'63 Engine stamp date 1 month past body build date

[Bobby G.]

Re: '63 Engine stamp date 1 month past body build date

It can be very difficult to find the original configuration of these cars. They are 47 years old and most have been through many owners. I have owned my 63 for 13 years and have taken alot of the car apart but I do not know how my car was originally equiped from the factory. The only items I am certain of are the color of the exterior and interior and the fact that the car originally had an am fm radio. Most of the parts you mentioned are bolt on pieces and are easy to change. My car had a powerglide in it and I changed it to a 4 speed all the parts are bolt on. The tach would probably be the most difficult or time consuming and expensive part to change. You should be able to figure out if you have a solid lifter engine or a hydraulic lifter engine but that doesn't mean you have the original engine. A 340 hp solid lifter engine would have a 6500 red line the 300 hp wold have 5500 red line. You could try to track down previous owners to get a history of the car.

Thanks Bob. I have already paid for the services of one of our members, Bill Gould at Auto Ancestry.com to run the history of the car. It is now in process. I do have the 6500 redline tach. Also have everything still in the car for a 4sp except the trans.

[Bobby G.]

Re: '63 Engine stamp date 1 month past body build date

Hey Bobby !

Wanna solve some mysteries in a hurry ?? Post a few pictures of this car for us. Especially the engine compartment. Let's have a look and see what we can tell you about it.

Tom, that is a good idea and I will do it soon. I am a bit technologically challenged and will have to get my daughter help me do that post.

[Bobby G.]

Re: '63 Engine stamp date 1 month past body build date

Bobby, I see you're a recently new member......welcome!

Is yours the Daytona Blue, white interior coupe? I spent much time looking at that one at the auction in April. Very nice car. When I first looked at it the hood was down. Later in the day the hood was up and I noticed the engine pad as not being "typical". I saw no vin derivative and didn't know the vin# as the tag was inaccessible(doors closed). I had just completed a partial restoration of our 63 Silver Blue 300 hp PG coupe so I was comparing.

I did like the correct style/placement A6 A/C compressor aftermarket hookup. FYI you may want to put a shield over the A6 pulley to keep the oil from spattering the hood underside.

By now as you can see that the engine in yours appears to not be original to the car. The BJ listing never stated those "matching numbers" words, so it is what it is I guess. Hopefully you considered that when you acquired it. If not, you are not alone.......there are many of us here that had similar experiences before.

IMO you have a very nice swc to drive and enjoy.

Rich

Yes Richard that is the car. The BJ listing said that it was 1 of x number of automatics and 1 of x number of air conditioned cars. However both of those features appear to be after market. So much for BJ comments. The somewhat unique side of the story is that I wasn't there. A friend of mine called from the floor of the auction and jokingly said "is there anything we can buy for you today" and I jokingly said " yes I have always wanted a '63 split window. He asked what would you pay and I said $50,000 knowing that they usually went for much more. He called back about 15 minutes later and said a split window was coming up next. It bid up to 48k quickly and he said " do you want me to bid" and I said sure. I heard the auctioneer say my bid, and then it didn't go up. UH OH. He busted out laughing and said"you just bought a car". I had no idea what it was color or contents wise. Probably not a good way to do it. The good news is I love it and am having lots of fun figuring out the mystery. I plan to make it all it can be. Thanks for any help.

[Tom H.]

Re: '63 Engine stamp date 1 month past body build date

Tom, that is a good idea and I will do it soon. I am a bit technologically challenged and will have to get my daughter help me do that post.

Can't wait to see it !!! Heck, there's a bunch of us that are challenged around here !!

[Bobby G.]

Re: '63 Engine stamp date 1 month past body build date

'S' suffix code (in this case) is a 1962 to 1964 327, 250 hp engine, installed in a passenger car, with a powerglide transmission.

Passenger car engines of this time frame did not have VIN derivatives stamped on the engine pad.

Sounds like what you have is a "period correct" replacement engine.

These are desirable engines because the engine pad and associated broach marks do not have to be ground off. One can simply add the apprpopriate letter after the 'S' suffix to "convert" this engine to a Corvette engine (i.e. SC or SD). Of course, the VIN derivative also needs to be added to the engine?
Obviously, this would not work if the car was a manual transmission car. You would need to start with a 'R' suffix code engine in that case.

This concept of "adding a letter" to make a single character suffix code passenger car engine into a Corvette engine pretty much works for engines from 1955 to 1964. If I recall, all engine codes became two characters starting in 1965.

Edward, what are the specific differences between the 250 and 300hp engines? If I can add or change something to make it correct I will.

[Edward M.]

Re: '63 Engine stamp date 1 month past body build date

Edward, what are the specific differences between the 250 and 300hp engines? If I can add or change something to make it correct I will.

Adding a letter (i.e. SC for 250 hp, SD for 300 hp, both with Powerglide), plus the appropriate VIN derivative is a bit of an art form. It is a LOT more involved than just taking some stamps and hitting them with a hammer.

It can be done, with the right stamps, and by the right person(s).

[Richard M.]

Re: '63 Engine stamp date 1 month past body build date

Yes Richard that is the car. The BJ listing said that it was 1 of x number of automatics and 1 of x number of air conditioned cars. However both of those features appear to be after market. So much for BJ comments. The somewhat unique side of the story is that I wasn't there. A friend of mine called from the floor of the auction and jokingly said "is there anything we can buy for you today" and I jokingly said " yes I have always wanted a '63 split window. He asked what would you pay and I said $50,000 knowing that they usually went for much more. He called back about 15 minutes later and said a split window was coming up next. It bid up to 48k quickly and he said " do you want me to bid" and I said sure. I heard the auctioneer say my bid, and then it didn't go up. UH OH. He busted out laughing and said"you just bought a car". I had no idea what it was color or contents wise. Probably not a good way to do it. The good news is I love it and am having lots of fun figuring out the mystery. I plan to make it all it can be. Thanks for any help.

Wow, Yes probably not the best way. It was risky, but you took a chance. I bet your heart was pumping. ....your UHOH comment was . Good for you! You have a nice one there!

So here is my opinion. I would just leave the engine as it is and enjoy it. Why try to make it something other than what it really is. Sure you could pay to have the engine stamped, etc. But why???? BTW, I never saw the cast date on the block. That could be way outside the range too. I couldn't even see if it was a "870" block because the kick-down shifter linkage plate covered the block part#. Also I cannot recall if I saw the "casting clock" on it. If there's a clock that means it's a 64 up block(maybe 65 up I forget).

There were other things that I saw about the car that were not "typical". (BTW, I won't use the words correct or incorrect or wrong as I'm not a judge, just a auto enthusiast that likes originality)
As I said before I spent quite some time looking at the car. It was very nice. Loved the white interior. Really sharp!

I saw you were going to get some help to post pictures. I took the liberty to add links to the BJ photos below. Hope that's ok....

Rich

[Edward M.]

Re: '63 Engine stamp date 1 month past body build date

I agree with Richard. The engine date is already a month past your build date, so that is not going to fly with any organization that judges these cars.

So even if you do get the engine stamped to match your car, its still not right.

The right way (or the wrong way, depending on who you ask) is to locate a block that has a casting date that works for your car. Even better would be one with a stamp pad similar to what you have now (just an S suffix and no VIN derivative). Have that stamped appropriately.

However, I would not do anything until I determined what the car actually came with originally. If it really was originally a 340 hp car, then it was not originally an automatic car.

Get those sort of questions answered first. Good luck with it, whatever direction you decide to go.

[William G.]

Re: '63 Engine stamp date 1 month past body build date

In my humble opinion, BJ is really treading on ultra thin ice to state that a car (this '63 SWC, for example) is one of xxxx number built equipped with this or that option. Sooner or later these kinds of statements are going to get someone in the midst of a court battle. BJ supposedly checks these cars over before accepting them into "the lineup". How can they make these kinds of statements? Seems to me BJ is very directly implying these are authentic and original cars by stating one of xxxx built with certain options....such is not the case; they are not one of a certain number built with a stated set of options. Course I guess BJ, and others, are betting that attorney fees being what they are that no one is likely to want to go to court over this amount of money,,,,but still it is a very false and misleading statement. I certainly wouldn't want to be part of an operation run that way.

[Michael W.]

Re: '63 Engine stamp date 1 month past body build date

IBJ supposedly checks these cars over before accepting them into "the lineup".

Who told you that?

[Loren L.]

Re: '63 Engine stamp date 1 month past body build date

15 seconds of research will confirm that the statements you refer to were NOT by BJ but by the consignor, who apparently built the car from parts "on hand".

PS: no white interiors in '63...

[Bobby G.]

Re: '63 Engine stamp date 1 month past body build date

15 seconds of research will confirm that the statements you refer to were NOT by BJ but by the consignor, who apparently built the car from parts "on hand".

PS: no white interiors in '63...

Loren I am well aware of the things that are on the car that didn't come on it in '63. The comments posted at the auction probably were from the consignor but they were on a big, nice , thick poster board with BJS name all over it. It would be easy to assume that they were representing the car to be the way they said it was. There is a bunch of case law on misrepresentation based on less than this particular situation. That said, I'm a big boy and can take my lumps.

[Bobby G.]

Re: '63 Engine stamp date 1 month past body build date

Adding a letter (i.e. SC for 250 hp, SD for 300 hp, both with Powerglide), plus the appropriate VIN derivative is a bit of an art form. It is a LOT more involved than just taking some stamps and hitting them with a hammer.

It can be done, with the right stamps, and by the right person(s).

I understand that. I was wondering if there were any mechanical differences between the 250 and 300hp. Bobby

[John G.]

Re: '63 Engine stamp date 1 month past body build date

I think the 250 had 896 heads, the 300 and up used 461's.
BTW is the dude that bought it for you still your friend???ha
I'd build it like I wanted it and DRIVE it.
Good luck,
John G.

[Sydney G.]

Re: '63 Engine stamp date 1 month past body build date

Also,
The 250 hp used 2" exhaust pipes and the 300 hp 2 1/2".

Syd