Holley carb date stamp

[Patrick N.]

Re: Holley carb date stamp

Wayne------


Notice how the first character of the part number ("3"), the second character of the broadcast code ("U") and the first character of the word "LIST" ("L") are heavy stamped. This is virtually the same as the carb pictured in the original post. I doubt that a restamper would have gone this far. Yes, there are certain minor differences but I think they're within manufacturing variation.

Joe,
would the part numbers vary in height as much as they are shown in the original pic? The "3,2,5" in the part number are much higher than any other examples shown. Were all the numbers stamped at the same time- i'd think they would be more in-line.

[Joe L.]

Re: Holley carb date stamp

Joe,
would the part numbers vary in height as much as they are shown in the original pic? The "3,2,5" in the part number are much higher than any other examples shown. Were all the numbers stamped at the same time- i'd think they would be more in-line.

Patrick-----


With the exception of the first digit of the GM part number I don't see where any of the other characters are very much out of line.

I assume that all of the numbers were stamped at the same time but I don't know that. In any event, even if they were all stamped at the same time that does not mean that they would have all been perfectly aligned.

[Roger G.]

Re: Holley carb date stamp

The issues voiced so far concerned me as well, especially the offset characters. I have absolutely no experience looking at these, but in my search for a matching carb I've noticed there are dealers on ebay that will stamp anything you want, part number, date code, phone number, whatever you pay for.

The car currently has three service carbs. Here are the three that came off the car years ago. I believe that two of them are original, but have no way to prove that. The car is a March 12, 1969 build.


IMG_0396.jpgIMG_0395.jpgIMG_0394.jpg

[Ronald L.]

Re: Holley carb date stamp

The issue you have is the restamper have been doing this for 20 years so people are thinking many re-stamp are original after 20 years of use.

There is too much letter to letter height variation and wobble for these to have been hit with a high volume production Holley stamp machine.

Look at David's real one and other's I posted a few years back, as well as Wayne's. Chances are you need to also take into account two other aspects, the known sellers of fast stamping, that tell you they are not restamp because they were never stamped to begin with (ouch), and then you have guys trying to unload bad purchases from years ago. There are enough of these out there that with a little patience you can get a good one.

[Reba W.]

Re: Holley carb date stamp

Holley carb.jpg

Here is a photo from new JG. Considering the source, it should be an original.

[William C.]

Re: Holley carb date stamp

Notice in the original in Reba's picture. ALL the numbers in the part number plane are aligned. This was done by machine without variation. Makes the picture in the first post very suspect indeed...the point I have been making via several posts.

[Jack C.]

Re: Holley carb date stamp

Just went out in the garage to look at my 7A1's , it's a 1

[Roger G.]

Re: Holley carb date stamp

Interesting in that the 3rd pic I posted there is a 1 and an I

[Wayne M.]

Re: Holley carb date stamp

[ATTACH=CONFIG]45610[/ATTACH]

Here is a photo from new JG. Considering the source, it should be an original.

Reba and Bill -- With all due respect, "considering the source" is precisely what's causing the problem. This carb obviously had a corroded surface that has been "restored" (re-colored) and is being presented for judging reference as "original". Couldn't they have located an untouched specimen (dirt and all ) ?

[Roger G.]

Re: Holley carb date stamp

Reba and Bill -- With all due respect, "considering the source" is precisely what's causing the problem. This carb obviously had a corroded surface that has been "restored" (re-colored) and is being presented for judging reference as "original". Couldn't they have located an untouched specimen (dirt and all ) ?

This appears to be an original untouched specimen

$(KGrHqR,!l4E87y3-05ZBPj119yDk!~~60_58.jpg$(KGrHqZ,!n4E9dES0,9,BPj116th3w~~60_58.JPG

[Warren F.]

Re: Holley carb date stamp

And yet that example appears to have the "l"s instead of the "1"s.

[Joe L.]

Re: Holley carb date stamp

This appears to be an original untouched specimen

[ATTACH=CONFIG]45616[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]45617[/ATTACH]

Roger------


I have no doubt this is original. Notice the heavy stamped "3" in the part number, the heavy-stamped "U" in the broadcast code, and the heavy-stamped "L" in the word "List". Also note that the "3" in the part number and the I in the word "LIST" are raised above the base line formed by the other characters. All these features are exactly the same as in the carb you pictured.

Could the carb you pictured be a re-stamp? Yes, it could. In the same way that just about ANY carb could be a re-stamp.

Attached is a photo of the stamping on an NOS, in-the-box, Holley 3130 manufactured the 4th week of June, 1968. We KNOW this one is not a re-stamp. Note that it has all of the same characteristics I described above. In addition, all of the characters are NOT perfectly aligned


DSCN2852.jpgDSCN2853.jpgDSCN2854.jpg

[William C.]

Re: Holley carb date stamp

I would note that the "3" in the part number is actually centered with respect to the line of numbers. It appears to be a newer replacement in the stamping unit, but the outline of the punch is above and below the other characters by the same amount, unlike the one in the first post.

[Roger G.]

Re: Holley carb date stamp

Thanks Joe,

There also appears to be more offset to the digits in this known original compared to some of the other examples.

[Patrick N.]

Re: Holley carb date stamp

This does show some evidence that the part numbers can vary in height, but how would one still explain the use of the "I" in the date code vs. a "1"?