DZ Block EBay (http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=34202&item=2440735650)

Shouldn't a block with date V0102DZ also have the vin on the pad too? Also, were the Assembly stampings ever this out of line?

Seems like the restamp industry is in full force recently :mad:

i have seen a few v1202dz blocks with their vin stamped by the oil boss.from what ive seen the vins were moved about the same time the x codes were phased in(norwood cars).the stamping does look bad to me on that ebay block.i thought the numbers and letters were set in a metal holder then stamped uniformaly in one straight line.

[ 11-03-2003, 09:29 PM: Message edited by: 69z28rsbilly ]

That's one of the saddest looking restamps I've ever seen. Engine stamps were held in a gang holder so they should always line up. The letter characters are also always taller than the digits, by about the width of the letter stroke. Would be impossible to get the entire code stamped at an angle relative to the pad while having the individual number parallel to the front of the pad.

Hello, If you look closely at the 1, it looks like it had the lower tails of the 1 cut off of the wrong style font. GM never had a 1 with lower tails. Can not understand why the DZ is so crooked realitive to the date, as Mark C said they had a gang type holder to hold all the letters and numbers inline. The only possible explanation is maybe the Flint assembly plant workers forgot to put the DZ in the holder so they just hand stamped them. I am still suspicious of the 1 though. I am not sure what Mark means about the letters being taller than the numbers, i measured my 2 DZ blocks with a Vernier and they are the same size rite through the entire stamp. ( V0527DZ and V0420DZ and these are definately original ) Maybe Mark could enlighten me? I would like to see under the orange paint to see if the original grain and broach marks are still there? That would probaly clear it up. Maybe this block had a differnt suffix that someone changed into a DZ. Hope this Helps.

Actually, on most if not all of the engine code stamps that I've seen, the letter "I" is used instead of "1".

Look at the 14th, 15th and 16th post on this thread. There are attachments with images in the 14th and 15th posts. The height difference is clearly visible in the 14th post.

http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB1&Number=44388&page=4&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1

I have to agree, those sure look to be hand stamped to me also.

Also about 1 month lapsed from the date cast till it was machined and assembled. Thats seem like a long time for a block to sit before it got used. The foundry was near the engine plant.

Hello, Checked out the posts on the yenko.net website and i see what you mean about the hite difference. Mine are definately not different in hites. I have owned my Z since 73 and it has not been messed with. The stamp on the post ( V0925DZ) is of a very late car (19N693637) is it possible earlier stamps did not have the hite differnce? Also the 0 and the D font differ from my V0527DZ. I am sure the stamps wore out after use , is it possible they had different suppliers? I have seen the letter I used also but mostly on Corvette pads. I also have a 70 Z block that has two "3"s in the stamp and they are both differnt design fonts. As far as time lapse, mine is 6 days from cast date to assembly date, but i have seen Corvette stuff as far apart as 6 months. The NCRS website as well as Nolan Adams reconize this. Maybe Mark could share some insight in time lapse? Thanks.

That's a horrible looking re-stamp. And the casting date on his heads look like a "9" for late 69, not "8" like he says. IMO it's a slapped together bunch of parts someone is marking up to make a big profit. Even if that was all original, it's still not worth the current bid price.