Stamp pad originality opinions.. please

[Ron H.]

original or restamp ? 67 sb

[Duke W.]

Re: Stamp pad originality opinions.. please

For the chapter level judge that I am, I'd say it's okay. If it's a restamp it was done pretty well.

Most restamps, especially older ones, look "too good". One of the things that I look for is die wear that shows up in the form of different depths of the characters because the dies used in the factory stamp had different wear levels. They were neither all new nor all very worn.

Another thing I like to see is the some of the characters very slightly offline or very slightly cocked, which is common. These are all pretty even.

Broach marks are really tough to judge from a photograph. They need to be observed from different angles of incident light. They look okay, but guys are getting better at reproducing them.

Like I say, at a chapter meet I would most likely give it a pass, but recommend to the owner that he take an old toothbrush and lacquer thinner to low areas at the edge of the pad to remove the paint before he gets it judged again, especially at a regional.

It appears to me that this pad was painted at one time, then the paint removed, but they didn't get the low spots. This area was masked off in production and there should be no evidence of paint, even in the low spots at the edge of the pad.

I've seen some known restamps that most high level judges would probably pass. The bottom line is that guys are getting better at duplicating broach marks and the stamped data, so they are getting harder to judge correctly.

It's getting to the point that to know for sure you need to compare the next few jobs prior to and after the one you are judging (assumng the reference jobs are bonafide original) because most of the characters will be the same and they were usually stamped by the same guy using the same technique. In this case even the best restamp will be obvious because sequential originals should appear nearly identical to each other.

Duke

[Chris E.]

Re: Stamp pad originality opinions.. please

Looks pretty good to me too. I'm not an expert and the picture doesn't show the whole pad, but it seems alright.

Here's my 67 HT stamp pad for comparison. Known original.

[Michael G.]

Re: Stamp pad originality opinions.. please

My opinion would most likely mirror Duke's. I look for what would be considered the norm. Norm being uneveness of letters and numbers typically due to wear and the human element. This pad (for me) is somewhat too crisp, clear and even to be 40 + years old however will stop short of saying it's not original

[Duke W.]

Re: Stamp pad originality opinions.. please

Well, now this thread is getting interesting because the second set of photos is an example of what might be "too good". Very similar level of penetration with no indication of different wear on the dies or holder. In fact, everything looks pretty new. The OPs photo appears to show some variation in penetration.

The other issue is that looking at a photo is nothing like looking at the pad in person from different angles.

Fortunately we don't judge stamp pads from photos, but photos can be very educational.

Duke

[Robert G.]

Re: Stamp pad originality opinions.. please

About a year ago, vin 10236, an AO Smith coupe like this one showed up on ebay. The body number was 554 with date of F30. This one is vin 10264 with body number 520 and date F31. I would be looking at the trim tag too because I don't see how 520/F31 could come after 554/F30.

[William C.]

Re: Stamp pad originality opinions.. please

AO smith bodies were staged and entered production on an "as needed" basis, so the sequence of body build to VIN is not consistent as it is with ST Louis bodies.

[Robert G.]

Re: Stamp pad originality opinions.. please

I'm comparing the body build date to the body number. I realize they may have entered the body drop at St Louis in a different sequence. How can body 520 have a date of F31 and 554 have a date of F30?

[Joe C.]

Re: Stamp pad originality opinions.. please

Chris' photo shows how the pad surface is supposed to look. Broach marks are subtle, and never should resemble continuous lines or "grain". Mottling is present, which is VERY difficult to duplicate artificially.

My opinion goes more toward a re-broach than original, because the "grain" in Ron's photo is too pronounced. At this point, and from the photo, I would say "inconclusive" , requires closer inspection. Under magnification, the "grain" lines are not contiguous, as they should be, but appear much too pronounced, as is done using modern day broach reproducing equipment.

[Jack H.]

Re: Stamp pad originality opinions.. please

The relative date issue depends on when the trim tag was affixed... As John Hinckley has taught us, the paint booth was a great separator for body finish order as a given body might have cycled/dwelled for some time during the paint process before it passed muster of QA/QC inspection and was allowed to progress further down the assy line in the body shop.

[Ron H.]

Re: Stamp pad originality opinions.. please

Robert brought up a good point about body drop sequence. I am not informed enough to have a logical answer to out of sequence drops.

Here is the trim tag that goes with the stamp pad.

[Chris E.]

Re: Stamp pad originality opinions.. please

Well, now this thread is getting interesting because the second set of photos is an example of what might be "too good". Very similar level of penetration with no indication of different wear on the dies or holder. In fact, everything looks pretty new.

Duke, for what it is worth, my dad bought this car (now mine) in 1973 and never touched the engine in the 33 years he owned it. One reason the letters might look so good is because I had the block hot tanked to clean off all the grease and grime.

[Duke W.]

Re: Stamp pad originality opinions.. please

That just goes to show ya...

There's a huge range of stamp pad appearance. Some of the OE stamps look very nice and appear to have been applied with some care.

Some looked like they were done by a drunk after the bars close.

I've never seen one that was obviously a restamp. I've seen a couple that appeared "suspicious" to me, but NCRS judging rules say the benefit of the doubt goes to the owner.

Duke

[Joe C.]

Re: Stamp pad originality opinions.. please

It has much less to do with the stamping as it does with the pad surface. If the broaching appears inconsistent with typical, then it stands to reason that the stamping must have been done after the reproduction broach. Stampings, by themselves should not be used to determine stamp pad originality, unless one has access to examples of pads which were stamped within hours of each other, with which to compare font/alignment of characters within the gang.

Mottling, as it appears on Chris' example, is very hard, if not impossible to duplicate.

There is a range of prominence of broach tool marks which would appear to be "typical". The marks which appear in the first post appear to be indicative of a broaching tool which was much duller than usual, and beyond its service life.