With all the restamps of the partial VIN's on the top of the engine, why do we never see NOR restamps of the partial VIN's down by the oil filter? Or do we?

With all the restamps of the partial VIN's on the top of the engine, why do we never see NOR restamps of the partial VIN's down by the oil filter? Or do we?

They are out there. Probably not photographed because, once the engine is in the car, it is difficult to get a decent pic. Also, being painted over, and on the rough cast surface, makes it hard to photo even out of the car.

I guess anything is possible, but due to the rough cast finish on the rear side of the block by the oil filter, it makes restamping almost impossible. I have seen where someone covered the area with JB weld or some sort of epoxy and blotted the still tacky glue in order to make it appear like the cast finish of the block, but that is easy to spot with a little solvent or a small wire brush. Lightly clean the area and if you hit real cast iron, not covered up iron, you most likely have the real thing,especially if your vin matches. Some of these cover-ups look REAL good, look very carefully to make sure. Counter exchange blocks can still be found out there which never did receive the vin, unless done under warranty at the dealer and this was a rare find, I worked for chevrolet years ago. Someone could forge the vin on one of these blocks. If your block cast date is about a month before the production of the car, and you can read your vin stamped in this area all should be just fine. I have been working on first gen camaros for over 31 years, I just am amazed by the crooks out there. I guess if you found the correct casting and block date code on a counter exchange block you could make what you wanted, but due to the drying up of blocks out there I would think this would be hard to do, especially staying in the month or so of engine to car build date. But then someone could retag the car to make it a month after the engine build date--- this is a stinky scene and we all know there are lots of crooks out there, and this situation is not getting any better. Hope this helps.
1967 Camaro SS, factory A/C, origional 350, owned over 31 years!!
1969 Z-28, Dusk Blue, white stripes, cowl hood, all matching, M22

I would say crooks are lazy. They figure no one will go the trouble to look.

you see.... you need to be creative.......


if i were a crook,
i would just restamp a block a # that didnt match the vin.then,ppl wouldnt even doubt me.....

see? i'm so smart!!!:)

wagonman, your a moron!!!!! lol

I guess anything is possible, but due to the rough cast finish on the rear side of the block by the oil filter, it makes restamping almost impossible. I have seen quite a few blocks VIN restamped in the rough casting area. The stampings are getting better and better. I think they have the block pad stamping and VIN stampings down pretty good now. The good ones have you second guessing yourself.

Darn ! You guys have my mind going, was the VIN stamped on the rough block or flattened down to accept the stamping ? Many Thanks...Joe

69SSL48 ,

Blocks were stamped on the rough, (those that didn't have a pad stamping)

delete......

delete......

z28Doug,

Thanks for the info, my oil pad vin appears to be stamped on a ground down area . Also from all the info that I have I believe it to be the original block. The only concern is that the cast date on the block is dec 68 and build date was in may? Any idea's.....Joe

Joe,
My block was cast Feb. 5th and assembled Feb. 11th. (1969)

Why do you believe it is the original block? There shouldn't be a ground down area in the rough cast for a partial VIN stamping.

Sorry, but it could be a restamp.

If you post a picture of the pad stamping the experts (that wouldn't be me) can let you know if it's a restamp or not.

Good luck,
Doug

Many Thanks Doug, Not sure about how to picture post. E-mail on the way Many Thanks.................................Joe

I pulled my DZ the other day and took a wire brush to the rough casting area to remove paint. All the paint is gone, and for the life of me, I cannot see anything that resembles number or letter stampings. If I look real hard for a minute, I start to see something that looks like a 6, but I think my mind just starts playing games on me. Did all blocks get the extra vin stamp down in the rough casting?

Depends on the build date of the block.

After posting this, I stumbled across some info from Google about rough casting stampings starting in January 1969. My block is J18.

I Did all blocks get the extra vin stamp down in the rough casting?

It was not an "extra" stamp. As I understand it, sometime during the 69 model year they started stamping the vin by the oil filter instead of the deck, and at some time later, still during the 69 model year, they switched back to stamping it on the deck.

Have a look gang and give me your thoughts...Thanks Joe


http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n35/josecare1/69-Camaro-SS-037.jpghttp://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n35/josecare1/Block-Pad.jpg
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n35/josecare1/69-Camaro-SS-036.jpg
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n35/josecare1/69-Camaro-SS-035.jpg
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n35/josecare1/69CamaroSS029.jpg

All I'll say is my stamp is different than yours. Mine is an April stamp. The block shouldn't be ground smooth there.

What if the guy stamping the vin at the Norwood or Los Angeles plant was a dislexic moron, or was hung over on Monday? Then how was it corrected? Mistakes happened?
My thoughts not yours.

Is that block casting date really L29(screw)(space)8? Have never seen a block casting date in that format before, with a screw in the middle of it (vs. one screw at each end). If it's a Tonawanda casting (as the pad stamp indicates), the year should be "68" not just "8", although the (space) may have been a "6" that fell off the plate.

That date was created by soldering individual brass letters/numbers to a brass plate, which was then attached to the iron or stainless pattern with screws; when the packed green sand mold was created around the pattern, the plate left its impression in the mold, and those characters became raised in the casting poured in that mold. Occasionally (but rarely) an individual soldered letter or number came off the plate and it wasn't noticed for a while. Photo below of an actual date code plate from the Saginaw Foundry. :thumbsup:

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2002-2/13522/CastDateMarker.JPG

:beers:

Is that block casting date really L29(screw)(space)8? Have never seen a block casting date in that format before, with a screw in the middle of it (vs. one screw at each end). If it's a Tonawanda casting (as the pad stamp indicates), the year should be "68" not just "8", although the (space) may have been a "6" that fell off the plate.

That date was created by soldering individual brass letters/numbers to a brass plate, which was then attached to the iron or stainless pattern with screws; when the packed green sand mold was created around the pattern, the plate left its impression in the mold, and those characters became raised in the casting poured in that mold. Occasionally (but rarely) an individual soldered letter or number came off the plate and it wasn't noticed for a while. Photo below of an actual date code plate from the Saginaw Foundry. :thumbsup:

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2002-2/13522/CastDateMarker.JPG

:beers:

Cool John. I always like reading yours and Kurt's repsonses:thumbsup:

I have to believe that this block and stamping are the real deal . I am the second owner and have all the documentation . The original owner was a retired doctor. Any other ideas Please chime in . Any other pictures or numbers needed please let me know . Thank You For all info....Joe

Do you happen to have a photo of the VIN stamp on the trans... if so we can eliminate a possibility and may be able to clear it up.

The oil filter stamps I have seen are usually hard to read and sometimes you can't read them or all the characters. That one is real easy to read. I have never seen one with grind marks either.

If you talk to l Grenning a NCRS authority on engine stamps he can give you more info on grinder marks mistakes etc.

Joe,

Whats the date on your trim tag?? Your Vin comes up as the car getting its number(vin) around the 3rd week of May, so it is close to the build date on the block, 0506, or first week. The concern is the cast date being 5 months earlier, 1228, and then the block being put together in May is a far stretch. Also, the ROUGH area were the vin was found near oil filter has been ground somewhat, which is suspicious, as if to get a good stamping. Remember that supporting documents are also forged/copied/aged, as to be real. My opinion is that if your car was put together in May 69 as per trimtag, then your block, "more than likely", is not the original block, or has a 1/2 of 1% chance of being the origianl block. Yes there were mistakes made and delays of parts, but more than 3-4 weeks is not feasible. Thats one big error restampers make because they hold to the claim that they have the ONE item(block, trimtag, cyl head) that was screwed up on the line, so therefore it HAS to be accepted as a "TRUE" good GM screw up! Do you know if your block is a 4 bolt main, have you seen your engine apart????

Hope your doc.s are real!!
Marty

What if the guy stamping the vin at the Norwood or Los Angeles plant was a dislexic moron, or was hung over on Monday? Then how was it corrected? Mistakes happened?
My thoughts not yours.

Good point..........
Doug

Here are a few more pic's. As I said before it was purchased from a doctor. He in no way tried to misinform me about the car. The engine bay was covered in oil from many years of old gasket leaks, which reflected in the price that I payed . It has all the original parts #'s crank 3932442, water pump 3927170, carb 7029202, intake 3927184, heads 3947041, bal 3947704. I feel strongly that this the original motor to the car.... Yes it is a 4 bolt main, can't find any numbers on tranny but it is an older TH350.....Thanks Joe


http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n35/josecare1/69CamaroSS028.jpg
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n35/josecare1/69CamaroSS026.jpg
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n35/josecare1/69-Camaro-SS-045.jpg
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n35/josecare1/69CamaroSS023.jpg

Joe, How about cleaning the paint off the pad with some lacquer thinner, and reposting a better picture of the full pad, so TC can critique the grain of the pad etc. That might help clear up the mystery somewhat. I suppose it might be possible regarding the cast to stamp date but it is quite a spread.

Sorry grain a drain on my brain.....Just talking at myself! The engine is in car so abit hard to snap. I do have a couple more images that have not been cropped. Hope these help? Thanks Joe


http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n35/josecare1/BlockVin1.jpg

Joe- Actually i meant a better shot of the deck pad without paint so the grain of the pad and the assembly stamp stand out better.

I will get a better pic this wknd...Thanks Joe

Pictures as requested, Hope this helps...Thanks Joe


http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n35/josecare1/Block-Pad-Close-2.jpg
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n35/josecare1/Block-Pad-Close.jpg

Looks like this deck was milled, not broached.

It appears to have been lightly milled, however the broach marks are quite visible and they appear to be legit.

The grinding down on the oil filter boss looks like it was to remove excessive casting flash that was protruding from the boss.

If a Moron stamped and enigne and trans assembly with the wrong number... the wrong number most likely would have been left as stamped, I do not think that there was anyone checking the stamps for accuracy as there are quite a few documented cases of mis-stamped VIN's on engines and transmissions... usually upside down characters or the previous car's VIN.

This is what mine looks like. For the longest time I wasn't sure about this motor.

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a253/DZRick/exhaustandtop027.jpg

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a253/DZRick/exhaustandtop035.jpg

69SSL48, you have a p.m.