Roadrunner or Not

-
^^^Further more...insurance is the one thing you need to have but hope to never use...
 
chryslerfat said:
The farther this thread goes and the farther the OP post`s things they are posting makes me believe it is a stolen car. It has a VIN stamped on the core support then it does not. The car has a California assigned Vin then it does not. The VIN is a make believe VIN and so forth.
Click to expand...

Either that or this whole thing is bullshit just to pull everybodys chains.
 
mrtires24 said:
Yes by law you must have a VIN on the vehicle that matches the vin on the title or registration for said vehicle. And as stated allready... The vin on 68 or newer must be visable through window on dash.

If you wreck your car you can bet your *** the insurance co will ask for your title to match against the car. And someone said you would need to have a sharp insurance agent...NOT...that's standard procedure. The title or registration is what is insured...and that piece of paper ( title) MUST. Have a vin that matches the cars vin.

A vin is like a fingerprint for a car and this fingerprint is what makes the vehicle 100% unique and able for the insurer to know what vehicle it is insuring....or what vehicle you are buying for that matter.

Why do you think vehicles without titles are so much cheaper than an exact same vehicle with a clear title?!?!? Your title vin that matches you vehicles vin is what makes your vehicle your vehicle...otherwise all you have is a bunch of parts bolted together and a piece of Detroit muscle yard art!.

I feel for the OP...and odds are they should be able to keep the car because it sounds like the vehicles vin ( fingerprint) are long gone.

Right now Dianne I wouldn't drive it...it's not covered.

You all should know insurance companies stay in business by NOT paying out. And will find and use any reason not to pay out. This is such an easy out for them.

Would you drive any other vehicle with expired tags? No insurance? You might as well drive around with your insured blue tacomas plates and title on the RR. Because your tittle is about just as useless to your RR as the blue tacomas title is to your RR. There is no connection to each other.
I rest my case
Click to expand...

Well said, very much my sentiments.
 
what about states like Ga, Al, and others that don't keep titles on cars built before a certain date? they issue a tag and a registration, that's all? many of the owners of these cars have NO title. just wondering.
 
barbee6043 said:
what about states like Ga, Al, and others that don't keep titles on cars built before a certain date? they issue a tag and a registration, that's all? many of the owners of these cars have NO title. just wondering.
Click to expand...

In NY a transferable registration is the proof of ownership. Sign the back of the registration on the appropriate line and you've just transferred the car to a new owner. State finally wised up and are allowing us to use copies of the registration in the vehicle so we can keep the original in a safe place.
 
mrtires24 said:
You all should know insurance companies stay in business by NOT paying out. And will find and use any reason not to pay out. This is such an easy out for them.
Click to expand...

Tell me about that one. I'm not going to call names or post my personal experience with a certain insurance company on the internet.
I would be more concerned about that than the other issues.
 
adriver said:
Tell me about that one. I'm not going to call names or post my personal experience with a certain insurance company on the internet.
I would be more concerned about that than the other issues.
Click to expand...

What's there to tell you about?
 
When you say tag, you mean a decal for the license plate? Or a new coded tag to put on the car and stays there?

There must be something that links the car to the paperwork. What's on the registration? Up here we call the paperwork registration and it clearly has a location for a vin and the vin is the same as what's on the vehicle linking the two.
 
mrtires24 said:
When you say tag, you mean a decal for the license plate? Or a new coded tag to put on the car and stays there?

There must be something that links the car to the paperwork. What's on the registration? Up here we call the paperwork registration and it clearly has a location for a vin and the vin is the same as what's on the vehicle linking the two.
Click to expand...

Except that the car in question has a completely manufactured VIN that is NOT on the car anywhere, and no paperwork other than the title with the manufactured VIN on it!
 
cosgig said:
Except that the car in question has a completely manufactured VIN that is NOT on the car anywhere, and no paperwork other than the title with the manufactured VIN on it!
Click to expand...

Was a generic "the car". I know this car has nothing linking the two hence it's BOGUS and shouldn't be driven.

The question in post 261 was for someone else. Think barbee???
 
chryslerfat said:
Hope you have not had the car impounded yet.
Click to expand...

If it was then at least this crazy, shady ***, grey area, no real answer, wild goose hunt of a thread would be over. Some people make me wonder how they make it thru each day. The OP knows the car is not legit. Everyone on this thread gave them precise directions to follow. Did they do any of it? no! Did they beat around the bush and give half *** no specific answers? YES! If you ask me, which I know you didn't. The OP was either looking for ideas about how to screw someone else and cover there own *** by passing this car off. Or they really are dummies and just learned an expensive lesson. Either way might as well start parting it out now.

RANT OVER
 
cosgig said:
Except that the car in question has a completely manufactured VIN that is NOT on the car anywhere, and no paperwork other than the title with the manufactured VIN on it!
Click to expand...

Actually the State of California issued a VIN plate for the car back in 2003. I believe that is when the error occurred. It appears they may have transposed one of the letters/numbers and that's what we're trying to figure out.

I had no problem transferring title, registering it or insuring it.

If and when the issue is cleared up as to the VIN plate, I'll let you know. Until then, happy driving.
 
younggun2.0 said:
If it was then at least this crazy, shady ***, grey area, no real answer, wild goose hunt of a thread would be over. Some people make me wonder how they make it thru each day. The OP knows the car is not legit. Everyone on this thread gave them precise directions to follow. Did they do any of it? no! Did they beat around the bush and give half *** no specific answers? YES! If you ask me, which I know you didn't. The OP was either looking for ideas about how to screw someone else and cover there own *** by passing this car off. Or they really are dummies and just learned an expensive lesson. Either way might as well start parting it out now.

RANT OVER
Click to expand...

Really - what do you even know of the situation besides what your lame brain has conjured up? If I wanted to screw someone over do you think I would be spending time and money trying to figure out what the heck is up and publicizing it? You are the dummy.

There has been some really great advice on this thread and I'm working on trying to get this issue straightened out. It takes time and money to do so.

Obviously you didn't read the posts about me wanting to find out the history on the car. If it is indeed stolen, it should go back to its rightful owner!!! I've paid for several back ground searches and the NMVTIS search (data base) says the car is good to go.

I have visited with a Mopar inspector for multiple states and he has offered even better advice. I've talked to the regional department of the DMV for Texas and they indicated that title is good, car is in my name and that the car is legit. Furthermore, it has a CA state issued tag/VIN # and we are working on getting one issued by the State of TX. We'll have to take a day off of work to trailer it to the big city. It is very possible the State of CA transposed a number on the VIN plate they made for the car. That's what we're trying to figure out now.

How many times do I have to say how stupid it was of me to buy a car without checking the VIN plate/tags, etc. I honestly didn't even think about the dash tag, vin plate, etc. I did notice that the CA VIN plate and the title VIN matched and paid for the NMVTIS background search that came up clear. Stupid me.

I make it through the day with a clear conscience and some class. How do you make it through the day by being rude and ugly to someone you don't even know who has asked this forum for help. Again, stupid me.
 
Kudos to you for doing the legwork to try to figure this out. I sure hope it doesn't all bite you guys in the behind when it's all said and done. From what you're saying I'd think you're on track with what you should be doing.
 
mrtires24 said:
When you say tag, you mean a decal for the license plate? Or a new coded tag to put on the car and stays there?

There must be something that links the car to the paperwork. What's on the registration? Up here we call the paperwork registration and it clearly has a location for a vin and the vin is the same as what's on the vehicle linking the two.
Click to expand...

Yes, the State of CA Dept of MV issued a VIN plate in 2003 and that matches the title. When I called, I was told that there is no evidence of foul play in their data base and that the car was re-titled when it was restored or salvaged. However, when deciphering the VIN # there is a discrepancy as it states it is a Roadrunner but then says it had a 318.

As you might recollect, that was what my first post was about. Evidently, one of the numbers was transposed or entered incorrectly back in late 2002, early 2003 when the car re-surfaced. That's my issue. Trying to figure out if it is a RR or Satellite so that I can call it what it is.

I did learn (after holding for an hour) from one of the threads on the title search that the records were purged but that the car was sold by a "car business" in 2003. They would not give me any more information than that. I'm still digging.

Will keep you posted of any new developments. In the meantime, I best get back to work!!!
 
Diana's Dart said:
Actually the State of California issued a VIN plate for the car back in 2003. I believe that is when the error occurred. It appears they may have transposed one of the letters/numbers and that's what we're trying to figure out.

I had no problem transferring title, registering it or insuring it.

If and when the issue is cleared up as to the VIN plate, I'll let you know. Until then, happy driving.
Click to expand...

Well, if it indeed has a legit California DMV issued VIN number, then you're all set, that is the cars new registration number! The old VIN given by chrysler does you no good in tracking down the possible origin of this car!!

I still contend however, that you should be doing pencil rubbings of every number you can find on the body, getting every casting and assembly number off of the motor and trans, and every part that has a casting or part number, then do some research as to their origin! Just by the part number alone, you can tell which year, or years that the part was manufactured for! The more 1968 items the car is wearing, the more it leans to original components being used! Even if the motor is a 1971, they could've swapped all of the components from the 68 motor that was in it! If it's a 383, that's a good start right there, it could be the original, or at least lean toward the car having a big block in it to begin with!!

Plus, it's fun to trace parts on a car, like a mystery!! At least to me anyway!!! ....
 
RustyRatRod said:
Either that or this whole thing is bullshit just to pull everybodys chains.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I don't play games. Not into that sort of thing.

The SO # is stamped on the support - I can read about 5 of the numbers, I'm just guessing at the remaining #s. I can read most of the numbers in the trunk.

When we have some sunny days on the weekend, we're going to look for the tranny # and engine #'s and send all of these numbers to the person who is helping us in Detroit. Hopefully, he'll be able to sort some of it out.
 
cosgig said:
Well, if it indeed has a legit California DMV issued VIN number, then you're all set, that is the cars new registration number! The old VIN given by chrysler does you no good in tracking down the possible origin of this car!!

I still contend however, that you should be doing pencil rubbings of every number you can find on the body, getting every casting and assembly number off of the motor and trans, and every part that has a casting or part number, then do some research as to their origin! Just by the part number alone, you can tell which year, or years that the part was manufactured for! The more 1968 items the car is wearing, the more it leans to original components being used! Even if the motor is a 1971, they could've swapped all of the components from the 68 motor that was in it! If it's a 383, that's a good start right there, it could be the original, or at least lean toward the car having a big block in it to begin with!!

Plus, it's fun to trace parts on a car, like a mystery!! At least to me anyway!!! ....
Click to expand...

Agreed, wholeheartedly! That's exactly what we're working on. Thanks!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top