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.
When I see pads displayed on the forum they look so clean and crisp as if they were stamped yesterday then I look at the one I have sitting on a dolly in my garage at it looks like a train wreck. I have had this block in my possession for close to 33 years. It's a 3869942 block cast date Nov. 18/65. The heads, intake, exhaust and distributor are all correct and dated properly for the build time frame for this engine. My question.. is this a restamp or did the general do it, I am not into restamping so if it is I certainly did not do it, would have been done back in the mid 80's. Say it as you see it I can handle the disappointment. Thanks for any and all comments
Ric
The original "broach" marks should run front to back of the block, parallel to the numbers, it looks as if someone used a file or grinder perpendicular to the numbers and then stamped it.
Joe
If you really want to know you could contact Al Grenning . In late 1965 there were a # of 427 passenger car ( full size Chev, ect ) engines that were removed from the assembly line , torn down and re configured for 390 hp corvette production . The original Engine ID #s were filed off and re numbered for corvettes . I believe that is what you have , a factory grind out and re stamp . No one would produce a fake that bad looking .
Mr Grenning will evaluate and tell you what you have for a nominal fee . If you want him to certify it in writing the price is higher .
Al Grenning is the only one alive who has the documentation to back up his opinion .
If you really want to know you could contact Al Grenning.
Al Grenning is the only one alive who has the documentation to back up his opinion .
And that is my opinion .
Bill
I'm gonna say restamp, but whether it was a home job or done at the assembly plant, can't say. You can see the grinder marks on the heads as it took off the orange paint. And not to mention the grinder marks on the pad.
You're telling me Al is the only one alive that can say for certain whether a stamp is real? And what happens when he's no longer around? Does he have a bodyguard?
I'm gonna say restamp, but whether it was a home job or done at the assembly plant, can't say. You can see the grinder marks on the heads as it took off the orange paint. And not to mention the grinder marks on the pad.
You're telling me Al is the only one alive that can say for certain whether a stamp is real? And what happens when he's no longer around? Does he have a bodyguard?
I am telling you that in my opinion AG is the only one that can say for certain . He has the in house factory directives from this time frame when these engines were re dressed and installed in Corvetts .
If you research him thoroughly you may agree and I hope he is around for a long time .
Bill
If you really want to know you could contact Al Grenning . In late 1965 there were a # of 427 passenger car ( full size Chev, ect ) engines that were removed from the assembly line , torn down and re configured for 390 hp corvette production . The original Engine ID #s were filed off and re numbered for corvettes . I believe that is what you have , a factory grind out and re stamp . No one would produce a fake that bad looking .
Mr Grenning will evaluate and tell you what you have for a nominal fee . If you want him to certify it in writing the price is higher .
Al Grenning is the only one alive who has the documentation to back up his opinion .
And that is my opinion .
Bill
IF the factory restamped it, why did they use 1s instead of Is in the assembly date? They may have needed to grind out the VIN but why the assembly date too?
03-03-2017, 03:07 PM
another engine pad
Besides the grind out of the pad the characters used in these stamps are not factory type