VIN Codes.

[gap1927]

I'm looking at purchasing a sweet 66 convertible.

https://www.mtlouestmotors.com/fr/inven ... id30344089

However, I noticed that the VIN (6Y87Z126893000000) has a code 87 which would signify a Landau roof. Shouldn't the VIN for a convertible be 85?
This would indicate to me that the car was rebuilt using a couple of cannibalized vehicles, maybe even of different years?
Also the color combination of red with tan roof and interior looks a bit odd since all the red convertibles I've seen have either red, white or black interior.

If any experts would care to check the pics and give me an opinion of yea or nay that would be very much appreciated. Note that the price is in Canadian $$ so $30,000 would be equivalent to about $22,000 USD.

I'm planning on inspecting the car in person but it's about an 18 hr drive to Montreal from where I live so if the are any red flags about the deal, I'll forget about it and keep looking.

Thanks in advance for any help... Gerry

[Alan H. Tast]

More information needed like photos of the trunk interior, stamped VINs on the cowl, behind the passenger side headlights, and the data plate on the driver's door. Pictures of the area behind the rear seat showing structural panels would reveal convertible-only parts, and there shouldbe additional braces in the engine bay. Tan tops were only available in 1965. Only black and white were offered for all exterior colors, with blue tops for blue-colored interior/exterior combinations. A handful of clues suggest Town Landau like dash trim and steering wheel plus lack of 6 power window switches in console and no cranks for vent windows. Dash pad color should match interior color at ends and edge/cove. It's either a convertible with title/VIN and some interior parts from a Town Landau, or a Town Landau / convertible mish-mash that's had a LOT of work done to it.

[cacockrum]

First, I agree with your thought that the VIN number 6Y87Z is for a landau, and that it should be 6Y85Z if it is a convertible. (In case you are not aware of this, in addition to the data plate, the VIN number is stamped in three locations on the body; at the front cross-over brace between the headlight housing and hood latch, at the top of the cowl/firewall shelf on the passenger side, and beneath the cowl vent panel also on the passenger side.) Second, there should be a second set of braces extending from the front portions front fenders where they attach to the body and extending to the cowl. So it certainly appears that this is not an original convertible. A review of the Ford parts books will reveal a number of significant differences between the lower frame and body panels which were incorporated into the convertible in an attempt to compensate for the lack rigidity provided by the roof panels. The missing braces could be easily installed, but that alone would not make the body as stiff as the real convertible. I would also be concerned by what appears to be a poorly-fitting driver's-side door, which may be caused by a slight twist in the body. One other thing that jumps out at me are what appears to be several new floor panels. This suggests a major rust problem in the car's past.

[cacockrum]

First, I agree with your thought that the VIN number 6Y87Z is for a landau, and that it should be 6Y85Z if it is a convertible. (In case you are not aware of this, in addition to the data plate, the VIN number is stamped in three locations on the body; at the front cross-over brace between the headlight housing and hood latch, at the top of the cowl/firewall shelf on the passenger side, and beneath the cowl vent panel also on the passenger side.) Second, there should be a second set of braces extending from the front portions front fenders where they attach to the body and extending to the cowl. So it certainly appears that this is not an original convertible. A review of the Ford parts books will reveal a number of significant differences between the lower frame and body panels which were incorporated into the convertible in an attempt to compensate for the lack rigidity provided by the roof panels. The missing braces could be easily installed, but that alone would not make the body as stiff as the real convertible. I would also be concerned by what appears to be a poorly-fitting driver's-side door, which may be caused by a slight twist in the body. One other thing that jumps out at me are what appears to be several new floor panels. This suggests a major rust problem in the car's past.

[gap1927]

Thanks guys, I really appreciate your insight. The missing braces under the hood, which I would not have been aware of are a major red flag. I suspect that with further investigation other structural components unique to a convertible will also be lacking or improperly installed, leading to major flexing etc of the unibody & possibly even a catastrophic failure for instance if you hit a major dip in the highway at 70 mph?
I've decided not to pursue this deal but I am going to question the dealership as to the history of the vehicle. They may not even realize they got stung on this car.

[Alan H. Tast]

Thanks guys, I really appreciate your insight. The missing braces under the hood, which I would not have been aware of are a major red flag. I suspect that with further investigation other structural components unique to a convertible will also be lacking or improperly installed, leading to major flexing etc of the unibody & possibly even a catastrophic failure for instance if you hit a major dip in the highway at 70 mph?
I've decided not to pursue this deal but I am going to question the dealership as to the history of the vehicle. They may not even realize they got stung on this car.

Good luck in getting a response.