1967 427/435 engine stamp

[David B.]

Re: 1967 427/435 engine stamp

Ken - Agree that could be what happened-- Especially when you consider that you're looking at the characters backwards when you put them in the gang holder. Regards, Dave

[Wayne M.]

Re: 1967 427/435 engine stamp

....it is always interesting when someone is brave enough to put their engine stamp on here for all the "experts" to comment on...

This doesn't take much bravery on my part, as it's not even a Corvette block. So much the better to show a Tonawanda example untouched by NCRS hands (except me ). Factory grind-out and re-stamp; notice the two different zero fonts. LF code is 1965 low horse 396 for manual trans; block is 3855961 2-bolt.

[Richard E.]

Re: 1967 427/435 engine stamp

Thanks for the picture Wayne...It looks like they used many different styles...

[Steve B.]

Re: 1967 427/435 engine stamp

Wayne, I thought that you would like to see this one. Its as you know a 65 396 regrind. I saw the car years ago and I believe its the real thing.

[Steve B.]

Re: 1967 427/435 engine stamp

Wayne, I thought that you would like to see this one. Its a regrind of an L78 as you know. I saw it years ago and believe it to be real.

[Steve B.]

Re: 1967 427/435 engine stamp

For some reason I could not attach the pic, here it is.

[Richard E.]

Re: 1967 427/435 engine stamp

It seems to me that as of late there are alot more"factory grindouts" but
what do i know...

[Pancho T.]

Re: 1967 427/435 engine stamp

amazing the"factory grindouts" look a lot like the grind out restamps that have been around for years

[Kenneth B.]

Re: 1967 427/435 engine stamp

amazing the"factory grind outs" look a lot like the grind out restamps that have been around for years

First I assume that you think that most are fake. Why would someone now do that when one can get the factory broach marks if you want to pay for it. At the Corvette plant Cars were just job#'S & cost 4,000.00 & nobody cared about the crap we worry about now. When NCRS/ BG deducted points for this many real factory regrinds were were re-cut & stamped for that reason. Al Grenning changed that with his data base of block stamps. Please go to his seminars on this. Not all pads are Cookie cutter the same. I have a 1969 435 motor that was bought 20 years ago with the SN ground but with most of the broach marks left intact along with the build date/ussage code alone. Corvette as SN 302 a very early car.
KEN

[Pancho T.]

Re: 1967 427/435 engine stamp

First I assume that you think that most are fake. Why would someone now do that when one can get the factory broach marks if you want to pay for it. At the Corvette plant Cars were just job#'S & cost 4,000.00 & nobody cared about the crap we worry about now. When NCRS/ BG deducted points for this many real factory regrinds were were re-cut & stamped for that reason. Al Grenning changed that with his data base of block stamps. Please go to his seminars on this. Not all pads are Cookie cutter the same. I have a 1969 435 motor that was bought 20 years ago with the SN ground but with most of the broach marks left intact along with the build date/ussage code alone. Corvette as SN 302 a very early car.
KEN

Ken,
you assume wrong.I do not think that most are fake.I know that many are.My point is that the "regrounds" look a lot like the poor earlier attempts at restamps.As far as the 20yr ago mark for restamps you are late.I know of a guy that was restamping motors in the early '80's.His restamps were in Bloomington Gold & NCRS Top Flight cars then and now.He was buying blocks from my dad and I back then.By the way he is still around today and still does the same service and still buys hard to find blocks from me.I am sure through the years his methods have improved just like the knowledge about these restamps have.Just because a stamp has been done a long time in the past does not mean it was done at the factory.
Pancho

[Kenneth B.]

Re: 1967 427/435 engine stamp

Ken,
you assume wrong.I do not think that most are fake.I know that many are.My point is that the "regrounds" look a lot like the poor earlier attempts at restamps.As far as the 20yr ago mark for restamps you are late.I know of a guy that was restamping motors in the early '80's.His restamps were in Bloomington Gold & NCRS Top Flight cars then and now.He was buying blocks from my dad and I back then.By the way he is still around today and still does the same service and still buys hard to find blocks from me.I am sure through the years his methods have improved just like the knowledge about these restamps have.Just because a stamp has been done a long time in the past does not mean it was done at the factory.
Pancho

OK AT some point you have to decide for what reason was the block stamped this way. If it dose not add value than what is the use. I have been playing with these cars for 35 years. 80% of the HP engines are re stamps & 60% if the others are also. At least 50% of the Corvettes I bought did not have the original engine. My point is that I hate to see a original motor bastardized to get it certified. What it was is what it was. So what is your point. I say if it looks like a duck,quacks like a duck it's a duck.I am just glad that NCRS now has some leeway on the pads. My only point. Stampers are so good know that it's hard to tell & who cares.
KEN

[Michael W.]

Re: 1967 427/435 engine stamp

NCRS now has some leeway on the pads.

Huh? Somebody changed the rules?

[Richard E.]

Re: 1967 427/435 engine stamp

I started this thread in hopes of finding someone with the same assembly date as my 67 435 engine TO223JE and it ended up hashing out the pros and cons of factory grindouts and restamped(restoration) engines...

[Steve B.]

Re: 1967 427/435 engine stamp

I started this thread in hopes of finding someone with the same assembly date as my 67 435 engine TO223JE and it ended up hashing out the pros and cons of factory grindouts and restamped(restoration) engines...

Richard, you are correct. I apologize for hijacking your thread.

[Richard E.]

Re: 1967 427/435 engine stamp

no problem at all Steve