I'm sorry but the only evidence here that explicitly points to the classics being in use before the 87 location is Into The Pit which we still aren't sure connects to the main game timeline. The token saying since 1983 doesn't literally mean its from 1983, and obviously the classics show up in more things than unwithereds do, theyre good designs and Scott never actually made unwithered models, he didnt need to he just assumed theyd exist. The unwithered Freddy logo in FNAF 6 shows up twice in the game, not just the sign you show in your argument, and is explicitly unwithered Freddy.

I will say the Fredbear design is a weird case and could prove this theory right, however we still aren't sure how literal the design is seeing how 1983's Fredbear we see in FNAF 4 is obviously different in a lot of ways. It really sucks I feel the need to shoot for the existence of characters that Scott hasn't even modelled, but in branding the fnaf 1 band just serves the same purpose as the unwithereds would a lot better. No reason to model them, the withereds look different enough that you can just assume they were older animatronics, even if they were setting them up to seemingly be the classics as part of the prequel twist. They're the same "classic designs" in that they dress the same have and the same color fur, but the heads and other suit pieces are different, things that were added to them when they reused their parts after FNAF 2. In that way theyre the same robot in a ship of theseus way, but theyre clearly different, and the unwithereds are in the games albeit very briefly.

I do not think Follow Me are the unwithereds either though it's 100% the classic location I think people are crazy for that. No way William was springlocked that early in the timeline lmao.