When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
History / OriginalityGot a question about 1982-1992 Camaro or Firebird history? Have a question about original parts, options, RPO codes, when something was available, or how to document your car? Those questions, answers, and much more!
A disgruntled bidder alleging the car was short hammered
The car ran 100% early through the auction
And finally the fact that the car is under coated.
ok so I went to the block last night to address the concerns:
From Barrett-Jackson:
“Tthese guys on this forum do not understand how an auction works. The bidder knows he is going to pay the premium when he bids and takes the final hammer price in to account when he bids.. Therefore the car sold for the price listed on our official tabulation.”
On the short hammer talk:
”Unless there is aggressive bidding once a car reaches 100% of its value we will drop the hammer. We have 1800 cars to sell and we are here to bring value to both the buyer and the seller- that’s how we stay in business”
Then I was asked what the Hagerty #1Value was for the car? “ $33,000”. “there you go we sold the car well above it’s determined world best valuation”
All part of the risks you must be willing to take to sell at auction.....
Sounds like there has been a lot of questions/comments about the paint on the car?
I was surprised it went for that much given a few of the closeup photos from auction attendees that surfaced on a facebook IROC page, but I'm glad to see all things thirdgen gaining in value. Well sold!
Originally Posted by CPC Norwood
Paint? How so?
too good?
Not sure, just heard some people comment about it....
All part of the risks you must be willing to take to sell at auction.....
Sounds like there has been a lot of questions/comments about the paint on the car?
i looked at this car over in person at the auction and the paint looked flawless. Like a brand new car! The red 90 1le had some paint issues.
That's what a lot of people were wondering on the facebook page. Hard to tell without seeing the car as a whole in person. The photographs of the entire car look phenomenal, but those closeups suggest there may have been at the very least some localized respray, possibly more. Note what appears to be red overspray on the black above the driver's side tail light and on the black window trim, as well as some unevenness on the b-pillar paint thickness. Given the car was sitting in a storage shed, it doesn't surprise me that it may have received some work.
Alternately, it is entirely possible that this is "original" GM paint and any repainting is the work of GM. The Van Nuys plant and most GM plants in general weren't known for their quality in the 80's. It was common for brand new cars to be pulled in to a correction yard before shipping to a dealer to have quality issues fixed, some of which were as significant as paint and body work (one plant worker recalled a Monte Carlo with a Regal front clip making it out of the NUMMI plant as a "finished" car).
That's what a lot of people were wondering on the facebook page. Hard to tell without seeing the car as a whole in person. The photographs of the entire car look phenomenal, but those closeups suggest there may have been at the very least some localized respray, possibly more. Note what appears to be red overspray on the black above the driver's side tail light and on the black window trim, as well as some unevenness on the b-pillar paint thickness. Given the car was sitting in a storage shed, it doesn't surprise me that it may have received some work.
Alternately, it is entirely possible that this is "original" GM paint and any repainting is the work of GM. The Van Nuys plant and most GM plants in general weren't known for their quality in the 80's. It was common for brand new cars to be pulled in to a correction yard before shipping to a dealer to have quality issues fixed, some of which were as significant as paint and body work (one plant worker recalled a Monte Carlo with a Regal front clip making it out of the NUMMI plant as a "finished" car).
OMG... let’s not lower our selves to the level of Buzzfeed shall we?
Did our face book expert give the other Third gens an inspection? If not why not?
Social media is used as a weapon because the unscrupulous are creating a fake narrative all because everyone is chasing the same money at the auction.
The car has original paint and to suggest otherwise makes a person look silly.
Respectfully, you did not purchase the car new, so you can only speculate on the fact it has all original paint
You are going on your own opinion and what the PO told you (which is sometimes not truthful).
It looks to me as if it has had some paint work in the past, and after seeing the evidence in the pictures,
saying otherwise is not something I'd believe. We all have our own opinions, but mine is that it's not all original paint,
based on what I've seen. What level of work it's had is unknown, but in my experience, this is not a "factory flaw in the paint"
or anything that was done at the factory when it was built
How is it speculating when there are tape lines and red paint on parts that would have been assembled on the car after the body was painted? While it's 100% possible that GM tried to correct an issue before delivery, or that the paint was repaired under warranty for the delamination problems, it's clear that paint didn't get on trim and the tail light rubbers when the car was originally painted.
That said... Folks are getting way too hung up on "Original Paint" when talking about thirdgens. The factory paint on thirdgens looked nice, but it faded quickly and delaminated frequently. The delam isn't something you can really correct, short of repainting the car. It's like any other issue that is subject to a recall. Bragging about original paint on a thirdgen is like bragging about having the original Bouncing Betty airbag in your Honda, the original Firestone Wilderness ATs on your Explorer, or the original exploding fuel tank in your Pinto. The factory paint was crap.
OMG... let’s not lower our selves to the level of Buzzfeed shall we?
BUZZFEED: 17 THINGS THIRDGEN FANS ARE SAYING ABOUT THIS 344 MILE IROC'S PAINT Number 7 will Shock you!
Originally Posted by CPC Norwood
Did our face book expert give the other Third gens an inspection? If not why not?
Social media is used as a weapon because the unscrupulous are creating a fake narrative all because everyone is chasing the same money at the auction.
The car has original paint and to suggest otherwise makes a person look silly.
This isn't that big of a deal. We're a bunch of history/originality nerds in here and enjoy dissecting survivors. Somebody posted more detailed pictures from the actual auction that gave us reason to wonder about the paint's history/originality. As I speculated above, this very well may be 100% original given GM's struggles in the 80's. Or, it could be a repaint... it's a 30 year old car with two owners. The safe caveat here would be to say "believed to be original paint" with the typical auction speak of buyer buys as-is.
Somebody at the auction felt strongly enough about the car to throw $37.4k at it so it must be good - it's a pretty IROC and congratulations on a strong sale that shows values are moving up.
I generally don't get involved in internet arguments... But on this one, I have to comment...
If those close up pics are of the actual car vin 1G1FP2182KL108748 , the paint in those sections of the car is not original, period. There is no gray area and it is deceitful to think otherwise. There is overspray on the tail light rubber and drip rail. Never ever was there a case where GM masked off the tail lights to paint a thirdgen in the factory. Never. End of story. If that is the case, is there any paint or primer behind them?! Pictures tell the story on this, no need to see it in person. The ad for this car listed it as an original paint car, and if the buyer as not there in person to view it, they have a right to be upset.
Is it possible that it was touched up at the dealership pre or post sale? Sure. But it's surely not original paint and never will be again. This is something that makes or breaks a car deal for me. Are people okay with repaints? Sure... Do some cars deserve repaints? Sure... Is it tough to keep a stored 300 mile car for 30 years perfect? Absolutely. But there is some history as to why this was done and in my opinion, it's crazy to thik that someone did a terrible mask job on such a low mile car. How long would it have taken to pull out the tail lights to paint... If anyone disagrees, please send those pics to any professional auto appraiser and get them to say it has original paint and post it up here. Good luck.
I generally get involved in internet argumements... But on this one, I have to comment...
If those close up pics are of the actual car, the paint in those sections of the car is not original, period. There is no gray area and it is deceitful to think otherwise. There is overspray on the tail light rubber and drip rail. Never ever was there a case where GM masked off the tail lights to paint a thirdgen in the factory. Never. End of story. If that is the case, is there any paint or primer behind them?! Pictures tell the story on this, no need to see it in person. The ad for this car listed it as an original paint car, and if the buyer as not there in person to view it, they have a right to be upset.
Is it possible that it was touched up at the dealership pre or post sale? Sure. But it's surely not original paint and never will be again. This is something that makes or breaks a car deal for me. Are people okay with repaints? Sure... Do some cars deserve repaints? Sure... Is it tough to keep a stored 300 mile car for 30 years perfect? Absolutely. But there is some history as to why this was done and in my opinion, it's crazy to thik that someone did a terrible mask job on such a low mile car. How long would it have taken to pull out the tail lights to paint... If anyone disagrees, please send those pics to any professional auto appraiser and get them to say it has original paint and post it up here. Good luck.
If those close up pics are of the actual car, the paint in those sections of the car is not original, period. There is no gray area and it is deceitful to think otherwise. There is overspray on the tail light rubber and drip rail. Never ever was there a case where GM masked off the tail lights to paint a thirdgen in the factory. Never. End of story. If that is the case, is there any paint or primer behind them?! Pictures tell the story on this, no need to see it in person. The ad for this car listed it as an original paint car, and if the buyer as not there in person to view it, they have a right to be upset.
Is it possible that it was touched up at the dealership pre or post sale? Sure. But it's surely not original paint and never will be again. This is something that makes or breaks a car deal for me. Are people okay with repaints? Sure... Do some cars deserve repaints? Sure... Is it tough to keep a stored 300 mile car for 30 years perfect? Absolutely. But there is some history as to why this was done and in my opinion, it's crazy to thik that someone did a terrible mask job on such a low mile car. How long would it have taken to pull out the tail lights to paint... If anyone disagrees, please send those pics to any professional auto appraiser and get them to say it has original paint and post it up here. Good luck.
I normally don’t get involved in arguments like this either, but ev305tpi stated this extremely well. Lots of cars are repainted; many are even repainted well. That being said, this is 100% apparent (yes, based on photos alone, IF infact these photos do depict the car in question) that some paintwork was done at some point in the car’s life (whether the seller was aware or not is a completely different question). The car was advertised as “original factory Dark Red Metallic paint”; not mostly; not a portion of... and regardless of the reason why, be it collision damage, vandalism, paint failure, shipping damage, dealer inventory mishap, factory mishap or otherwise, it is not the “born with” original finish no matter how you slice it. For many, that’s a deal-breaker as it is only original once, whether it has 344 miles or 34,400 miles or even 344,000 miles.
Im here! the car has been removed by the owner. Picture to verify. Pretty sad we all supposed to be connected as a group in support of theses cars. Sad about all the negativity, when we should be celebrating the increase in awareness and value of Third Gens.
Why would a repaint justify him having to move the car? Do they think there is not enough security there? Sorry, but there are much more expensive cars mingled in close by.
Let me ask this, why would you consider that original paint?
Im here! the car has been removed by the owner. Picture to verify. Pretty sad we all supposed to be connected as a group in support of theses cars. Sad about all the negativity, when we should be celebrating the increase in awareness and value of Third Gens.
IMO, what is SAD is the mis-representation of the car.....nuff said
Im here! the car has been removed by the owner. Picture to verify. Pretty sad we all supposed to be connected as a group in support of theses cars. Sad about all the negativity, when we should be celebrating the increase in awareness and value of Third Gens.
I don't understand? What would make them feel it needs to be removed? Did I miss something?
No you tell me why it you think it was a repaint... you are on the spot here
ask me specific questions then I will ask you some? Fair?
go.
The pictures have overspray on parts that are assembled AFTER the body is painted at the factory. Did GM make tail light molding with maroon paint that can be bought at the parts counter?
Okay, your turn to defend the original paint claim.
Phil, please understand that what others are saying is correct that the car has had some paint work at some time. It's unfortunate that the car has left because it's very easy to prove any paint work with a paint thickness meter. I know you know this, because of the level of detail you put into the last Norwood car. I would not put down the TGO community for just pointing out the paint issue. Absolutely none of the posts were derogatory or negative, other than to say that the paint work would have been something to think about if they were bidding on the car.
I DO know how hard it is to keep a low mile car in pristine condition because I am constantly bumping into my car and I have to check it for marks. I HAVE put a few on the car in the past 19 years. It happens!
My belief for it being removed is that the new owner will probably want to flip the car in the future and doesn't want any more scrutiny of it to show up on the Internet. As was mentioned here, it's a deal breaker for many collectors and if the car isn't as perfect as believed, it loses value.
Now, on to Barrett-Jackson. Their response to the hammer price is BS. So, they hammer at book value for a #1 car. If that's the case, how do ANY of the cars exceed the previous years sales price? How did the Mopars keep going up in value? They should keep the auction going until there are no more bids! The sellers are getting short changed if that's their policy. I just learned that I will never try to sell a car at a Barrett-Jackson auction. I would love to hear what Dana Mecum thinks of this practice.
I don't understand. You used a dark red metallic clay bar? And what we see is the residue?
I tape off the car for compounding, but not claying. I don't understand how the red got on the black trim pieces. If the red isn't paint, what is it? It sure looks like paint and clear to me.
I don't understand. You used a dark red metallic clay bar? And what we see is the residue?
I tape off the car for compounding, but not claying. I don't understand how the red got on the black trim pieces. If the red isn't paint, what is it? It sure looks like paint and clear to me.
end caps were not painted in plant. They were vendor supplied.
01-17-2019, 07:02 AM
