Talk:Number matching

I am thinking this sounds too much like a guide to number matching released from a classic car restoration paper. Informative but a bit like it was pushing the reader to make sure the reader got a number matching car when searching for classic ones. Catzilla4 68.179.130.208 (talk) 04:32, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I agree completely and I tried to add some meaningful content to the article and focus on the VIN and how it is and always has been the only really "important" number that needs to "match" throughout the vehicle where it is found on production vehicles. All the b.s. about production dates and assembly dates and part numbers on minor assemblies like carburetors and simple parts like exhaust manifolds is basically useless. The person who wrote that stuff is either confused or ignorant about the difference between "original" and "correct" and how a vehicle can be "original" without being "correct" but a vehicle can never be "correct" without being "original" when "original" means all of the major parts that were originally assembled and have parts or all of the VIN on them are still with the car. No amount of finding the "correct" carburetors or exhaust manifolds or obsessing over "assembly dates" and making sure they're in chronological order can EVER overcome the absence of the car's original engine block. And among true collectors and enthusiasts, there is no debate about what "matching numbers" means, and serious collectors won't buy a car without verifying that it is a matching numbers vehicle.68.234.100.60 (talk) 23:30, 28 April 2017 (UTC)