Here's a good research question and has been a Firebird Mystery. Any factory spoiler cars out there? I've heard that there were a few with the spoilers from the factory. Also, it would be interesting to see if anyone had dealer information about the Camaro style spoiler being installed at the dealerships. We know they were but does anyone have any documentation. Like a bill/invoice for it.

No 67-8 factory spoilers.
Some Pontiac dealers installed camaro front and rear's.
Mostly rears.

The factory rear spoiler cars I've heard of were the 9's. I've heard tell of the dealer installed rear Camaro spoilers but not the front ones. I remember seeing the rear Camaro spoilers on 1st gen Birds in the 70's but I didn't see any front ones until the 80's which leads to skeptisism.

The ONLY factory installed spoilers on 67-69 FGF was the rear for a 69 T/A..there may have been dealer ones installed but NOT factory...

John,
You are saying you know for a fact that there weren't any non TA 69's that had a factory spoilers? This is what we are after here..... I've recently heard different.

Does anyone have a dealer Master Order sheet for Firebird dated after April 1969? That might help. It is definitely not an option on early 1969 cars.

Jim, You state......I heard it from an unsubstantiated source. WHO?....Actually, I read it.....WHERE... Having an open mind, I was considering it. Personally, I don't have anything to prove it either way....JUST AS I SAID PROVE IT, YOU CAN NOT... I can tell you a lot about the code for a spoiler on a first generation Camaro....NOT THE TOPIC HERE...FGF ONLY NOT CAMARO... There are some similarities that may or may not be coincidental....LOOKING FOR PROOF THATS ALL.

When I started the subject I was asking for information. Not making any claims. And I'm still asking for information and not making any claims. I did toss out a couple myths to keep things light and interesting. But as of yet I haven't seen anything that's anything more than 'interesting'.

correct..only 69 T/A's got rear spoilers NO 67 or 68's...The D80 tag is still not proof I would have to see a PHS or even better an original window sticker with the rear spoiler listed on it....But I have not seen one in my 35 years of owning these cars.

Same here. I would think that a Firebird with a trim tag with a D80 on it would warrant a PHS. Since on Camaros that means trunk spoiler.

Are you in agreement that D80 is the GM RPO for rear spoiler?

Definitely. And exactly in that same time period.

No Camaros ...just FGF.

Often our sister cars help with Firebird Mysteries.

yes they can...I do not think we can compare the 2 for a defined answer.

They do share a code that has everything to do with the topic at hand.

Yes, they can. Do any of these codes sound familiar to Chevy fans? M20, M40, N41, N10? These codes are all part of the Firebird options and are common with Camaro.

One notable conflict in RPOs is JL2, which is power front disc on a '69 Firebird (per Car Distribution Bulletin 3/27/69) but air induction hood on a Camaro.

But I believe a few late cars with spoiler option exist.

http://forums.performanceyears.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-416989.html

Remember this tag? I would really like to see the PHS for this car.

And this link has a few more, unfortunately no photos, the pic above is in the list.

http://www.transamworld.com/1969%20Body%20Tag.php

Earliest D-80 shown is 03-B, car shown above.

The D80 is in a different place on the tag in the picture above then any other I've seen or heard of. Also, some background on the tag makes it questionable. When it was offered the owner promised to produce the car within a few months time because the car was snowed in. Local people have offered to go see it. It's been years now without there being any reported sighting of the tag or car. Until this get's cleared up the picture is just 'interesting'. I would also be interested in seeing the PHS that would correspond with a tag like above.

On that brief list above there is also a Van Nuys D80 car. Hmm, wonder where that one is?

I am not surprised that the code is in a different location than a Norwood or Van Nuys...many other differences, however small, between L and N cars, and U cars. Hyphens in the color codes are one small difference.

One part of this mystery is SOLVED!!!!!

D80 on that particular tag could, in fact, be a coincidence.

LOS code mystery solved thanks to our sister cars;

Fisher Body body scheduling code
The LOS (Los Angeles/Van Nuys) body scheduling code is a letter followed by one to three digits, e.g., F103. Based on data analysis only (there is no GM documentation yet available that describes this code) - but with consistent application to thousands of datapoints - CRG believes the code was used by LOS Fisher Body (and other plants that built multiple carlines) to aid in scheduling the body build order.

The letter indicates the approximate production day of the month for the start of the assembly of each vehicle body. It began with letter "A" on the first day of the month of the Fisher production calendar, incremented at the start of each additional production day to the next alphabetic letter, and was reset to letter "A" at the start of the next production month. (Note that the Fisher production calendar is known to differ slightly from the calendar month, and we also do not yet know exactly how the Fisher production calendar related to the Chevrolet monthly production reporting calendar.)

The one-to-three digit sequence number that follows the letter was reset to 1 at the start of each production day and was incremented serially with each body built by the factory as the day progressed. Data analysis indicates that the sequence number at the LOS plant was assigned regardless of model or body type. By this we mean that Camaros and full-size passenger cars both incremented the same sequence counter. The unit counter was reset to 1 the next day as the day-of-the-month code letter incremented to the next letter. In the example, F103 would indicate the sixth day of production for a given month and the 103rd body started on that sixth day of production.
__________________

My car was built about 30,000 units earlier on the same line. The tag layout is identical to the one shown, except for the extra code.

Can we find other LOR tags from the range 02A-05D to compare? A sequence would not have appeared only on one car, it would have been implemented as a regular inclusion.

any tag..? mine is "early" its a 10-D = oct 68, so it should be from before? I can take pic of mine today ,as I`m driving it to the office....or is it too early?

Instead of looking for something that's easy to find and will not help. Let's look for something hard to find, maybe non existent; A LOR tag with an extra code...... If you have a tag with extra codes in addition to the standard ones shown on the tags I posted previously, then you have a 'missing link'. If one truely does exist....

since I was down taking a pic of lic pl holder/ fuel door , I took one here too, so if you can use it or not ,here it is anyway..."early" 69

The reason for my last request was to establish that most LOR tags in the build range close to this car do NOT have any extra codes and look similar in format. From the pics you've shown, this does seem to be the case. LOR cars don't typically have a build sequence. So on to the next question, are there any other LOR tags with extra codes? Jim, you seem to have a good '69 library, have you encountered any?

Nope, none. In 25 years of looking, none. It's the rarest of rare. That's why it's so important for follow up on this one. And with little or no follow up with added pictures of the car. No independant sightings. Many offerings of Pontiac people in good standing near said position of the car you have to start drawing conclusions about the tag. There have been attempts at getting to the bottom of this for years now. There has also been much dis-information given out by the person who offered the tag. I can elaborate with quotes but it would only be entertaining as a comedy....

Not looking for comedy nor debate. Just documentation and photos.

So the search parameter is "exceptions to the rule". Does not matter if it is a B80, D80 or something else entirely. A 1969 LOR Firebird with any extra codes other than year, series, plant, body unit, paint, trim, and build month/week. Simple enough, right? Maybe you could post elsewhere for a bigger pool of info?

They already slapped the do-do out of the D80 guy over there. What do you expect when you say that you have #8 TA vert and it is green and made at the wrong plant BUT it went down the assembly right behind #7. That's a hard act to follow.....

You forgot it's a 350 car, too...

That has a good deal to do with other forums and other websites listing D80 as a surefire way to tell a real T/A. It's not. And my contention is that it's not exclusive to T/A based on allegorical reference, but I do not have proofs one way or the other. Tom Vaught and others have made a strong case for the existence of D80 cars but again, I haven't seen any hard evidence.

I did come across some other interesting tidbits. The first dealer bulletin announcing the T/A showed that it was to have the same Ram Air induction package as the Ram Air III, rather than the T/A hood which was eventually released on it. Is there a prototype out there with standard Ram Air hood?

I was supposed to get together with Tom (Vaught) for lunch a few months ago. I'll ask him about the D80.

Here's an interesting tag AEED80;

yeah , you`e supposed to come down here ,cruise with us and share a few beers too! we`re still waiting...maybe one day..

sorry for the O.T., breaking Geoffs rules,...lol

I just wanted to let the group know that my D80 car is being researched. Heres what he sent me tonight.

I have been exchanging info with Vikki already.
Still working on this project. The guys who have Lordstown cars with UPC codes have yet to follow-up with me. I'll send them reminders.

Slow process. But I am not giving up. Problem is, I keep going off on tangents when one bit of research leads me to another mystery.

I'll let you know when I have anything new.

John vaile64@bellsouth.net

P.S
He also has my phs on the car.
As for the comment on it may have been the next car
behind the 7th 1969 trans am convertible car with #380 vin.
That info was given to me from A Camaro Research Group.
Because my vin is #381
But they didnt want to tell me that the other car with 380 vin
was the 7th 1969 trans am convertible they are researching.
I found that out through another website.

P.P.S
There's a local member of this group that has already seen the car.But it's up to him to come forward.

Also there will be no more photos of the car until its restored.
I have gotten to much crap over this car. "SORRY".

Posts are being moved here.

Vikki, am I misunderstanding, or is it a possibility that T/A's were put out of other factories? What I'm getting at is: is it possible that Tracy's 69 really is a T/A? Remember that it is a Lordstown car. I have never seen the title, but he insists that it says the car is a T/A. I have all the #'s from the body tag written down somewhere.
Sorry for the hijacking, Jim.

I did not record any of the info off his tag, but his car had none of the T/A "signs". I would like to see that data again, as it was a rather hectic day. But I seem to recall the build date being considerably before T/A production.

Nearly all T/As were built at Norwood. I am not aware of any documented Lordstown T/As.