When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Well, I'm no expert, but if that's a restamp it's a pretty damn good one. A close up of the broach marks would be helpful, but what I can see from this picture appears to show good linearity of the marks.
Perhaps a dumb question, but does it match up with the car's VIN? Have you checked the block number and casting date as well?
I was looking at making a offer on this car but after some emails with the owner It seems this was a re stamp. He was very honest and said his father in law who passed away had the engine restamped to match the car at some point. I am after a original born with 66 or 67 427 coupe so Ill pass on this one. Thanks for looking at this guys. Its scary I almost bought this car and would have thought it was original.
It would help if you could somehow check out those raised casting dates, there's still the possibility that this is the original block and maybe some shop decked it and then restamped the original numbers/characters afterwards?
Mike T - Prescott AZ
I was looking at making a offer on this car but after some emails with the owner It seems this was a re stamp. He was very honest and said his father in law who passed away had the engine restamped to match the car at some point. I am after a original born with 66 or 67 427 coupe so Ill pass on this one. Thanks for looking at this guys. Its scary I almost bought this car and would have thought it was original.
It is good that the seller was honest about it. The concern of many (most??) is that restamps are largely done in an effort to pass off a non-original car as numbers matching, obviously.
Id bet restamp. Truth is there are people who are so good at restamping, its darn near impossible to be sure. There are people who claim to be beyond being duped, but they can be. Unless you have original paperwork on a car...youll never know. The whole numbers game is so whored up. I guarantee you there are folks on here who think they have original motors, and sadly they dont. I agree with the one fellow....the second picture looks real, but again , like everyone else....I can be fooled.
Too much emphasis is given to "numbers matching" as far as im concerned. If its the correct type of motor and the car looks pretty much stock....buy one...enjoy it..drive the darn thing.
Id bet restamp. I guarantee you there are folks on here who think they have original motors, and sadly they dont.
I'm a multi car/multi make classic car owner who came into Corvettes 3 years ago (but I've a 63 Impala 327/250 for 14 years so I have a vague idea on some of the stuff).
I've always found it amusing how many of the Corvette folks insist they have their original motors. I know some may, very few, mostly guys lucky to still be able to drive one they bought new. School teachers, nuns, nurses and housewives didn't drive big block Corvettes. The hallmark of the big block was its ability to rev. It's often short initial lifespan was because of...its ability to rev, and the expectation of at least the first two owners was to explore its limitations in that area.
Come on...48-50 year old high performance engines, original to the car? Yes there are some. But most of them are likely not.
I have a 56 Cadillac Fleetwood that will be shown at the Greenwich Concours next Saturday. No one will give a sh*t if it's the original engine or not. but the funny thing is, it is! Most of the old Caddys, Packards, Lincoln's & imperials running around have their original engines. The prior owners who cared about them enough to remain on the road this long drove them gently.
No big block Corvette, from new or otherwise, was driven gently.
This '66 427/390 had been a daily driver for my brother from the time he bought it new until the early 70's. It's a numbers matching, Top Flight car in excellent condition, with 89k miles .... that has been red lined plenty during its entire life. The engine has never had any repairs, besides a carb change, water pump, and tune ups. I now own it and it still runs like new. I used to own a matching numbers '66 427/425 that was just as dependable. Like anything, if cared for properly, they will last.
Last edited by big block ken; 05-26-2015 at 12:37 AM.
Like anything, if cared for properly, they will last.
I do not dispute that. My point was that all but a handful of these cars were not cared for properly. They were new cars then, not appreciating collectables, and were driven much as new Camaro's, Mustangs and Chargers/Challengers are driven today. (New Corvettes tend to be driven by much older, more responsible adults than they were in the 60's-before BMW, Audi and when they were still "cool" among young people).
My car has a numbers matching 396 with a stamp that cannot be told from original according to several NCRS types who have seen it. Do I believe it's the original motor? No. I guess I hang my hat on its possibility, but we all know that few original big blocks are left. It's nice to think of your wife or girlfriend as a virgin before you met her, and even though she may have said as much...get real.
This '66 427/390 had been a daily driver for my brother from the time he bought it new until the early 70's. It's a numbers matching, Top Flight car in excellent condition, with 89k miles .... that has been red lined plenty during its entire life. The engine has never had any repairs, besides a carb change, water pump, and tune ups. I now own it and it still runs like new. I used to own a matching numbers '66 427/425 that was just as dependable. Like anything, if cared for properly, they will last.
Ken,
I purchased my car in 1979. It had been parked from 1972 until I got it. Back then nobody I knew worried about the "born with engine". I was lucky enough to find out later that mine was the "born with engine". It was driven hard in its early life. It needed a rebuild when I got it. It needed interior, paint and body repair also. The only thing it did not have was the correct intake manifold/carb on it.
I use the "born with engine" connotation because people question the use of the OEM, Original and Matching Numbers engines.
I really have to laugh sometimes at the skepticism that shows up on the forum. As everyone knows there is no real paper work for these cars prior to 1967. You can swear up and down that your car has the "born with engine" because you can follow the ownership back to the original purchase and still some of the skeptics will question the validity of your claim. Yours and mine are different. You can follow yours because it stayed in the family since new. In my case I can't follow it past the guy I purchased it from. So a lot of people will question my claim that it is the "born with engine" because of this fact.
How many of the skeptics would love to have the "born with engine" in their car even though they state their car is just fine with a NOM (should be NOE) in it? I would venture to say that almost all of them would love to have the "born with engine" if they could find it and could get it back at a reasonable price.
...
I really have to laugh sometimes at the skepticism that shows up on the forum. As everyone knows there is no real paper work for these cars prior to 1967....How many of the skeptics would love to have the "born with engine" in their car....
Keep laughing, as the skepticism is warranted. If you know you have an original engine I think that's fine. Who among us wouldn't want that?
My objection is the huffing and puffing among the multitudes who believe its possible for more than half the big block Corvettes out there to have their born-with engines. The effect is deception and many paying far more than they should for a car based on a lie.
It skews values and prevents good owners from buying otherwise good cars. It unfairly separates the folks with claimed "original engines" from those without. It's an obsession that places emphasis on an aspect of a car far less relevant than the quality of its restoration or the way it drives.
Again, my point is not to diminish the uniqueness and importance of your original motor, only to make the point that most are not and so what?
I am one of the guilty parties to getting rid of original engine. I bought a 1961 with a 283 stock in1969 for $900. It was not fast enough and for $300 I put in a 327. Did not think for a moment about it being an original motor that I gave to the mechanic.
Blew it up in1970 , and bought a 66 that I put on over 250,000 miles in 45 years. Original engine l-79 , 5 rebuilds and still going strong
Keep laughing, as the skepticism is warranted. If you know you have an original engine I think that's fine. Who among us wouldn't want that?
My objection is the huffing and puffing among the multitudes who believe its possible for more than half the big block Corvettes out there to have their born-with engines. The effect is deception and many paying far more than they should for a car based on a lie.
It skews values and prevents good owners from buying otherwise good cars. It unfairly separates the folks with claimed "original engines" from those without. It's an obsession that places emphasis on an aspect of a car far less relevant than the quality of its restoration or the way it drives.
Again, my point is not to diminish the uniqueness and importance of your original motor, only to make the point that most are not and so what?
Dan
You & I are on the same page. I have been saying the same thing for years. They have been stamping engines since the early 80'S because as you said they were beat to death or were worn out at 80,000 Mi. Engines were NOT rebuilt back then because it was faster & cheaper to swap it out. Unless a person bought the Corvette new there is no way to tell if its the factory stamped one or a GOOD restamp. For those that get it no explanation is needed. For those that don't none is possible.
05-25-2015, 10:34 AM
Plus the font is not typical.
