[C2] How does my pad look?
02-26-2018, 09:10 PM
#101
Team Owner
Member Since: Feb 2003
Location: Sitting in his Nowhere land Hanover Pa
Posts: 48,995
Received 6,937 Likes
on
4,779 Posts
2015 C2 of Year Finalist
I read through the article and it says that the engine code was applied to the sides of the block with a grease pencil when the bare block started down the line. The actual stamping of the pad was done at final assembly. Hopefully we are now on the same page about when the pad was stamped.
Regarding errors in the GM parts books, I have seen cases where an individual part listed in the parts book was incorrect for the listed application. I've also seen cases where a part called out in the AIM was not actually used in production.
I'm not saying that the GM parts book (or Ed) are wrong about the specific question of the single-R code being used on 327s in 1964. What I'm saying is that its risky to assume that any one source on this topic is absolutely, positively correct and does not need to be corroborated by other sources.
So far the data I have seen are conflicting, but it shouldn't be hard to figure out this particular aspect with some further research. If no one else chimes in with corroborating data, I'll do some more research when I have some time to spend on it.
The reason I think this is important is that I agree with you that it would not be hard to convert a 1964 single-R to an RT. If such single-R blocks were produced in 1964, this pad will need closer study.
Regarding errors in the GM parts books, I have seen cases where an individual part listed in the parts book was incorrect for the listed application. I've also seen cases where a part called out in the AIM was not actually used in production.
I'm not saying that the GM parts book (or Ed) are wrong about the specific question of the single-R code being used on 327s in 1964. What I'm saying is that its risky to assume that any one source on this topic is absolutely, positively correct and does not need to be corroborated by other sources.
So far the data I have seen are conflicting, but it shouldn't be hard to figure out this particular aspect with some further research. If no one else chimes in with corroborating data, I'll do some more research when I have some time to spend on it.
The reason I think this is important is that I agree with you that it would not be hard to convert a 1964 single-R to an RT. If such single-R blocks were produced in 1964, this pad will need closer study.
02-26-2018, 09:11 PM
#102
Race Director
Member Since: Nov 2003
Location: Cottonwood AZ
Posts: 10,698
Received 3,048 Likes
on
1,934 Posts
C1 of Year Finalist (performance mods) 2019
You have to build a hipo engine in order to stamp it as such. But you don't have to know what it is going to be before you assemble it or cast it.
02-26-2018, 09:16 PM
#103
Team Owner
Member Since: Feb 2003
Location: Sitting in his Nowhere land Hanover Pa
Posts: 48,995
Received 6,937 Likes
on
4,779 Posts
2015 C2 of Year Finalist
02-26-2018, 09:18 PM
#104
Drifting
Thanks for the all the great discussions guys, really appreciate it. Fortunately this is academic for me as I have no plans to sell the car and didn't buy the car thinking it might be something it may or may not be. I'm encouraged that Joe's pad expert friend confirmed that it was possible for Flint to leave off the last character, especially during initial runs of low volume engines, and hand stamp it later. I'm curious to see if other 365HP TI engines built around the same time show a similar hand stamp look to the "T" on my block. I think I may start a separate thread to elicit some responses to that question.
For now though, I'm pretty convinced the block started life as a 365HP TI engine. I'm sure it is possible (if blocks with just an "R" at the end were produced at the same time) that someone tried to fake a TI engine with this car, but that seems like a lot of effort to go through (getting the right date coded block and distributor) for a '64 SBC, especially since I'm sure it happened many years ago. Plus, this car wasn't sold to me with any claims of it being a TI car so if the previous owner paid a supposed premium for it, that didn't get passed on to me.
I may also actually pay Joe's expert or that other guy to get a more definitive and formal answer. Would come in handy if I ever get this car judged. That day though is pretty far in the future as I pulled this engine to put in a 383 built from a different block.
If anyone else has anything constructive to add, please do so.
Thanks,
Patrick
For now though, I'm pretty convinced the block started life as a 365HP TI engine. I'm sure it is possible (if blocks with just an "R" at the end were produced at the same time) that someone tried to fake a TI engine with this car, but that seems like a lot of effort to go through (getting the right date coded block and distributor) for a '64 SBC, especially since I'm sure it happened many years ago. Plus, this car wasn't sold to me with any claims of it being a TI car so if the previous owner paid a supposed premium for it, that didn't get passed on to me.
I may also actually pay Joe's expert or that other guy to get a more definitive and formal answer. Would come in handy if I ever get this car judged. That day though is pretty far in the future as I pulled this engine to put in a 383 built from a different block.
If anyone else has anything constructive to add, please do so.
Thanks,
Patrick
02-26-2018, 09:20 PM
#105
Race Director
Member Since: Nov 2003
Location: Cottonwood AZ
Posts: 10,698
Received 3,048 Likes
on
1,934 Posts
C1 of Year Finalist (performance mods) 2019
to think it all was done before computers and smart phones. just goes to show you how great this country industry use to be. now if the computer system goes down the whole plant shuts down. just think about how much planing went on every day to ensure every thing was there each shift. and next time you think about matching bolt head markings think about the number used each day at flint
02-26-2018, 09:21 PM
#106
Race Director
Member Since: Nov 2003
Location: Cottonwood AZ
Posts: 10,698
Received 3,048 Likes
on
1,934 Posts
C1 of Year Finalist (performance mods) 2019
02-26-2018, 09:24 PM
#107
Melting Slicks
Okay, I see that Ed's book does list the "single R" for a 1964 passenger car 327. I know Ed and he is very thorough.
That being said, are there any other sources we can use to double-check this? If Ed's data are from the GM parts books, it is not impossible for GM to make a mistake.
That being said, are there any other sources we can use to double-check this? If Ed's data are from the GM parts books, it is not impossible for GM to make a mistake.
http://www.348-409.com/suffixsb.htm
02-26-2018, 09:42 PM
#108
Melting Slicks
Wow. What's the bottom line on this pad? It sounds like no pad can ever be confirmed as original unless the original owner has the car and can verify the motor was never removed from the car. And he also has documentation from it birth date.
02-26-2018, 09:52 PM
#109
Drifting
That's what Mr. Grenning does.
02-27-2018, 12:01 PM
#110
Drifting
Here is an example of an original pad from a '64 365hp with A/C. You can see that this low volume engine had the second suffix letter stamped separately.
02-27-2018, 03:55 PM
#112
Drifting
I don't know if the 46,554 number is just for Flint or includes Tonawanda, and I don't know if all 46,554 were built using the '870 casting.
However, it seems likely that Flint built some or all of these using the '870 casting. If in fact all of the Flint builds had a single-R suffix, then it would certainly be possible to use one of those blocks to add the T and create an RT suffix.
I've looked at a few online sources and some of them say the single-R suffix was used in 1964, while some of them don't.
I'm a bit worn out trying to sort out the assembly codes using the internet, but for the time being I'm willing to say that it may well have been possible to find an '870 casting dated February 1964 that had a genuine, Flint-stamped F0303R assembly code. And, someone could have added a T to that stamping to make it an RT.
However, all this means is that this pad needs further study, because hand-stamped suffix letters reportedly DID happen at Flint.
At this stage I think some of the true pad experts in the NCRS need to take it from here, because an accurate determination on this pad may be a bit too complicated for us amateurs.
The following users liked this post:
mikelj (02-27-2018)
02-27-2018, 04:25 PM
#113
Team Owner
Member Since: Feb 2003
Location: Sitting in his Nowhere land Hanover Pa
Posts: 48,995
Received 6,937 Likes
on
4,779 Posts
2015 C2 of Year Finalist
Joe I agree. It’s time to let someone who was at Flint in 64 or someone who has studied Flint pads a great deal more then I or you. I never herd or seen this add on suffix code and while your points are valid I just can’t see why Flint wouldn’t know what they were building until the end. I hope JohnZ or others chime in
02-27-2018, 05:21 PM
#114
Drifting
Just to add to the scope of possibilities, I think I have seen some allegedly original stampings where BOTH of the suffix characters appeared to be hand-stamped.
The following users liked this post:
mikelj (02-27-2018)
This is a real issue with this pad.
02-27-2018, 06:50 PM
#116
Team Owner
Member Since: Mar 2003
Location: Greenville, Indiana
Posts: 26,118
Received 1,843 Likes
on
1,398 Posts
I've seen a lot of 2870 blocks over the years. I own several. I've never seen any difference in any of them except for the amount of wear on the cylinders or if they had a main bearing cracked.
Whatever is stamped on the ID pad at the front has never been an issue nor has it been a factor in the value of the block. Regardless of what is stamped on it.
The block in my man made '63 L 84 came from one of my piles of junk. It had pop up pistons in it, stuck to the cylinders. I beat the piston out of the bores, had it bored and decked because of rust and it runs perfectly. I have no idea what punch marks were on it to start with on the pad but the 2870 is very pronounced at the rear.
I think some of you people could be diagnosed with something to indicate a mental illness.
So, what is the hassle here?
Whatever is stamped on the ID pad at the front has never been an issue nor has it been a factor in the value of the block. Regardless of what is stamped on it.
The block in my man made '63 L 84 came from one of my piles of junk. It had pop up pistons in it, stuck to the cylinders. I beat the piston out of the bores, had it bored and decked because of rust and it runs perfectly. I have no idea what punch marks were on it to start with on the pad but the 2870 is very pronounced at the rear.
I think some of you people could be diagnosed with something to indicate a mental illness.
So, what is the hassle here?
Last edited by MikeM; 02-27-2018 at 06:52 PM.