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.
Keep in mind that even if you believe the stamp to be genuine, others will always doubt it because of the condition. This will alter the resale value now, and forever in the future.
in sorry DKM 106. I don’t agree with you. The stamp pad did not look like that from the factory and I have seen many of them as well not just corvette either
You can disagree with me, that's ok. I have a number of exact same engine stampings in my library. My database has thousands of engine stampings, trim tags, and factory paperwork. Here is one engine stamping for comparison to the LT1 stamp provided by the original poster:
I looked around at some pics of other pads and did see some supposedly real ones with the C fairly closed but also saw one where it was more open. Somebody with experience viewing more pads would need to chime in.
Just for fun, here is the engine in the car and supposedly the emissions sticker. Again, I've not seen the car in person yet. Just going by the pics I was sent.
Well, I just noticed he had marked the ad as pending. I might have missed out on a pretty good deal.
2025 C3 ('68-'73) of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
2024 C3 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
2023 C3 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
Originally Posted by 67:72
My 2¢:
There are definitely circular scratches (non-factory) from the V of the engine stamp continuing through the VIN stamp.Agree
There's also something that looks like partial characters under the S and 0 of the VIN. Agree
I'm not understanding the shallow depth of the V compared to the date characters. I'm ok with this, as it goes from dark / deep to light & shallow from right to left evenly, gang stamp prob punched / hit on an angle or as mentioned more warn then other characters. The # 1 next to the "V" in question is also much more shallow then the "Z"
The broach marks under the 230CGZ look decent, though light in depth.I'm ok with this.
My .02
The "C" in the first picture looks a bit high & not inline with the others but it could be my old eyes !!!
WhatI DONT LIKE is the fact that as mentioned the sticker is a reproduction, pointing to someone, somewhere trying to misrepresent what it really is or was !!
Last edited by 427SIXPACK; Dec 28, 2024 at 05:09 PM.
WhatI DONT LIKE is the fact that as mentioned the sticker is a reproduction, pointing to someone, somewhere trying to misrepresent what it really is or was !!
Putting on a repro emissions sticker is pretty darned common -- they are so easy and inexpensive to replace that it's like replacing air cleaner and valve cover stickers. My '72 LS-5 emissions sticker was peeling off, scraped, and looked pretty horrible. I replaced it and didn't think any more on it (but would if I were going for judging). There is nothing about a replaced sticker that should warrant more than passing commentary as there are much more reliable clues to the original engine option.
You can disagree with me, that's ok. I have a number of exact same engine stampings in my library. My database has thousands of engine stampings, trim tags, and factory paperwork. Here is one engine stamping for comparison to the LT1 stamp provided by the original poster:
Wow, there are so many matching characteristics between these two engine stamps! The light V, 1, 3, & C; the heavy 2, 0, G, Z; the weird nick in the 2's center stroke. The only thing I don't really see in the later stamp is the little down-turned beak on the 3, but there's something there on lower stamp, just not the same.
Would you mind sharing why? If you prefer, you can DM me so you're not helping the fakers realize what makes it look fake.
Feel free to send me a private message, and I will answer any questions you have. In addition to the L88 and L89 registries, I have a site, Corvette Validation Services, that helps buyers and owners validate engine stampings, trim tags, and factory paperwork.
Putting on a repro emissions sticker is pretty darned common -- they are so easy and inexpensive to replace that it's like replacing air cleaner and valve cover stickers. My '72 LS-5 emissions sticker was peeling off, scraped, and looked pretty horrible. I replaced it and didn't think any more on it (but would if I were going for judging). There is nothing about a replaced sticker that should warrant more than passing commentary as there are much more reliable clues to the original engine option.
when you removed your emission sticker because it didn’t look good that would put a flag up for me as to why you did it . If any car wasn’t a high dollar car I guess it may not matter . However if you’re talking about 67 427/435 BB that would be a big deal .
...one person that could be is Al Grenning through the NCRS. He has a Master Stamp Pad Library and I've attended many of his "pad classes" at NCRS events "back in the day". It was just my opinion about that "very closed C" character. Another great pad person for '68 to '72s is Stan Falinsky who is an NCRS Master Judge. Maybe he'll chime in on this thread soon.
Paul,
Just seeing this now… As Jonathan and Mike have already posted, this look to be a really good stamp. I always like to withhold final judgement until I see a pad in person (you can rule one out from photos, but you can’t definitively confirm until you actually see it in person), but this one looks spot on. Add to that, Jonathan’s comp photo of a pad near this one and I think that you’re good to go on this one.
As far as the emissions label, as others have stated, these get replaced all the time during restorations. Some are better than others. What you can do is save the original for future owners once it has been removed.
