engine code problem?

[Mike Cobine]

What happened to the engines?

Interesting information John. Do you know what happened to those engines returned to Flint?

I assumed they were rebuilt and sent back out. On the Chevrolet side, I assume an -SA engine would still be an -SA engine. But was there any changes since the assembly date was already stamped.

If they werre completely disassembled for parts, were the blocks ever reassembled in other configurations, such that an -S block may now be an -SA or an -SD and so on?

On the Corvette side, there was a serial number stamped also, which now didn't apply. Did they take that off at Flint or was that done back at St. Louis?

I know there was an article in The Corvette Restorer a couple of years ago about stamping mistakes and taking hand grinders to clear the pad and restamp, but I thought that was on the line. Anything different when back at Flint?

[Clem Z.]

when touring the C-5 engine factory

the guide told us that they are billed $3000 in labor if a engine that was installed in a C-5 has to be replaced at the factory.

[Ray C.]

Re: engine code problem?

Hi! Clem

Have you ever seen a 3844457 intake with a 5 as the casting year date?

Thanks Ray

[Clem Z.]

Re: engine code problem?

back in the 60s when i was a tech inspector at the drag race tracks we were only looking for the casting numbers and not the date code. back then i had no idea what a date code was and i still am not up on the date code end of the hobby

[Loren L.]

Original owner of '65 #23540 states

that his 250HP has a 3866922 dated D105.

[Ray C.]

Re: Original owner of '65 #23540 states

Will add to survey data!

Thanks, Ray

Calling anyone owing a 1965 250HP, could you please provided your intake casting number?

THANKS!!

[John H.]

Re: What happened to the engines?

Mike -

When the engines got back to Flint Engine, they were torn down in the "Warranty Return Area" to determine the root cause for the failure, and most of the parts in the resulting pile were scrapped - at 270-290 engines per hour, it wasn't worth the hassle to pick through the used parts from one engine and figure out which ones were suitable for re-use. If the block was a good piece with perfect bores, it got the "grinder" treatment on the pad and was re-used and re-stamped.

If an assembly plant made a mistake stamping the VIN derivative, they didn't use a grinder at all; the specified Engineering procedure was to "X" out the wrong VIN (all of it - "XXXXXXX" - not just one character) and re-stamp the correct VIN adjacent to the "X'd out" VIN.

[Mike Cobine]

Thanks John

for the information. I've seen engines that don't follow the normal and wondered if they were results fo rebuilds and reinstalls or what the deal was. Your information seems to indicate they weren't.

I've seen many over the years with what appears to have been an extra suffix letter added at a different time than the original assembly stamp. I know some were stamped H for Holley and supposedly R for Rochester (although I've never seen an -R last character) but these have been different.

Some have been big blocks, where the -I or -J was similar to the first part and the the last letter was heavier or lighter and often misaligned. Others have been small blocks where the last letter or two appear different.

I chased a '63 327 for a long time so I've seen several '63 blocks where there was an -S or -R suffix and then another letter obviously stamped separately and later. If they had all been Corvette (C, D, E, or F) it would have been one thing. But some are A and B and a few C and D. The C and D being Corvettes had serial numbers that looked like someone used their JC Whitney stamp set.

The obvious answer was someone restamping them, but these were often junkyard engines that were not from Corvettes so there wouldn't have been any reason or value to restamp them.

Some of the VINs looked like they were handstamped, one letter at a time, and again, not with a vehicle that was valuable.

If they were all Corvette engines or ones found recently, then I'd say they were bogus restamps. But most are from other vehicles or from too long ago to matter, and that is puzzling.

[Patrick H.]

Re: Thanks John

Mike,

Al Grenning has MNAY examples of original engines with quirky engine stamps like the ones you are describing. He believes that due to time issues, partial engine codes were stamped on the engine line, and then the proper suffix filled in later with a letter or two. For example, in 1966 the big blocks were I_ . You only need one loaded stamp on the assembly line, and the proper additional character can be added later to make IL, IP or whatever.

I'm sure many quirky original stamps have been replaced due to the same thoughts as yours.

Patrick

[John H.]

Re: Thanks John

Mike -

There have been many factory "anomalies" in engine plant suffix stampings over the years, including the last suffix character being stamped individually; Al Grenning has stacks of photo documentation showing all manner of variations to the "perfect" stampings we like to see. Al will again present his fascinating tech session on stampings and documentation at the 2004 National Convention in Windsor next July.

[Mike McKown]

Per your request

My '65 serial 18543 has a '922 intake. Engine # is FO518HF. Casting date on the intake is E105. $100 bill says it is original.

[Mike McKown]

Per your request

My '65 serial 18543 has a '922 intake. Engine # is FO518HF. Casting date on the intake is E105. $100 bill says it is original!