69 VIN Pad Damage

[Pat K.]

http://www.lvwdev.com:81/block

[Mike Cobine]

Re: 69 VIN Pad Damage

This is where I have a lot of problems with the original engine thing anymore.

I'd say it doesn't affect your value. Two reasons - value isn't determined until you sell it, get a loan against it, or make an insurance claim. If you don't, nothing is affected. The second reason is it is still the original engine and you can prove it and sales are based on original blocks, not NCRS judging sheets. It may impact how many line up to buy it, though.

Now as far as judging, I can't say. But I'd guess that your lack of highly visible broach marks will get you deductions in NCRS judging. Which I can mock that someone with a fake engine but looks right (unstamped block that has been stamped correctly) can get more points than your original block. Since I have heard the arguments that restoration is about returning to original so original should get more points, then judging of yours will be contrary to that statement.

I guess the dilemma is do you keep the original engine in there and suffer the deductions or do you replace it with a fake ("restoration") engine and get all the points?

I hope you didn't pay them.

[Jack H.]

Think you answered your own question....

Deduct 38 points for the stamp pad surface + 25 points for the affected stamp and you get a 63 point deduction. 63/4500 = 1.4% loss presuming a 'perfectly' restored car. Take the value (tricky number to come by) of an equivalent car and multiply by 1.4% to arrive at your 'loss'.

Maybe too rationale, but I think that's the approach some attorneys would use to argue in civil court....

[Harmon C.]

Re: 69 VIN Pad Damage

Pat With pictures and story in hand and what I can see I would take the 38 points off and buy the numbers. Each judge has their own ideas on an issue like this. Lyle

[Patrick H.]

Re: 69 VIN Pad Damage

Agreed. I'd hate to take off any points for the numbers when it's obvious he's trying to SAVE the original block, and not fake it by finding another one to restamp.

I was lucky when I had my engine rebuilt from my 71. I was allowed to be present for each and every moment of the rebuild, and documented it with photographs. My stamp remained in excellent condition.

Patrick

[Mike M.]

Re: 69 VIN Pad Damage

i agree with lyle--only 38 pt deduct for loss of original broach marks.The machine shop i've used for 20 years or so know to treat my pads as if they were the pope's gonads---not to be touched under any circumstances. Hope you recover monetarily for the shops screw-up. good luck, mike

[Patrick H.]

Re: 69 VIN Pad Damage

Mike,

They don't need to touch the pad when they bore and stroke those 283's up to 400+ cid's. It's the BOTTOM of the block that gets worked on for that.

Patrick

[Pat K.]

[Larry S.]

Re:what removed the broach marks?

I have a question here.What removed the broach marks here.It seems the stopped the machining just short of the end of the block.

[Harmon C.]

Re: 69 VIN Pad Damage

Pat Mike and I said 38 points total on a good day but we have no control over other judges. Lyle

[Pat K.]

Re:what removed the broach marks?

I assume it was the chemicals used to clean the block. Case in point, one number and letter to the left of the VIN were difficult to read prior to the cleaning of the block, and are now almost impossible to read after the cleaning.

Pat

[Harmon C.]

Re:what removed the broach marks?

Pat It looks to me like they shot piened or bead blasted it. Lyle

[Michael W.]

C) 25 points for each character?

I don't think so. I believe that it's a total of 25 points for the C) assembly stamp and another 25 points total for the D) VIN derivative. Whether either or both would be deducted would depend on the individual judge.

The 38 point deduct for E) the pad is pretty well a 'given'.

Looks like your shop did more damage by destroying the broach marks than they did by partially removing the VIN stamp. Sorry to see that.

[Jack H.]

It's in the book....

The book is the NCRS Judging Reference Manual (the 'white' book). Turn your copy of it to Section 4, Standard Deductions; Rule 1, Engine Block Cylinder Cases and read along with me....

We have no questions on part A and B of the rule (casting number/configuration and casting date. So, we're at part C and D of the rule:

"C. If A and B are judged to be correct, judge for appropriate, normally configured engine plant stamping and engine assembly date or serial number and alpha prefix or suffix code which matches car as listed in the appropriate judging guide (See note).

On cars assembled approximately mid-1960 and later, judge for correct, normally configured VIN derivative. From 1953 through mid-1960, if any of C is judged as incorrect, deduct 50 points. Mid-1960 & later are to be split at 25 points for each stamping group. Judge D regardless of scoring on C.

D. Judge for the absense of paint, dirt, rust or other condition which obscures pad. Judge for presense of normal factory production machining marks. If either is judged negatively, deduct 38 points.

NOTE: Each of the above listed items must be scored as full credit or full deduction; no partial scoring"

So, we've got a case where a portion of the pad's numbering pad has been contaminated/oblitherated (flunks the normally configured test) and we deduct 25 points per part C of the rule. Since the 'opps' also affected the pad's surface (can't oblitherate the stamping without going deep enough to also affect the broach marks in that area of the pad) and the NOTE says we can NOT give partial credit, deduct 38 points per part D of the rule. Ergo, 25 + 38 = 63 point deduction.

[Pat K.]

Re: It's in the book....

I agree, 63 points is the extent of the damage.

Thanks,

Pat