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.
Looking at a 67 convertible. Original engine is not in the car.
What I don’t know is if the original engine is any good…it could be good or it could be “hurt”, but I really have no way to know.
What I am asking for help on:
1. Opinions on the stamp pad? Does stamp pad look ok even thought it is partially covered in paint (argh).
2. Does the engine date and build sequence for the VIN correlate?
Original Engine Number are as follows:
Engine Pad: 7113128 V0228HT
Casting Date: B227
Cast #: 3892657
Looking at a 67 convertible. Original engine is not in the car.
1. Opinions on the stamp pad? Does stamp pad look ok even thought it is partially covered in paint (argh).
2. Does the engine date and build sequence for the VIN correlate?
Original Engine Number are as follows:
Engine Pad: 7113128 V0228HT
Casting Date: B227
Cast #: 3892657
Well, it is 111 engines later when the OP's engine was stamped. A tired worker, different worker on the next shift. What KingRat circled shows that the 2nd two is the same and consistent in both photos.
Well, it is 111 engines later when the OP's engine was stamped. A tired worker, different worker on the next shift. What KingRat circled shows that the 2nd two is the same and consistent in both photos.
Actually the second 2 is the same in three stamps here. The guy just pulled the 7 out and replaced it with a 8. Also, the last letter in the engine suffix is often out of alignment with the rest of the stamp. The big thing with the stamps when they got to "711" is the alignment of the ones. It looks like an old friend when I see a "new to me" original stamp.
In my humble opinion, there are NO stamp experts here! Only very good Opinions!
However, there are very good "educated" opinions AND a library of '67 stamp pad pictures for comparison. Ultimately, people have to come to their own conclusions.
However, there are very good "educated" opinions AND a library of '67 stamp pad pictures for comparison. Ultimately, people have to come to their own conclusions.
I agree KingRat! I just like to protect our Members from Litigation......I've been through it too many times.
Appreciate the feedback and litigation is not in the cards. Given the consistency in the history and the feedback here, I am comfortable and as mentioned that is what matters.
In my humble opinion, there are NO stamp experts here! Only very good Opinions!
I disagree.............I believe RSinor is one of the best out there. Especially for 1967 (and really any C2). Roy was NCRS 1967 Team Leader for years and later NCRS National Judging Chairman. I judged under his leadership for years. If he calls it...........that is the way it stands.
Roy and Al Grenning co-wrote the BOOK on C2 Trim Tag Verification.
I disagree.............I believe RSinor is one of the best out there. Especially for 1967 (and really any C2). Roy was NCRS 1967 Team Leader for years and later NCRS National Judging Chairman. I judged under his leadership for years. If he calls it...........that is the way it stands.
Roy and Al Grenning co-wrote the BOOK on C2 Trim Tag Verification.
Larry
Will either of those two gentlemen weigh in on the stamp in question?
I'd also say that Jonathon Herrick has a huge data base of stampings and is as close to an expert on C3 stampings, trim tags and paperwork as there is.
However, there are very good "educated" opinions AND a library of '67 stamp pad pictures for comparison. Ultimately, people have to come to their own conclusions.
And you are not going to get access to that library unless you are the owner, and not the buyer, and you have 4 figures plus expenses ready to pay to even ask..
the many decades old patina of that stamp promotes a very strong faith that it is original from the factory. The patina argument is stronger than the stamped characters argument
IMHO
And you are not going to get access to that library unless you are the owner, and not the buyer, and you have 4 figures plus expenses ready to pay to even ask..
the many decades old patina of that stamp promotes a very strong faith that it is original from the factory. The patina argument is stronger than the stamped characters argument
IMHO
I would say the opposite.
Broach marks and stamping are the key elements to validating a stamp.
On my 68 L89, Jon Herrick had pictures of the pad of 3 cars after mine and several before in his database. My stamping had a unique spacing between characters.
This same spacing was seen on the stampings before and after my car.
67 Engine pad/numbers
. Given the consistency in the history and the feedback here, I am comfortable and as mentioned that is what matters.
