CE block price de-valuation

[Robert W.]

I am investigating a 68 L71/L89 roadster. The car is mostly mechanically original and low mileage, having been stored for the past 25 years. The tank sticker is present denoting the L89 option. The motor is a correct 4 bolt 3916321 block with a date code of J 18 7 (sept 18 1967) yet is stamped CE. From my understanding the CE block was most likely a warranty replacement. How much does this affect the value of the car ?

[Michael W.]

Re: CE block price de-valuation

The value is usually the same as any other NOM cars as there's no real proof that this engine was installed as a direct replacement for the original.

[Joe L.]

Re: CE block price de-valuation

The value is usually the same as any other NOM cars as there's no real proof that this engine was installed as a direct replacement for the original.

Mike and Robert------


In fact, if I understand the way things work on this, a "CE" block might actually take more of a judging point "hit" than a non "CE" block. For instance, if the "CE" block were dated outside the 6 month prior window (as most will be), then it would take more of a "hit" than a correctly dated, non "CE" block even if the casting numbers on both blocks was the same and correct.

[Tom L.]

Re: CE block price de-valuation

The only way to be sure that a CE block was installed under warranty is a repair invoice for the warranty replacement along with the correct ID numbers for the CE block that is in the car. In either case there is no difference in judjing. It is a NOM car.

[Jimmy B.]

Re: CE block price de-valuation

J 18 7 casting is "Oct" not "Sept"

[Tom S.]

Re: CE block price de-valuation

The only way I would be interested is if it had paperwork stating that it is a warranty replacement. But as stated above it is still a NOM.Tom

[Michael J.]

Re: CE block price de-valuation

Right, it's just another NOM car. I recently looked at a 1967 L71 car (tank sticker, etc.), but had a '74 454 block in it. Obviously the price hit is very large for this (30-50%) from a numbers matching L71.

[Michael W.]

Re: CE block price de-valuation

Mike and Robert------


In fact, if I understand the way things work on this, a "CE" block might actually take more of a judging point "hit" than a non "CE" block. For instance, if the "CE" block were dated outside the 6 month prior window (as most will be), then it would take more of a "hit" than a correctly dated, non "CE" block even if the casting numbers on both blocks was the same and correct.

That's correct Joe. Without knowing the final assembly date of the car in question, an Oct '67 block might be OK.

[Harmon C.]

Re: CE block price de-valuation

I am investigating a 68 L71/L89 roadster. The car is mostly mechanically original and low mileage, having been stored for the past 25 years. The tank sticker is present denoting the L89 option. The motor is a correct 4 bolt 3916321 block with a date code of J 18 7 (sept 18 1967) yet is stamped CE. From my understanding the CE block was most likely a warranty replacement. How much does this affect the value of the car ?

If the 68 your looking at was built a week or two after Sept. 18 1967 block date then for judging it would be a good match but still a NOM.

[Joseph S.]

Re: CE block price de-valuation

I'm trying to digest the scope and direction of this entire thread. Sounds like most of you would pass on a very low production car(600) units with documentation (tank sheet) because it no longer has its original engine. Sounds like a great find to me.

[Mark D.]

Re: CE block price de-valuation

Right, it's just another NOM car.

Right...just like Roger Judski's 69 ZL1 and his 67 12 mile L88...just more NOM cars.

[Joe L.]

Re: CE block price de-valuation

I'm trying to digest the scope and direction of this entire thread. Sounds like most of you would pass on a very low production car(600) units with documentation (tank sheet) because it no longer has its original engine. Sounds like a great find to me.

Joe------


I could not possibly agree more. These are the sort of cars that most folks should be SEEKING OUT rather than shunning. This is especially true if one's intention is primarily to drive and enjoy the car.

[Michael J.]

Re: CE block price de-valuation

Joe------


I could not possibly agree more. These are the sort of cars that most folks should be SEEKING OUT rather than shunning. This is especially true if one's intention is primarily to drive and enjoy the car.

I agree with both of you, but my point is that the price should be heavily discounted due to the NOM state of the car, that's all. If it is newly totally restored, with original all other things, it is just not worth what a numbers matching car is worth. If it is a project car and you just want a driver, great, just don't pay premium prices for what it left the factory with that is no longer there.

[Pat M.]

Re: CE block price de-valuation

To each his own, but to me an original engine is THE most important thing I look for in a Vette, whereas a replacement transmission, frame, etc. wouldn't bother me much.

[Tom L.]

Re: CE block price de-valuation

Seoconding Joe's comment...

I have a NOM car and each time I sit in the car and drive, I smile. Frankly I haven't even noticed the stamp pad from there!