67 engine pad question

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Edward M.
    Extremely Frequent Poster
    • November 1, 1985
    • 1915

    67 engine pad question

    Is this the real deal or not? Last four of the VIN are obscured for a reason that I cannot comment on at this time.
    Attached Files
  • Michael H.
    Very Frequent User
    • December 1, 1987
    • 715

    #2
    Re: 67 engine pad question

    I would be suspect, as the engine build stamping is to much in line with the VIN stamping. Most of the engine stampings are closer to the head on big blocks.

    Just my .02

    Mike

    Comment

    • David K.
      Expired
      • September 2, 2011
      • 73

      #3
      Re: 67 engine pad question

      Originally posted by Edward McComas (9316)
      Is this the real deal or not? Last four of the VIN are obscured for a reason that I cannot comment on at this time.
      I think you mean the last three of the VIN?

      Dave

      Comment

      • Mike E.
        Very Frequent User
        • June 25, 2012
        • 920

        #4
        Re: 67 engine pad question

        L88? Interesting.


        Mike

        Comment

        • Stephen L.
          Extremely Frequent Poster
          • June 1, 1984
          • 3146

          #5
          Re: 67 engine pad question

          This is the stamping of my original 390/427. Vin is close to the one you photo'd
          Attached Files

          Comment

          • Edward M.
            Extremely Frequent Poster
            • November 1, 1985
            • 1915

            #6
            Re: 67 engine pad question

            Originally posted by David Kissner (53757)
            I think you mean the last three of the VIN?

            Dave
            Yes, thank you. I didn't learn to count properly in rocket science school.

            Comment

            • Michael G.
              Extremely Frequent Poster
              • January 1, 1997
              • 1251

              #7
              Re: 67 engine pad question

              Stamping looks too 'pretty' not the typical stamping we see on a like kind BB engines. Both stampings show to stamped with about the same amount of pressure.
              Last edited by Michael G.; January 21, 2015, 08:04 PM.

              Comment

              • Steven C.
                Very Frequent User
                • May 1, 2002
                • 199

                #8
                Re: 67 engine pad question

                Ed, VIN suffix 15484, which is in my pad library, would be described as not typical IMO.

                Comment

                • Ara G.
                  Extremely Frequent Poster
                  • January 31, 2008
                  • 1108

                  #9
                  Re: 67 engine pad question

                  bye........

                  Comment

                  • Edward M.
                    Extremely Frequent Poster
                    • November 1, 1985
                    • 1915

                    #10
                    Re: 67 engine pad question

                    Request that this thread be deleted. The owner of either the car or the engine has complained to Corvette Forum and had the thread on that site removed. I purposely did not identify the specific car, but it was identified anyway.

                    Not wanting to stir up any more stuff.

                    Please delete this thread.

                    Comment

                    • Kenneth B.
                      Extremely Frequent Poster
                      • September 1, 1984
                      • 2078

                      #11
                      Re: 67 engine pad question

                      Originally posted by Edward McComas (9316)
                      Request that this thread be deleted. The owner of either the car or the engine has complained to Corvette Forum and had the thread on that site removed. I purposely did not identify the specific car, but it was identified anyway.

                      Not wanting to stir up any more stuff.

                      Please delete this thread.
                      That's why I keep saying this factory stamp debate is NOT good for the hobby. IMHO Unless is' a gross misstamp no one can say for sure including all the self proclaimed experts that are now gospel. If it looks like a duck quacks like a duck let it be a duck.
                      65 350 TI CONV 67 J56 435 CONV,67,390/AIR CONV,70 454/air CONV,
                      What A MAN WON'T SPEND TO GIVE HIS ASS A RIDE

                      Comment

                      • Stephen L.
                        Extremely Frequent Poster
                        • June 1, 1984
                        • 3146

                        #12
                        Re: 67 engine pad question

                        I stand by my posting earlier that my engine stamp is legit. I've owned the car since 1982, have the original tank sticker, been thru numerous NCRS judgings, including regional and national levels where I've received repeated Top Flite recognition without any comments on the stamping.
                        Attached Files

                        Comment

                        • Philip A.
                          Expired
                          • February 26, 2008
                          • 329

                          #13
                          Re: 67 engine pad question

                          Originally posted by Stephen Lavigne (7553)
                          I stand by my posting earlier that my engine stamp is legit. I've owned the car since 1982, have the original tank sticker, been thru numerous NCRS judgings, including regional and national levels where I've received repeated Top Flite recognition without any comments on the stamping.
                          Stephen
                          Your engine pad looks legit to me too. However, I also happen to agree with Ken and his posting. Objectively speaking your length of ownership does not validate the stamp pad, the tank sticker does not validate the stamp pad, and NCRS Flight Judging does not validate the stamp pad. The absence of comments on the stamp pad through all levels of Flight judging only means that it appears/presents correct and typical of production; not that it is original or validated.
                          Phil

                          Comment

                          • Kenneth B.
                            Extremely Frequent Poster
                            • September 1, 1984
                            • 2078

                            #14
                            Re: 67 engine pad question

                            Originally posted by Philip Arena (48654)
                            Stephen
                            Your engine pad looks legit to me too. However, I also happen to agree with Ken and his posting. Objectively speaking your length of ownership does not validate the stamp pad, the tank sticker does not validate the stamp pad, and NCRS Flight Judging does not validate the stamp pad. The absence of comments on the stamp pad through all levels of Flight judging only means that it appears/presents correct and typical of production; not that it is original or validated.
                            Phil
                            I totally agree. Not many original stamped blocks were around 40 years ago BB or SB but especially HP engines. Maybe 10% so where is this extensive library of original stamps come from. I will tell you that I have seen at least 30 425/435 engines that were restamped 35 years ago that are in the system as factory stamps. The real truth is that there is not enough pictures of pads as they came out the door at ST Louis to tell what is factory & what is not but there is a lot of money being made to tell you the can. This is so sad. Again as Pogo said " We have met the enemy & he is us"
                            65 350 TI CONV 67 J56 435 CONV,67,390/AIR CONV,70 454/air CONV,
                            What A MAN WON'T SPEND TO GIVE HIS ASS A RIDE

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            Searching...Please wait.
                            An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because you have logged in since the previous page was loaded.

                            Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
                            An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because the token has expired.

                            Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
                            An internal error has occurred and the module cannot be displayed.
                            There are no results that meet this criteria.
                            Search Result for "|||"