1958 Corvette suffix code

[Mike E.]

Re: 1958 Corvette suffix code

Your chances of getting a block with the wrong casting number, with the last letter of the suffix missing, and the date nowhere close to the build date of your car through judging and/or convincing someone it is the original one to the car is somewhat less than a snowball's chance in you know where. Three strikes and you're almost definitely out on this one. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but there's just too much against it!

[Edward M.]

Re: 1958 Corvette suffix code

The Lime Book ( third edition) of engine codes shows the stamping "D" as 58 to 62 283 170hp 2B, PG, PA or 63to 64 283 190hp 2B, PG PA. The PA indicated passenger car applications. What is the cast date code? Does the block threaded plug above the water pump?

Hey, that book sounds familiar

[Bruce B.]

Re: 1958 Corvette suffix code

Ed,
I have the 3rd edition.
Any changes since then.
Excellent SBC reference book.
Thanks,
Bruce B.

[Edward M.]

Re: 1958 Corvette suffix code

Ed,
I have the 3rd edition.
Any changes since then.
Excellent SBC reference book.
Thanks,
Bruce B.

Nope. I got out of it. Lots of those sorts of reference books now. Glad you like it.

[Jack H.]

Re: 1958 Corvette suffix code

I agree with Mike. Plus, what 'could' have happened isn't really the point. NCRS judges against 'typical factory production' norms. When a car deviates from that silhouette, the burden of proof falls upon the owner to document the deviation.

So when a stamp pad emboss ends in 'D' instead of 'DG', 'DH' or 'DJ', the reasonable judge is going to conclude this is a deviation from typical factory production for Corvette and rule accordingly. Now, the monkey is on the owner's back to PROVE that that's how the car was originally factory built. That's a tough road to hoe!

[Joel F.]

Re: 1958 Corvette suffix code

Your chances of getting a block with the wrong casting number, with the last letter of the suffix missing, and the date nowhere close to the build date of your car through judging and/or convincing someone it is the original one to the car is somewhat less than a snowball's chance in you know where. Three strikes and you're almost definitely out on this one. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but there's just too much against it!

I agree completely.

But on the bright side, it seems this engine is dated just barely within the 6 month guideline, so you could use this and only suffer a 50 point loss for the engine assembly stamp. That translates to roughly 1 percentage on your raw score, which is hardly insurmountable.

Add your battery cut-off, fire extinguisher, and NCRS window decal and you can recover 10 of these points. Drive the car to the event and you can easily recover all of these points and then some.

[Richard M.]

Re: 1958 Corvette suffix code

I agree too. My 59 with it's '61 519 block flighted at the Winter Regional. Label, extinguisher and driving it 106 miles there helped offset the engine hits. Remember, all parts on the engine, correctly dated block or not, get judged too. Thankfully mine had mostly all the right pieces.

[David N.]

Re: 1958 Corvette suffix code

Thanks again. Sorry for the confusion on my comment about only corvette engine. i realize that, my chevy by the #'s book didnt have that casting number and everywhere i looked it refrenced corvette for casting 3556519. I finally got the date and its K188 So obviously not original to the car. Guess i will have to look for a block for this car. Everything else is dated correct, drive train, intake, etc, etc. so guess thats a positive. This was a 2 owner car and i have mileage logs and title and registration that show history back to 1958 and 25K miles, so i wouldnt have thought the block would be replaced. Oh well, car was never represented that way so not too disappointed. Thanks again to all on this matter.

[Mike E.]

Re: 1958 Corvette suffix code

Joel--
If I'm not mistaken in reading through this thread, the block has the wrong casting number. The date is also AFTER, not more than 6 months before. So, unless they've radically changed things since I was the 61-62 team leader, that will not get the minimal point deductions that you are indicating.

[Joel F.]

Re: 1958 Corvette suffix code

Mike,

I am sure you are right. I was basing my reply off Joe Lucia's post and did not see the original poster's reply with the correct casting number and date. Off to detention for me for not paying attention! Would not be the first time in my case!

[E S.]

Re: 1958 Corvette suffix code

David----

Block casting #3756519 is generally considered a 1959 model year block. I would not rule out the possibility that it was used in late 1958, though. It was used for BOTH passenger cars and Corvettes for the 1959 model year and is, by no means, a Corvette-only block. As a matter of fact, there NEVER existed a Corvette-only block for ANY 55-82 Corvette engine.

You need to check the casting date again on that block. If it's actually December, 1958, then the engine is obviously not original to the car and is a 1959 passenger car engine someone installed in this car. The "D" suffix code was used for passenger cars for the 1959 model year.

Talking '64 engine here-I have a ref. book that states: Casting #3782870 in characters 1/2" high. Smaller characters were used on pass. cars. Also double digit cast date indicate Tona; not correct for corv. True or false? Thanks-E.J.

[Joe L.]

Re: 1958 Corvette suffix code

Talking '64 engine here-I have a ref. book that states: Casting #3782870 in characters 1/2" high. Smaller characters were used on pass. cars. Also double digit cast date indicate Tona; not correct for corv. True or false? Thanks-E.J.

E.J.-----


2 character year casting dates were used for most (but not all) Tonawanda-cast blocks. Tonawanda-cast blocks were not used on Corvettes with the possible exception of a few 1965 small blocks.

I really don't think that the size of the casting number or date fonts was related to whether the block was a Corvette or passenger car block. When the blocks were cast at Saginaw, I don't think they "knew" what application they were going to be machined and assembled into. However, the size of the font may have varied from foundry pattern-to-pattern. Someone may have concluded that this difference was related to application. I don't think so.

[John D.]

Re: 1958 Corvette suffix code

Hey, that book sounds familiar

Hi Ed, I never knew you were an author? Tell us about your book as I bet a lot of the guys don't know. On the other hand maybe this is not the thing to do here. If not email me the info on my AOL account please. Thanks, John

[E S.]

Re: 1958 Corvette suffix code

E.J.-----


2 character year casting dates were used for most (but not all) Tonawanda-cast blocks. Tonawanda-cast blocks were not used on Corvettes with the possible exception of a few 1965 small blocks.

I really don't think that the size of the casting number or date fonts was related to whether the block was a Corvette or passenger car block. When the blocks were cast at Saginaw, I don't think they "knew" what application they were going to be machined and assembled into. However, the size of the font may have varied from foundry pattern-to-pattern. Someone may have concluded that this difference was related to application. I don't think so.

Then-are there "corv. only" blocks or not?-
Thanks-E.J.

[Joe L.]

Re: 1958 Corvette suffix code

Then-are there "corv. only" blocks or not?-
Thanks-E.J.

E.J.-----


As far as 1955-96 Corvette V-8's are concerned, there are absolutely no Corvette-only blocks that I am aware of.