First, let me say I'm a new member and first time poster. I owned a 77 vette years ago. I'm in the market for a 73 coupe and MAY have found a good one. Here is my dilemma:
I paid a well credentialed appraiser to inspect the car. One of his photos shows the VIN code engine stamp. He noted on the written report "Restamped". I contacted the seller who is a Corvette dealer who has been in the business over 40 yrs. He swears this is the original "born in" engine for the car. He sent me at least 20 pictures from internet sites that show corvette engine stamp pads. Indeed the Engine Type/size font on the left side is different/larger than the VIN portion of the stamp on the right side. I don't know what a CORRECT engine stamp pad should look like for a 1973 coupe. I don't know how to detect a Restamped code.
Any help would be greatly appreciated6

Here is the engine pad stamp on the 73 coupe. Is it correct/original to car?

 

The others on here will be more knowledgeable about the stamp so I can't answer that but I will say that you paid the appraiser and he works for you. The dealer works for himself.

 

Thanks for your response. I've been told that by others as well so I know that's good advice. One point I forgot to make is that the person that assembled all the data on the car and looked at the photos (appraiser) was not the same "inspector" that laid eyes on the car and wrote "restamped" regarding the engine pad. I'm wondering if the "inspector" was in error by judging the engine pad "restamped" based on a wrong impression of what it SHOULD look like. I don't know.

 

I would start with some basic information about the engine. First, what is the part number on the block and what is the cast date of the block? What are the part numbers and date codes of the heads? What is the assembly date code on the assembly plate? A "CWM" stamp should be a 454 big block with 275 hp and it should have a manual transmission. The block number should be 3999289 Heads should be 353049. You can begin with this information and then continue to look at more aspects of the engine. Not a 100% assurance that the engine is original, but it can quickly prove it is not. The VIN would be 1Z37Z3S400001 for a coupe with the fifth digit being a Z for a 454/275 engine. Does the VIN match?

Good luck with your research.

David Howard

 

The photo of the pad (as seen on my computer screen) does not show any obvious signs of being bogus. But, a clearer image might be more enlightening. The pad HAS been painted over...but that is not unusual if the owner doesn't really know if it should be painted or not and the engine & compartment is getting refurbished.

I can't make out all of the engine code portion of the pad stamping. But the serial number should be smaller than the build/engine code. Frankly, I'm not sure why the "inspector" is flagging this pad as being a 'restamp'. If this person is a legitimate 'expert', he/she should have been specific about what attributes were improper.

 

The VIN numbers look OK, all in a line and equally spaced. But the engine code characters look more random. Here's my 79' SB as an example of what I mean. A better picture would help.

 

Here is my 74 engine pad for you to compare. 73 and 74 should be similar I would think.

 

Thanks for sending the picture. The size and fonts look the same. However, the VIN side and the engine build code side are reversed on mine (1973). Do you think that makes any difference?&

 

Since you paid for the information why not start by asking the appraiser how he knows it's a restamp? After all, isn't that the exact information you paid for?

 

several sleuthing things you can do.. and as previously recommended

casting number of the block
casting date of the block vs the birthdate of the car.
get the paint off the pad. there is no way anyone can attest to a non factory stamp without removing that paint totally.
a restamped engine is not necessarily a non original cylinder case. several scenarios exist where a restamped case IS the original engine.
what are the heads/intake/exhaust casting number and casting date compared with the birthdate of the car..
compare the engine stamp with the tranny stamp.. font and spacing should be exact since they used the same tool.

hard to tell why your inspector would make that report with the evidence you provided us.

also given a 46 year old car, unless the dealer has first hand knowledge of the car and its owners, there is no way he can legitimately guarantee to you that it is the original engine. it would be unreasonable for you to expect him to do so.

do you require original engine? is it priced as a original engine car?

as stated previously. don't know why you have not challenged your paid inspector to justify what he said.

a 73 big block has high motivation to be counterfeited.

 

...I don't know why some one would call restamp on that one, maybe because of the paint on the pad you cannot see the factory broachmarks. I believe the suffix and VIN numbers were opposite on bigblocks vs smallblocks. If I was BUYING this car and I had to have the "born with" engine, that paint would definitely have to come off carefully not to damage the pad itself before I bought this one. Not saying it is or isn't a re-stamp.

...sorry joe, very, very good post-was typing as you posted.

 

Did your appraiser note the VIN on the matching 4-speed transmission? Or note its absence?

As for the stamping order, try to find stamps from other 1973 LS4 engines. Here's one that shows the order you have. https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...4-4-speed.html

 

nothing jumps out at me as fake. the CWM. C looks a little small. M looks worn out. the guys in the plant with stamp in their hands weren't worrying about NCRS people grading their work 48 years later. engine looks like sept 27 assy date. what does trim tag say for build date? number 4398. a lil morr than 10% thru the years run sounds about right.

 

Looks okay for a big block 73 assembled in October of 72.

 

The trim tag reads "C09". I believe this translates to third week of September. Am I correct? And does this seem reasonable for the Engine Suffix Code?
Thanks,
Wes

 

Wes, I believe C is the third month of production and the 09 is the ninth day. So October 9, 1972 assembly date in this case.
David

 

which works good to perfect timing-wise for a sept 27 engine build.

 

look at the vin stamp.a couple numbers not perfectly in line. look at trans rear. numbers lined up the same? i guess frame stamped at same time and body showed up later?

 

David is correct. My 73 has a trim tag showing C06, assembled 3 days before yours back in October 1972.
Fran

 

Wow! You folks are awesome! I have learned so much. I hope to get a picture of the numbers on the manual trans for a little extra assurance. But,so far, the evidence is pointing toward this being the original engine for this car.
No matter the outcome I appreciate all of you giving me your time and expertise.