1966 427/425 Engine Pad Broach Marks

[Tom M.]

Re: 1966 427/425 Engine Pad Broach Marks

Thanks for agreeing with me. I think people now are so use to seeing #'S matching blocks that they beleave that most are origional. Like the other post there is no way to tell if it is a factory installed block or a restoration one of done right. I have had both. It is neat to have a born with motor Corvette but I don't think the value of one is more than the other unless someone tries to change HP & pass it off as origional. I would never guarentee a block unless I bought it new & I never did.
KEN

Ken, You got that right !!............Changing the trim tag from green to red.....Or Having a 250 hp or 300hp motor and installing 427 in it, and saying that the car is original ,............That's wrong, buyer needs to do some history on the car and seller

[Jack M.]

Re: 1966 427/425 Engine Pad Broach Marks

Dave, I love to see some of that data...

Ditto! Hope there is a possibility you could share.

Jack

[Mark G.]

Re: 1966 427/425 Engine Pad Broach Marks

John -

Just a couple pad photos on file.

Mark

[Patrick B.]

Re: 1966 427/425 Engine Pad Broach Marks

Mark:
Neither one of these look factory - hope they're not yours.

[John M.]

Re: 1966 427/425 Engine Pad Broach Marks

Pat, What stands out in Toms two photos that leads you to be so certain they are restamps. No one seems to be able to answer this question with a definitive answer. What are the key things to look for??

[Ronald L.]

Re: 1966 427/425 Engine Pad Broach Marks

John, Its not a cut & dry step 123 and you are either OK or not. Even if the stamp pad was reconstructed and passes scrutiny, sometimes the casting dates have been tampered with, ground out and or even bondo-ed in to be different.

That is where documentation becomes of value, and faked paper is even a task to pick apart but there are techniques. Give that new stuff printed on bamboo paper to me and we'll blow a hole in their story 10 miles wide

Back to these two pads...

On the second photo there are "scratches" that are swirly or off at an angle. The original machine that broached these blocks did not do it that way.

On the left, nice try, a little artificial aging but those fonts just about knocked my off my chair, and it looks like the surface was sanded or? after the numbers were stamped.

When you take a solid and bang it into another solid - metal is displaced, that old physics 101 thing about occupying the same space. So what you do not see is the ridges or metal displacement.

The old acid test then could be used to show where those iron crystals were compressed more that the surrounding crystals indicating where stamping had occurred previously.

[Patrick B.]

Re: 1966 427/425 Engine Pad Broach Marks

John:
The picture on the left has a vin with obvious bad characters. The 6's and 9's have flat sides and the 0 is too pointy. The picture on the right has a pretty good vin stamp, but the Tonawanda stamp is way off. The characters are too narrow (50% aspect ratio rather than 60%) with the exception of the I which is too wide for Tonawanda (but possible for Flint).

[Ronald L.]

Re: 1966 427/425 Engine Pad Broach Marks

The Tonawanda stamp in many cases (most originals) is partially under the head plug. Short cut restampers don't pull the head and place the restamp clear of the original location - a good place for the acid test

[William P.]

Re: 1966 427/425 Engine Pad Broach Marks

Mark:
Neither one of these look factory - hope they're not yours.

This type of opinion is why I would not advise anyone to post a picture of their pad for all the armchair quarterbacks to judge.
Bill

[Chris H.]

Re: 1966 427/425 Engine Pad Broach Marks

John, it takes a trained eye, and that only comes from experience. Every pad is unique, sort of like a thumb print. After years of looking at pads, it becomes relatively easy to spot a fake one.

Without getting into details, the best way to analyze any pad is to have the would-be seller of the car your interested in, provide a close-up, hi resolution photo of the pad. If he can't or won't provide a good photo, that should tell you something right there. Sellers with real pads want to flaunt it and brag about it with decent photos.

[John M.]

Re: 1966 427/425 Engine Pad Broach Marks

Would like opinions on this pad?? Is it a restamp??

[Patrick B.]

Re: 1966 427/425 Engine Pad Broach Marks

William:
You are right. My wisecrack about Mark's picture's was unkind and I regret making it.

[Chris H.]

Re: 1966 427/425 Engine Pad Broach Marks

I like how it looks. The broach marks are somewhat "polished" off, but I compared to other original '70 L46 pad photos I have, the font is consistent.

If you CAREFULLY clean the area from where the cylinder head rests to the front edge of the pad, you should see unbroken, consistent broach marks.

[John M.]

Re: 1966 427/425 Engine Pad Broach Marks

Can anyone post additional photos of known real 1966 427 pads!!

[Kenneth B.]

Re: 1966 427/425 Engine Pad Broach Marks

John, it takes a trained eye, and that only comes from experience. Every pad is unique, sort of like a thumb print. After years of looking at pads, it becomes relatively easy to spot a fake one.

Without getting into details, the best way to analyze any pad is to have the would-be seller of the car your interested in, provide a close-up, hi resolution photo of the pad. If he can't or won't provide a good photo, that should tell you something right there. Sellers with real pads want to flaunt it and brag about it with decent photos.

Don't you think the good restampers also have a trained eye? It's what they do for a living for Gods sake. Are you saying that you can look at 10 pads with sone original & some not & not miss a one. I will bet the house that you can't. I guess some people will never get it. I will quit trying. All of the armchair experts kill me.
KEN