3970010 block

[Charles I.]

I have an 350/300 in a 69 12/19/69 build. The block is a 4 bolt main. It's casting date is L 9 8. Were these blocks cast that early? I have had conflicting debates over this.

[Edward B.]

Re: 3970010 block

Post a picture of the casting date. More than likely it's actually L 9 9

The earliest casting date we have in the CRG database is March 25th, 1969.

Ed

[Joe L.]

Re: 3970010 block

I have an 350/300 in a 69 12/19/69 build. The block is a 4 bolt main. It's casting date is L 9 8. Were these blocks cast that early? I have had conflicting debates over this.

Charles-----

No, the 3970010 block was not being cast as early as December, 1968. However, I think what you're reading as an "8" is actually a "9". This is a common mistake when interpreting cast numerals. Besides, a block cast December 9, 1968 would be extremely unlikely to have been installed in a car built December 19, 1969. But, a block cast December 9, 1969 works perfectly.

[Charles I.]

Re: 3970010 block

Ok, then V1202HY ON my block would be a restamp

[Joe L.]

Re: 3970010 block

Ok, then V1202HY ON my block would be a restamp

Charles-----

If it actually is 1202, I would more suspect a factory stamping mistake.

By the way, December 2 (1202) would not work for a block cast in December 9, 1968 OR December 9, 1969.

[Charles I.]

Re: 3970010 block

How do i upload pictures

[Charles I.]

Re: 3970010 block

[Charles I.]

Re: 3970010 block

[Charles I.]

Re: 3970010 block

[Charles I.]

Re: 3970010 block

It's hard to read this way. When I take the manifold off I will strip it completely. The first number looks just like a 9, the second one is different. Thank you for your time

[Dick W.]

Re: 3970010 block

I believe that a Dec 1969 casting would work for the 38000 VIN

[Patrick B.]

Re: 3970010 block

Your engine is a real mystery. The stamping really looks original, but it is incompatible with the casting date. Remove the paint on the pad with the paint stripper and a stiff tooth brush. If the grain looks as good as the characters, it could be a rare plant mistake. Perhaps they meant to stamp it V1212HY. Unless the pad grain shows obvious decking, I would leave it alone. It is probably original but most NCRS judges will not believe it.

[Charles I.]

Re: 3970010 block

I've had the motor apart 23 years ago. Definitely no broach marks left. If it was a 78 motor how would I tell?

[Patrick B.]

Re: 3970010 block

A smooth deck without any evidence of rotary milling marks is what I would expect for an original engine. The broach marks can be very faint and would not make an impression on you unless you were specifically concerned about them at the time. Post a clear closeup picture without any paint on the pad. Unless you sanded or heavily bead blasted the decks, the faint broach marks are probably still there. You may have an original oddball that nobody will believe,but is actually original. Do you have a protectoplate

[Michael W.]

Re: 3970010 block

If it was a 78 motor how would I tell?

The stamp pad would be more of a square shape than rectangular, easy to spot.