climbabout

Need some help sorting out my engine pad from you experts. We're talking about a 64 coupe with L76 engine. The vin number and the data tag indicate a build date of June 16, 1964. It has the correct 2870 block and the block casting date is A 294 indicating January 29, 1964. I have always read the stamp pad as F0327RE indicating a March 27 engine assembly date. All lines up so far. But on closer inspection with a magnifying glass, the "3" has some faint lines on it's left side which make it look like it could possibly be an "8" which would indicate an August 27 date. What do you guys think? See pic below:
Tim

Nowhere Man

why is the "F" bigger then the rest of the letters? why is the vin stamped so crooked while the other stamp is straight. just food for thought. you might try and do some research on other cars built in the same week as yours with known original stamp pads. a tall order but you can learn a lot while looking

oldsarge

The E at the end also looks somewhat taller as well ??????
It is a messy looking stamping, that might pose as a bad restamp, maybe ??????

climbabout

Sarge - NowhereMan - Before posting this, I did a search of threads with the word "stamp" in the title and could not reach a conclusion on my own. One reply posted by John Z showed a picture of the font dies and it was mentioned that all the fonts used were not the same. Also that the stamping process was not a precision operation. When I bought the car, I did not pay a premium for it being an original motor car - and the seller did not represent it other than what it looks like - a really nice driver that may or may not have it's original drivetrain. It just seems odd that if someone did restamp this block, that they would use a date that seems reasonable in timeline to the rest of the cars numbers.
I suppose anything is possible.
Keep the opinions coming - I'm going for a drive now and do a few high rpm shifts. Check back later.
Tim

Nowhere Man

Tim the block was cast all most five months before the car was built. While that's accepted in NCRS that's not very typical

Mike Ward

Looks like the VIN derivative is partially hidden underneath the cylinder head (?)

climbabout

No Mike, the picture is deceiving - it's the angle the camera was at. Thats the fuel line out of focus that is in the way.
Tim

p.s. Nowhere man - point well taken about the casting date.

nassau66427

I'm used to seeing '64 "R"s that look like this:

John BX NY

The VIN derivative and assembly stamp character size font and placement are not typical of factory production in my view....

kenba

I AGREE. I think it would not pass BG/NCRS as typical.
KEN