Derrick Reynolds

My wife is concerned that somehow we got "ripped off" when we bought a used car from a nice man we met for the first time in our lives when he was standing in a field in semi-rural central Pennsylvania. We paid a price consistent with a "Numbers Matching" car, and over the last few weeks, she has been having me show her the numbers with literature references to convince her that I knew what I was talking about the day we plunked down our money and that we didn't get "snookered". So, as of yesterday, we had been through the whole engine except for the part number and casting date at the back of the engine. Tonight we were in the garage finishing the project and the part number was obvious and she accepted that right away as correct. Then the trouble started.

I remember that I thought the casting date was old for our car, but had been convinced before running into this car that more lattitude is normally given to '69-'71 cars due to the back to back strikes in '69 and '70 so that wider gaps are acceptable here. On that basis, I remembered accepting this engine as original (and the stamp pad looked exactly as I would have expected in my limited experience). For reference, engine assembly date = 3/12/70, car assembly date = 3/23/70. Anyway, tonight I showed my wife the casting date and she swore the code was K 7/8. I was like "Wha, wha, whaaaaaat??????????" So then we start a tizzy where she convinces me that the date is 11/7/68 and I am checking books and freaking out that 427/390 engines in '69 cars used the same block so someone could have re-stamped a '69 engine and put it in this car and I am about to have a coronary when.......

I went downstairs and got a drop-light AND a flashlight AND a wire hanger to move some of the vacuum lines that were partially blocking the cast date and got a REALLY good look. I am now convinced that the casting date is K 7/9, which is 11/7/69, which is consistent with my original feeling that this casting date is farther from the assembly date than "normal", but likely OK given what was going on in Tonawanda and St. Louis at that time.

If I have messed this up in any way, please let me know.

Thanks,

PK

400hp427vette

What are the numbers on the trim tag ?

vettebuyer6369

I am not aware of any special dispensation regarding dates for strike years, However, NCRS is consistent in allowing a 6 month spread between casting date and vehicle build date, and your car would appear to fall in that range. Your time frame would not cause concern for me.

I'd also note something listed in the 68-69 NCRS JG: "all 427s in 1968 and to around S/N 20,000 in 1969 have the casting date on the passenger side of the block near the freeze plug and engine mount of the starter. After about 20,000 in 1969, the date on a 427 is in the same position as small blocks."

I have no idea if this relates to your car, but given your concern about a date being 1968 and restamped as opposed to 1969, you might check this.

halfmoontrail

Post a picture of your engine stamp pad, there are a lot of guys here who can tell at a glance if it is original.

That date spread sounds long...my engine ('69 427/435) was cast March 1, '69, assembled March 25, '69, and the car built June 23, '69...that spread covers the specific '69 strike period. It's a little odd for there to be an extended period between engine cast and engine assembly, but not unheard of.

Steve

PS: If your transmission is matching numbers, the VIN stamping should be identical to that on the stamp pad, for comparison.

capevettes

Up to six months between the engine build date and the car's build date is acceptable. You appear to be within roughly 4. I would say you are within acceptable parameters as long as the stamp pad doesn't look funky and you can detect an amateurish re-stamp.

Derrick Reynolds

C23 Trim=400, Paint=979

Sounds like there is agreement here. Yes, the 6 month window is the accepted, but it would appear unusual for a block to sit around for a few months before being assembled into an engine. I think it is more unusual for an assembled engine to be left sitting around somewhere for months before being put into a car, but since there is only 11 days in between those dates, I was feeling pretty good about that interval.

I will get a picture of the stamp pad and post it. This will take a couple of days because it requires wifely assistance and she has her own projects to work on!

Thanks for the input!

Derrick Reynolds

If anything, this gives me more confidence that the engine cast date really is '69 and not '68 as the date is in the position you describe for later '69s. I was pretty confident before though, once I got a really good look, it was obvious the number was a 9 and not an 8, but it took some effort to get that really good look!

danthony

calm down - 6 months is generally regarded as acceptable. I do not recall any special dispensation for '70. I will check my NCRs guide tonight.

7T1vette

Your info sounds like the dates are correct. Contrary to info above, it is NOT unusual to find some parts (particularly engine blocks) that have some time difference with the car build. Blocks that had some minor manufacturing flaws got sent to "repair" and could sit in the shop for several days...or even weeks...before they get sent back to the build line. That's why NCRS gives a 6 month latitude on differences. You're GOOD....

avalonjohn

Here's the deal with my 69. Build date is Aug 4th, 69. 350/350 car. #010 block (one of the first used in 69)..........engine assembly of 0722 (69)............casting date "4 28 9" or April 28th.......a little over 3 months. Also, my intake is dated for July 69, but until I took a real hard look at it and cleaned it well, I swore the "9" was an "8".....they look alot alike. "..so I'd say you were good.

also, you are right regarding the strikes...........they had to have something to do with production numbers. Post a pic of your stamp!

Take care, john

Alan 71

All kinds of things happened for all kinds of reasons.
My 71, 350/270 was assembled at Flint on January 7, 1971. All the dates are right where you'd like and expect them to be. December and very early January parts. Except the intake manifold has an August 70 date with the 71 casting number. What pile had it been sitting under for 4 1/2 months?
Regards,
Alan

a560156

What is the VIN?
Is the casting date K 7/9 or is it K 7 9?

68AIR

Keep your wife out of the man cave.

vettebuyer6369

Yeah, I think that's exactly what I said.

pbcanney

I knew I heard it somewhere before

Derrick Reynolds

This was harder than I thought, to get a good picture of the stamp pad. The camera didn't seem to want to cooperate when I turned the flash off. After several tries, this is the best I have so far:

Sorry, should have included the VIN=194670S407541


By PKguitar

Derrick Reynolds

Actually, I didn't take a picture of that. From memory, I think it was K 7/9, does it make a difference?

PRNDL

So the car is a 1970... is it a bigblock?

Derrick Reynolds

Yes, 1970 LS5 2 top convertible.

Mike Ward

If you're hoping for comments on the appearance of your pad, it'll take a much better picture. Try the macro mode on your camera with natural lighting.


You're brave man putting out that kind of bread without a proper inspection upfront!