1967 '942 vs '351 Blocks (or VIN 7107262, Your Block *Might* Be on eBay!!)

[Joel F.]

This ad is for a 3869942 block that supposedly was ground and hand stamped as a 3904351 block. The pad pics are not great but it appears to be for 7107262, which seems really late for this sort of thing anyway. That said it is not the worst stamp I've seen but is too poor a picture to decide. The assembly code looks to read T1108JC. Let the discussion begin!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1967-Corvette-427-3904351-Block-Date-Code-E276-May-1966-/181228004245?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item2a3207e395&vxp=mtr

[Patrick B.]

Re: 1967 '942 vs '351 Blocks (or VIN 7107262, Your Block *Might* Be on eBay!!)

For that kind of money you could easily buy a very nice 351 cast block, maybe even an unstamped one.

[Richard E.]

Re: 1967 '942 vs '351 Blocks (or VIN 7107262, Your Block *Might* Be on eBay!!)

Kinda looks like #4262...IMHO

[Joel F.]

Re: 1967 '942 vs '351 Blocks (or VIN 7107262, Your Block *Might* Be on eBay!!)

For that kind of money you could easily buy a very nice 351 cast block, maybe even an unstamped one.

Yes, I agree but if you owned this car this block might be a huge bargain.

Of course that assumes this is even a legitimate casting grind out and restamp. I was hoping people knowledgable on such things would have commented. I've seen pics of heads that have been ground and stamped and were supposedly original but not for blocks.

[Patrick B.]

Re: 1967 '942 vs '351 Blocks (or VIN 7107262, Your Block *Might* Be on eBay!!)

Yes, I agree but if you owned this car this block might be a huge bargain.

Of course that assumes this is even a legitimate casting grind out and restamp. I was hoping people knowledgable on such things would have commented. I've seen pics of heads that have been ground and stamped and were supposedly original but not for blocks.

I have seen a 942 block renumbered 351 that appeared to be legitimate. It was renumbered with the same distinctive style hand stamps used to renumber a pair 858 heads to 391 that I had obtained from two different people. However it had an August engine assembly date and was in a very early car - number 173 possibly.

The stamped renumbering is not shown in the E-bay pictures so it is impossible to tell if it is the same style as other observed renumberings. The one thing that lends some credence is the cast date of May 27. I believe the change to 351 blocks occured on June 1, and the other heads and block I observed were all cast in late May. The pictures of the pad stamping in the ad were too poor to make a judgement about original grain.

[Michael J.]

Re: 1967 '942 vs '351 Blocks (or VIN 7107262, Your Block *Might* Be on eBay!!)

Am I missing something, a 351 block has 4 bolt mains doesn't it?

[Steven S.]

Re: 1967 '942 vs '351 Blocks (or VIN 7107262, Your Block *Might* Be on eBay!!)

Am I missing something, a 351 block has 4 bolt mains doesn't it?

Not all of them. Only SHP applications.

[Michael J.]

Re: 1967 '942 vs '351 Blocks (or VIN 7107262, Your Block *Might* Be on eBay!!)

Thanks, you learn something new everyday, I had never seen a Corvette 351 block without 4 bolt mains before.

[John H.]

Re: 1967 '942 vs '351 Blocks (or VIN 7107262, Your Block *Might* Be on eBay!!)

Thanks, you learn something new everyday, I had never seen a Corvette 351 block without 4 bolt mains before.

Michael -

1967 L-36's (427/390hp) and L-68's (427/400hp) are 351 2-bolt blocks.

[Michael J.]

Re: 1967 '942 vs '351 Blocks (or VIN 7107262, Your Block *Might* Be on eBay!!)

Michael -

1967 L-36's (427/390hp) and L-68's (427/400hp) are 351 2-bolt blocks.

Thanks John, for contributing to my knowledge. I have always been involved with the SHP 435HP engines, and just assumed GM would made them a unique casting number to denote 4 bolt mains and separate them from the others more easily from the outside. Having never been involved with the L36 or L68, I had always thought they were 942 or 321 blocks. That shows you what happens when you focus on only one or two engines and ignore the rest.

[Ara G.]

Re: 1967 '942 vs '351 Blocks (or VIN 7107262, Your Block *Might* Be on eBay!!)

I have recently either read or seen this exact thing on a block...and I can not for the life of me remember where....but it was a very interesting read. From memory, I thought there were some cases of this as legit? I honestly can not remember, but this is NOT the first time this came up....I would love to hear what the guys in know have to say.....ARA

[Tim G.]

[Kenneth B.]

Re: 1967 '942 vs '351 Blocks (or VIN 7107262, Your Block *Might* Be on eBay!!)

Thanks John, for contributing to my knowledge. I have always been involved with the SHP 435HP engines, and just assumed GM would made them a unique casting number to denote 4 bolt mains and separate them from the others more easily from the outside. Having never been involved with the L36 or L68, I had always thought they were 942 or 321 blocks. That shows you what happens when you focus on only one or two engines and ignore the rest.

Only difference is the 435 was drilled for 4 bolt main caps & a extra hole was drilled & taped above the oil filter flange for a oil cooler line if needed.

[Michael J.]

Re: 1967 '942 vs '351 Blocks (or VIN 7107262, Your Block *Might* Be on eBay!!)

Only difference is the 435 was drilled for 4 bolt main caps & a extra hole was drilled & taped above the oil filter flange for a oil cooler line if needed.

Thanks, I was wondering since the casting numbers are the same, then the 4 bolt was not cast into it. This explains it. I was also under the false impression that 4 bolt mains, like in other manufacturer's blocks, would have a wider, more reinforced cast main area.

[Tim G.]

Re: 1967 '942 vs '351 Blocks (or VIN 7107262, Your Block *Might* Be on eBay!!)

Two and four bolt main blocks were the same casting. You can convert a two bolt block to look like a 4 bolt block.