Gene Gorman

Mann is the car still for sale? I sent you a P.M. yesterday.

VERY INTERESTED

Buttonhead

I guess we are not going to see any pictures.

'67 Mann

Al Grenning of CCAS, LLC has reviewed the engine pad stamp and can not
support that it was done by Chevrolet. I wish to amend my original advertisement
for the car and 'delete' the part where I state the engine is original.

Attached is a photo of the engine stamp along with the VIN and Trim Tags. Also
included are photos of the casting date, casting number, and High Perf cast.

rickcarson8500

Does that mean that you are open to reasonable offers as maybe a "date correct" but not necessarily "matching numbers" car?

Rick

LPE385

This is very commendable by '66 Man, what it appears to be is a period correct restoration motor looking at the date on the side of the block. However "matching numbers" is what this is referred to by many. Matching numbers doesn't mean its "the original motor", just matching numbers.

Buttonhead

I would be willing to bet this is the original motor. Unfortunately it was rebuilt and someone did a horrendous job of restamping it. What should have been done was detailed HD photos of the pad should have been taken before rebuild. After rebuild I would have left the pad blank, and had the before photos to show the original. It really was not a very good decision.

'67 Mann

You guys are the experts not me... but it appears that I have
a correct cast date code, engine cast number L72 that works for my
production date of the car. Those are two good points I think...

This could still be the correct original block but whoever rebuilt the
motor back when may have decked it and done a not so perfect
job to stamping the pad... who knows?

Buttonhead

I too commend you on being forthright about the pad, but since nothing can be proven at this point

as to originality, regardless of correct casting number and date, have you reconsidered the asking price?

duramaxsky

I love this car. Too bad I can not afford it. I think the price is fair.