steve0415

Hi. Looking to buy a 66 427/390hp, low mileage Corvette. The engine stamp for the VIN has an S in it after the number 6. I found another engine pad stamp photo of a 66 390hp in Australia, built on the same day, September 9th, 1965, and the stamps are identical.

Does anyone know if this was an anomaly on the early 66 427 blocks?

I have attached photos, and the block stamping looks original to my eye, but the letter S puzzles me. I haven't seen this on any other 66 427 that I have seen photos of built after this.

Please let me know your thoughts.

Thanks,

Steve

Nowhere Man

Every day they changed the gang stamp dies. So in order to evaluate your stamp you need to find a known original stamp from the same day

leif.anderson93

I think the OP is looking for clarification on the "S" in the VIN derivative on the block pad...I'm curious, also.

steve0415

Thanks to those who replied. Just arrived home, and found the answer in the 1966 NCRS Judging Manual for 1966 Corvettes, 5th Edition, page 90.

" The letter "S" is found in VIN derivatives as applied on engine pads for the first several hundred cars. Example: 6S100XXX "

My guess now is that both cars #269 and #318 are legitimately stamped correctly on September 2nd, 1965, a Thursday.

Thanks again,

Steve

bradc6

My early 66 small block is stamped 6S100069.

JohnZ

Here's another one - original early '66 300hp convertible with an "S" prefix on the pad VIN; popped up at one of our Chapter meets.

Critter1

I question the machining (broach) on #1, #2 and #4. I can't see #3 well enough but it looks weird too. #2 is definitely, how's that go? Not typical factory production.

steve0415

PM sent.

Steve


QUOTE=Critter1;1594901115]I question the machining (broach) on #1, #2 and #4. I can't see #3 well enough but it looks weird too. #2 is definitely, how's that go? Not typical factory production. [/QUOTE]

tuxnharley

#2 definitely has several "shadow" stampimgs in the engine code grouping. It is particularly obvious in the "L", but is there in other characters as well.

Maybe the old stamp wasn't ground off quite far enough......?

Mjfloyd1

I thought the same when I got these same pictures a few months ago. This is the silver over silver 66 427/ 390 in Missouri correct?

John BX NY

In my humble opinion the only pad with suspicious broach marks is the pro team one which appears to have none in that pic.
I never knew about the S in the early VINS thanks for sharing. Maybe they used the same stamp for the engines and transmissions in these cars ?

steve0415

I am very confused now by some of the posts here. If you look at Stamps #1 and #2, they are stamped on the same date, and look Identical to me. The first car is in Missouri, and the second car is in Australia.

What are the chances that a re-stamper stamped BOTH of these blocks Identically, looking at the T0902IL ? Something I have always looked at when checking Engine Stamps is how the characters line up in the Gang when stamped.

Every character on both #1 and #2 are lined up exactly the same, 100%. They both have the letter L looking like a double stamp almost, to me, not a Shadow Stamping.

The top of the T is lower than the 0 next to it.
The top of the 0 is higher than the 9.
The top of the 9 is almost identical to the next 0.
The top of the 0 is slightly higher than the 2.
The bottom of the 2 is lower than the 0 before it and I after it.
The letter I is higher than the 2 before it.
The bottom of the L is lower than the I before it. And, the L has a double stamp on BOTH of these pads, in almost the Identical location.

Do you guys REALLY believe some re-stamper stamped BOTH of these engine blocks so IDENTICAL, probably years apart, or even on the same day for the same customer, or are the chances greater that they were BOTH stamped on September 2nd, 1965 by a GM worker at the factory? Maybe a GM worker who wasn't building collector cars, but just trying to get his work done before for the Labor Day weekend parties?

I think that because these photos are so large, much larger than the exact size of an engine pad, you will always notice some strange things in the pad and stamp. Just my .02

Please, if you have a Large photo of your ORIGINAL STAMP Big Block engine pad, from 65 - 67, please share your photos here. I am sure many of us would like to see what an original, or CCAS authenticated pad should look like.

Opinions or thoughts?

Thanks,

Steve

tuxnharley

Interesting. You make some good points. I had not noticed the shadows in #1 due to the darker shading.

What is even more interesting to me is that for the shadows/double strike to be the same in both cases the angle and force of the hammer blow and direction of the bounce would have had to be exactly the same each time.

What are the odds of that?

Critter1

My comment in post #7 was about the block surface. Not necessarily the character stamping. Especially in image #2. It's possible that characters in the #2 stamping are original but I think the broach is fake.