM colors for any model, truck or car in 1968? I ask this because of the Buick I owned that did show signs of painting OTHER than the normal process.

[olredalert]

----I kinda hate to post in this thread because it is getting a bit rowdy, but if we reference that original picture again, its now 46 years old. Don't you think there might be a chance that its faded or that the technology of polaroid cameras back then isn't remotely as good as what a cell phone takes today? The pic even looks faded to me. Just saying I wouldn't base anything on that picture. If the color isn't exactly EO, then it was slightly mis-mixed at the factory. Clems and the dealerships reputation are not in question here in any way.......Bill S

[Xplantdad]

This! As I sit here with my daughter getting her dialysis done...I will offer my opinion as well.

I am blown away that there has been this many pages and posts on this car. People are expecting a polaroid picture from 40 plus years ago to be color correct now? Also, since when did the ordering dealer and the original owners word mean nothing? As was mentioned above.. People would kill to have this much documentation on their car! At this point...this has become rather foolish.

Clem, thanks for coming on here to share your thoughts on your former Z28. With all due respect to all involved, experts make mistakes. That's what happened here...



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: olredalert</div><div class="ubbcode-body">----I kinda hate to post in this thread because it is getting a bit rowdy, but if we reference that original picture again, its now 46 years old. Don't you think there might be a chance that its faded or that the technology of polaroid cameras back then isn't remotely as good as what a cell phone takes today? The pic even looks faded to me. Just saying I wouldn't base anything on that picture. If the color isn't exactly EO, then it was slightly mis-mixed at the factory. Clems and the dealerships reputation are not in question here in any way.......Bill S </div></div>

[clem]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Xplantdad</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This! As I sit here with my daughter getting her dialysis done...I will offer my opinion as well.

I am blown away that there has been this many pages and posts on this car. People are expecting a polaroid picture from 40 plus years ago to be color correct now? Also, since when did the ordering dealer and the original owners word mean nothing? As was mentioned above.. People would kill to have this much documentation on their car! At this point...this has become rather foolish.

Clem, thanks for coming on here to share your thoughts on your former Z28. With all due respect to all involved, experts make mistakes. That's what happened here...



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: olredalert</div><div class="ubbcode-body">----I kinda hate to post in this thread because it is getting a bit rowdy, but if we reference that original picture again, its now 46 years old. Don't you think there might be a chance that its faded or that the technology of polaroid cameras back then isn't remotely as good as what a cell phone takes today? The pic even looks faded to me. Just saying I wouldn't base anything on that picture. If the color isn't exactly EO, then it was slightly mis-mixed at the factory. Clems and the dealerships reputation are not in question here in any way.......Bill S </div></div> </div></div>this is what happens when the facts get in the way of opinions that have been $$$ makers for some people they shoot the messenger

[earntaz]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Xplantdad</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This! As I sit here with my daughter getting her dialysis done...I will offer my opinion as well.

I am blown away that there has been this many pages and posts on this car. People are expecting a polaroid picture from 40 plus years ago to be color correct now? Also, since when did the ordering dealer and the original owners word mean nothing? As was mentioned above.. People would kill to have this much documentation on their car! At this point...this has become rather foolish.

Clem, thanks for coming on here to share your thoughts on your former Z28. With all due respect to all involved, experts make mistakes. That's what happened here...



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: olredalert</div><div class="ubbcode-body">----I kinda hate to post in this thread because it is getting a bit rowdy, but if we reference that original picture again, its now 46 years old. Don't you think there might be a chance that its faded or that the technology of polaroid cameras back then isn't remotely as good as what a cell phone takes today? The pic even looks faded to me. Just saying I wouldn't base anything on that picture. If the color isn't exactly EO, then it was slightly mis-mixed at the factory. Clems and the dealerships reputation are not in question here in any way.......Bill S </div></div></div></div>

Bruce -- exactly ... as I have said in the past, that's why we put destruct buttons on missiles ... TAZ

[bcmiller]

Omaha Orange was available multiple years and I believe normally only for truck or commercial use. Could be ordered as special paint if available that model year.

[Steve Shauger]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bcmiller</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I would expect better coverage in the area under the door panels on a normal (not hand sprayed) RG or HO car because of the color difference between the main body color and the primer.

Not so much on a special paint car where the body color was close to the primer color.

Oh and I did not originally introduce the photos of the &quot;purplish&quot; color primer on the Hugger Orange car. Just mentioned them again because they seemed to be ignored at first and I felt they were pertinent.

Think about it...and what the preponderance of the evidence showed on the car itself.

It's a special paint car no doubt - so how much does that add value to the car? Hard to say. It may still be a one of one - but Flamingo Silver / Sunset Silver - instead of that other color that keeps getting brought up.

Flamingo Silver / Sunset Silver shows up darker or has more of a purplish tint in some paint chip books (I have more than one book) so I can see how there may have been a misunderstanding.

There is no way to go back and look at the car now to see.
</div></div>

Bryon,

I find it odd that you chose to lock the thread on the CRG site but find the need to continue to post about it here. To me the background on why Clem ordered the car E O is interesting but that where it ends.

Color is all about personal taste, and for me this car holds no additional value. Someone else may feel different but again it's all about preference in color.

If you continue to post on this thread I think it only appropriate to unlock the CRG thread.

I believe there is enough day one information from the original owner, dealer and those familiar with the car to validate the color it was originally ordered.