jlagarde

After reading all the posts about engine restamping, it can make a person take another look. Here is a picture of mine. The s/n matches the tag but can anyone tell if its the original markings?

Thanks for the help with posting photos and thanks for any input on this.

Joe

MikeM

Better send that one back and let them try again. Ray Charles wouldn't like that one. Nothing about it. Sorry.

Corbrastang

The broach marks look a little crisp to me for a 40 year old block. Looks like they were made with a belt sander-like randy at engines limited uses.

Mike Ward

So- you're saying it's not OK?

plaidside

I am no expert but it looks to me that there is a number '2' under the large '0' on the left.

Corbrastang

Here is a picture of the pad on my 66 427/390 pad. The broach marks are very hard to see unless you have a magnifying glass. For some reason all of the numbers on this car are very faint, including the ones on the transmission and frame.



Ill post a few more exaples in a few moments

jlagarde

Where is engine limited located?

Corbrastang

[QUOTE=Corbrastang;1570718986]Here is a picture of the pad on my 66 427/390 pad. The broach marks are very hard to see unless you have a magnifying glass. For some reason all of the numbers on this car are very faint, including the ones on the transmission and frame.






Here is a partial example from a recent auction from a car that was supposed to be an all original 65 396-ill let you all be the judge



More examples to come-need to run out to the garage.

Avispa

I had no idea assembly of model year 1965 was still going on as late as July 1965, given the motor assembly date of July 6. The total production for 1965 was 23,564 so the 396 car that Cobrastang showed was almost at the end of the production run.

dn69427

what is the rules on wanting to go back to cast correct restamp engines?
I have a 67 coupe and was told the guy took out the original motor to put in a Camaro, I have read about Engine companies that advertise "broached / restamped" engines. I would like to put the car back to at least the "correct" engine

jbalch

I would guess absolutely not original, but I'm no expert. Take the head off and look and see if those "broach" marks run across the entire block.

ctjackster

what is the casting date on that block?

spacing is a little odd on that VIN suffix too . . . not to mention the alignment issues on the engine assembly code, the aggressive broach marks (maybe the cutters were getting worn?), etc. etc.

Mark_Milner

Usually the assembly stamp is decent and the partial VIN is messed up, but in this case, the partial VIN looks pretty good, except possibly a bit wide on the spacing. It is straight, uniform, spaced on digit centers, and so on.

The assembly date looks like they wanted you to know they restamped it. I have seen some really screwed up ones that were original (who restamps a 350 in a '70s Impala in the '70s?) but this one is not like those at all in this one looks like each letter was stamped by itself.

The "broach" marks are obviously sand marks, not from a broaching tool.

SupremeDeluxe

Regardless of the legtimacy of the broach marks, the characters in the date/suffix stamp are all out of line.

1-2-b-67L89

and this one does not take an expert to interpet. No use going into detail but many have already hit the nail on the head. IMHO, this is a poor example.

Geralds57

The broach marks are too aggressive. Probably made with a belt sander. If you look at the '0', you can see another '2' beneath it. Just my .02

Corbrastang

More examples

Auction example-These look like belt sander marks to me.



My fathers 66 427/390-i cant see any broach marks on the stamp deck, but the first 4 numbers appear to be stamped too deep into the block-VIN portion and other figures appear to be correct. I think that perhaps someone decide to freshen up some the first 4 because they were faded. There is no documentation that the engine has ever been rebuilt and it certainly doesnt look like it-the bottom side of the engine is coated with about a 1/4" of crusty old oil.



And here is an example of an absolute restamp. This is my original block out of my 65 327/350hp. the numbers were removed by a local machine shop. The broach marks make this very obvious that its a restamp. that and if anybody measured the deck they would quickly realize that it has been machined multiple times

Corbrastang

GOOD EYE! If you look below the T it looks like there is another T inbetween the current T and I. Might just be paint

philip964

Everyone is getting so good now. We've looked at so many on this forum, the restamps just sort of jump out now.

Except for the letters out of line and the orginal shadow letters showing underneath, this one is pretty good restamp.

I would give it a C+.

rrover

besides poor restamp jobs, how can we tell if a motor has been restamped? I was told that there are people out there in this hobby that have extensive photos of real pads, and can reduplicate them by comparison. Early vins to late vins, they study the characters and fonts as well as the wear and tear on the character fonts. for example late cars and cars that are last down the assembly line have wear to the gang stamp and they can tell if it is a restamp or real vin. Versus one that is early in production and fresh deep stamps and no wear. Do you think this is true? It is great that a forum like this exist with such insightfull people. Thanks this is what makes the hobby great.