Do these '67 engine numbers look correct?

[gary rubalcava]

Hello,

Can someone tell me if these stampings/castings are correct for a 1967 427/390 4-speed car. I have the books that decipher what all of the numbers mean, but taken together with the dates in mind can I please have your opinions on legitamacy. This car was awarded a Bloomington Gold Cert 13 years ago.

Engine Block Casting:3916321
Casting Date:F207
Engine Pad:T0629IL 7122918

This car was built on 7/12/67. Any info would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you for everyones help.

[Joe L.]

Re: Do these '67 engine numbers look correct?

Gary-----

The 3916321 block is generally considered to be a 1968 block. However, the casting date on the one you have is consistent with the engine build date and with the build date of your car. So, although it's unusal to find one of these blocks in a 1967, this one looks to be ok from the information you provided.

One curiousity, though, is the fact that the 3916321 block was designed for use with a spin-on oil filter. I don't think that any 1967 Corvettes ever got a spin on filter. However, there was an oil filter adapter which could be used to convert a spin-on filter block to a cannister style filter. GM used this adapter in PRODUCTION to convert the spin on filter blocks for trucks, taxis, and some police cars which continued to use the cannister style filters well after the spin-on blocks were phased into use.

Does this engine have a cannister style filter?

[gary rubalcava]

Re: Do these '67 engine numbers look correct?

Hi Joe,

Yes, this motor does have the cannister style (or bolted on) oil filter.

[Gerard F.]

Last day of 67 production?

Gary,

From the VIN and assembly date, it looks like your car was on or near the last day of 67 production. How say the experts?

Jerry Fuccillo
#42179

[Gerard F.]

Re: Do these '67 engine numbers look correct?

Joe,

I read a Restorer story about them running out of small blocks on engines stamped 06/26/67 and substituting different blocks. I wonder if this is also true of big blocks. Looking at the late date on this car, maybe they were already setup for the 68's

Jerry Fuccillo
#42179

[Gary Rubalcava]

Re: Last day of 67 production?

Hi Jerry,

Actually it is not my car, it is a car that I am considering purchasing and I want to know that the car's motor is original.

What was the last production date for 1967 cars?

[John H.]

Re: Last day of 67 production?

The car was built on July 11th, the last day of production, and there were 21 cars behind it. The '67 JG says the 621 block is possible on the last 100 big-block cars built.

[Gary Rubalcava]

Re: Last day of 67 production?

John,

The build date listed on the car is 7/12/67 but you are saying 7/11/67 was the last day of production? What am I missing here?

[Page C.]

Re: Do these '67 engine numbers look correct?

Hi Gary,
Saw a #321 block at Spring Carlisle in 1990 that was stamped 7122845 T0706JE.
Regards,
Page Campbell

[Gary Rubalcava]

Re: Do these '67 engine numbers look correct?

Hi Page,

So in comparison to the car I am looking at, it was completed earlier 7122845 vs 7122918, but the motor was manufactured later T0706JE (July 6th) vs T0629IL (June 29th). Is this out of the ordinary?

[John H.]

Re: Last day of 67 production?

Gary -

The "Birthday Book" shows July 11th as the last day of production; it's usually accurate within a day or two. What body build date is on the upper left corner of the trim tag - L11? L12?

[John H.]

Re: Do these '67 engine numbers look correct?

No, it's not. There was no first-in, first-out inventory control in those days; engine plant-to-assembly plant date spans varied greatly.

[Wayne K.]

Re: Do these '67 engine numbers look correct?

My late production L-79 #22827 has head casting numbers for a 68. I asked Nolan Adams about this and he said the casting dates for my car were fine and it was likely that they ran out of the heads with the 67 casting numbers.

[John H.]

Re: Do these '67 engine numbers look correct?

Wayne -

The 291 heads are recognized as correct for late cars in the JG, but are not shown (yet) as correct in the pocket spec guide; my June 8th 327/300 also has 291 heads, dated in the third week of May.

[Wayne K.]

Re: Do these '67 engine numbers look correct?

John,

Thanks for the update. I have the previous (3rd) addition JG and I don't recall that being published.

Wayne