Engine identification

[Jim J.]

Re: Engine identification

Actually, when I first saw the other stamp I post I was very sceptical. After showing it to the right people it was deemed original. The F on this car appears to have been done seperately as well. Superimposed the images are identical. The carb is so rare I would have to believe it to be original. Go try to find one!
Thanks for your observations.
Jim

[Jim J.]

Re: Engine identification

Funny you should ask. About 6 months ago I was sending some stamp images to Al Grenning when he (gently) embarrassed me into reading the manual for my Canon A95. It is a middle of the road camera. The stock zoom and lens is used, it is just the settings that required some tweaking. There is a manual focus setting that can be used on the high resolution images. This is the wayto go. I believe the A95 has been replaces with a new model but has similar adjustments.
Jim

[Jim J.]

Re: Engine identification

Joe,
Bell housing is a 3858403. The starter images to follow.
Jim

[Jim J.]

Re: Engine identification

Joe, The starter does in fact have the long and short bolts. What do you make of it?
Jim

[Joe L.]

Re: Engine identification

Jim------

The 3858403 bellhousing is the one I would expect for the 1965 L-78 application. The starter configuration is what I would expect. In your most recent photo the exposed metal areas of the nose look like they could be aluminum, as I would expect.

[Philip C.]

Re: Why are the rods numbered

If the motor has never been out why are the rods numbered? The starter is not correct nor is the carb date (They have nothing to do with the motor)The vin and pad code are right on with the casting date. I have about 160 cars on my old survey but we never asked about block casting numbers (too bad)Looks to be real to me. I have never seen a 961 4 bolt but never bothered to look at them with interest. I have Mike Hansons car, would like to get Bills W info on his two. I tell people all the time THEY WERE NOT MADE WITH A MAGIC WAND right Mr. Missile Phil 8063

[Mark #28455]

I dunno but I've seen a lot that are. *NM*

[Bill W.]

Re: Why are the rods numbered

I noticed the dates on the rods also. I looked at the orig. rods from 16120 and they are stamped with the same shape stamps.All looks good to me except961..If I owned it I would be trying to find all old owners.. Did Country Corvettes out of Kansas City restore or do any "motor" work on it?

[Philip C.]

Re: I dunno but I've seen a lot . NOT NOT!!

Mark Unless you are looking at a Ford motor, Chevy did NOT number the rods one thru eight. ask Joe hes the only guy you all believe. Phil 8063

[Mike M.]

Re: I dunno but I've seen a lot . NOT NOT!!

agree with phil. i've never disassembled what i believed to be a virgin mark 4 that had rods # stamped. then again, i've not seen it all. mike

[Mark #28455]

believe what you will

I personally have over 20 vintage BB engines in my collection and several late models as well, no Fords, only 2 SB's. In my engines (many of which I disassembled myself and had the original steel shim head gaskets) I don't think I recall any without the numbering. In addition, about 10 years ago, I bought an additional 10 sets of vintage rods, ALL of which were numbered (and the guy I bought them from let me pick which ones I wanted and he didn't number them himself). Then again, that's only a sample size of 30 or so out of the 50,000+ made so you may be right too!
Mark

[Jim J.]

Re: Why are the rods numbered

When we pulled the pan on this engine, again never having been off I am certain, one of my mechanics noted the rods were numbered. A debate ensued and several of us have seen rods numbered from the factory. This engine has never been out the car and no restoration work or cleaning for that matter has ever been done. I was amazed as to how filthy dirty this car was even after being judged at Bloomington. I believe that two owners who have owned it subsequent to original owner were afraid that any overcleaning or restoration work would draw suspicion to the authenticity of it. That in part was why I am putting it out there for all to see on this discussion forum. I have many good photographs of the bottom end and the pan is back on. I hope that it may serve as a guide for any future 65 961 blocks that may turn up.
All owners have been documented.The original owner is deceased however his son did attest that the car was never apart. Also, I posted the very interesting fuel receipts that were under the passseger's seat, which was removed last week for the first time by me personally, in a post above but will add to this one. Note the license plate. Says it all does it not?
Jim

[Jim J.]

Re: Why are the rods numbered

Here are the fuel slips up close. All have the original owner's name, address and signature and a license plate that says 396 425! I know that with all of the BS fraud going on these days that everything is suspicious. I had a hard time believing my eyes when I took the seats out. I am going to chalk this one up to flat out dumb luck as I was only taking the seats out to clean the carpets!

[Jim J.]

Shell game?

Another interesting find under the seat.

[Jim J.]

Re: Shell game?

Close up of legal mumbo jumbo with copyright date.