I believe the OP is confusing the "job numbers" found in chalk that CAN differ by 500.

How about "original miles"? Another term that just baffles me? Have you ever seen an "un original" mile?

 

well, The way I see it, you ask the question when saying, "numbers matching", like original motor, original transmission, etc, then say by "original", I mean they came from the factory with these parts in them??? THIS would or should clean up the air about "original" with the car. JMO
NOW my car has the matching number parts with the exception of the mirrors, fiberglass bumpers, & chrome air cleaner lid, & headers and dual exhaust, so I am Not a purist like some of the members are on here, I drive my car on the highways & interstates if I want to, (not very often because I enjoy the curvey shaded small highways(((which are almost as dangerous and the Interstates (IMO))).
Thank you, coffee is served in the hallway on your way out!

 

100%. This is evident on my '68[/QUOTE]

That's true. But what if both parts were restamped using a gang stamp holder on the same day. Both would match. And both would be non original. Some forgers know this.

 

That is correct. When I see "matching numbers" in an add all it means is I will have to ask the question, "is it original?" regardless. When I see "born with original motor" its a little more clear, but they could be lying. Either way it needs to be determined by the buyer.

Its just that "matching numbers" has no standard meaning. It means different things to different people.

 

That's a good one.

Maybe repro-miles?

Also about the chalk marks. The job numbers don't seem to correspond to anything. They are not tied to the vin from what I've observed. My 69 roadster has not been on the road since 1978. It has never been apart before my ownership, last owner had it since 1971.

It has the number 400 in a few places but the vin is 712871.

 

Here is a pic of the number 400 inside the fender well.

 

Ed, I was not in anyway trying to tie the two numbers (vin and job number) together. I'm merely pointing out that I believe the original poster (trolling?) was confusing them. His post is not really clear to begin with.....As posted "the last three digits of the vin can differ" differ from what?

Is that you, Mike Ward????

 

I understand. I didnt think you were trying to tie them together. I was just wondering of they had any relationship to anything at all. I have yet to see a pattern.

I agree the OP is not clear. Hopefully he will clear it up.

 

That's true. But what if both parts were restamped using a gang stamp holder on the same day. Both would match. And both would be non original. Some forgers know this.[/QUOTE]

Good point.

 

I've been wrong before but has the OP has left the building? First post, about a very touchy subject, with a '69 tri power.......

Let's hope.

 

I agree on the "no standard meaning." comment. To me I tend to interpret the statement "matching numbers" very broadly and generically. I assume they are saying that the components of the car that are serialized and/or date marked are correct for the car. When addressing the drive train unless I see "original engine, original trans, original rear end" for instance, then I assume nothing. I personally prefer cars that are drivers and am by no means a purist. I get that originality has a significant value impact on these cars and that is expected and appreciated. Just not a big deal to me personally. I spent too many years in manufacturing QA to take part marking and serialization too literally. I have seen every type of marking error that can occur, indeed occur. I recall buying a computer controlled LASER marking device for aerospace parts a few years ago. It was GUARANTEED to never repeat a serial number or apply an illegible marking because it had a built in vision system to verify it. Within the week the machine had committed both errors which were caught by an on the toes inspector. I have seen FIFO attempted but NEVER used 100%. Parts come to the line, leave the line, come back to the line, get jumped over in the line, go to a different line, go to a different plant sometimes, etc. But all that aside when it comes to part marking just like anything else. Buyer Beware. Educate yourself and proceed with due diligence and you should avoid making costly errors.

 

I've been around Corvettes a very long time and "numbers matching", to me, referred to born-with drivetrain that carried the VIN. Just because others use the term differently or other's perform fraud by faking numbers doesn't mean we should quit using the term.

I also have a 1972 Chevrolet Suburban and participate on that forum also. Occasionally someone will ask or state they have a "numbers matching" truck. Sorry, trucks did not get a VIN stamp on the drivetrain components. Much more difficult to prove "born with" items.

BTW, both my Corvettes have their "born with" drivetrain. I guess that puts me in the 2%?

 

Agree. Just because some sellers intentionally misuse the term for their benefit or some hobbyists insist on a vague, unspecific application citing that “ that’s what the Mopar guys do” does not mean we should not use the term properly. When Antonick and Groenning have specifically stated what numbers matching means, that’s good enough for me.

Matching numbers is when the engine pad VIN derivative matches the chassis VIN. End of story. It also refers to other VIN stamped parts (trans, rear end, etc) but the stamp that matters is the engine pad stamped VIN that was started sometime in the 1960 model year.

Parts that are “correct” either by date or part number, like an alternator, can be appropriate for many cars, unlike a VIN stamped part that actually “matches” a car’s VIN.

And, most importantly, “matching” means that VIN derivative is the same as the car’s. It does not mean it’s original or born with. A restamped VIN matches; it doesn’t mean original.

Terms like matching, correct, and original have been been used for decades in the Corvette hobby and have had specific definitions for a long time. The only thing that’s new is the broad misuse these days.

 

I've been around vettes for a pretty long time as well.

Part of the problem is there is no standard for the definition of "number matching"

Dmaxx says it should mean all original parts, not just drivetrain.
VB feels it should mean just vin stamped parts.

Also, if the 2% is meant from my comment of excluding 98%, please read my comment again. I did not say 98% of the cars do not have original drivetrains. I said 98% of the cars are not "matching numbers" to the definition that Dmaxx laid out which was "all original parts". I have yet to see a chrome bumper in person that is complete as it was the day it rolled off the floor. I know some are out there so I was generous with the 2%.

I have a 69 that is very original but the carb was switched out in the 70s along with the original sidepipes, tirss and some hoses, and some spark plug wires. So, by Dmaxx's definition, if I understand it correctly, my car is not completely matching numbers.

Funny thing is, even though he says his is, its technically not by his definition. His car, last I saw it, was not painted. Paint has a number, such as 974 Monza Red. If his car is not painted 974 Monza red, then the paint does not "match" the trim tag. Interesting isn't it. So until its painted, its not totally matching numbers........this is just how confusing it is.

But if you guys want to keep using the term, that's your right to do so.

I just feel it should be more precise, more accurately reflect the times and the change in its usage.

 

I miss Mike.

 

Man im confused

So ed, how does a person prove born with engine?
If a born with engine is rebuilt does that ruin it?

So i am getting the impression that born with is important to some folks while numbers matching be it orginal or restamp is just fine with others,

Others still i have seen are good with an engine for the same car same year, but not born with and not numbers matching unless restamped, if the born with engine is gone or blown up what else can they do?

So numbers stamped can and are redone on engines,
Can a restamp be proven every time?

 

Hello Bats,
At the moment, in my opinion, the only person that can absolutely verify an original Corvette engine block, stamp and stamp pad is Al Grenning from CCAS. He has a very interesting scientific approach equivalent to how ballistics are used to trace a bullet from a specific barrel and has applied it to identifying the pattern of broach marks on original engine pads.

All the terms do get confusing. My above examples and posts are meant to show just that. I don't really disagree with DMaxx, David or VB. My intention is to illustrate some of the problems with the terminology.

Each person has there own likes and dislikes as well as what is important to them when purchasing a car. That's perfectly fine. I think its just helpful if we can all agree on specific, standard definitions. It also makes it harder to legally mislead without outright lying.

 

A guy at work just told me he has a split window coupe with 500 CERTIFIED miles on it, he then insisted that he had the miles CERTIFIED. I'm not sure what that means in this case, but that's an over used, mis used term.

 

Ty,

I guess it boils down to the buyer has to have what they consider is "proof" that in this case the engine is what they desire it to be and are good with it,
I was drawn into a 68 L88 story, told a lot i wish i hadnt been told,
So called experts said they didnt like issues with the block stamping and rejected the car,
Yet that didnt stop that basically basketcase from getting big $$$ with a big reason being the engine was correct and orginal to the car,

 

What genius told you that ? The guy selling you the car ???