CE Engine Blocks

[Bill S.]

Question from a Corvette friend:
Is the NCRS was now recognizing "CE" stamped engines as acceptable provided the "CE "appeared on the stamp pad, and other casting numbers clearly are in synch with the year of your vette. My engine on my '67 Big Block is a CE engine that replaced a defective block under warranty during the first year of ownership. I have avoided Flight judging in the past thinking that this CE designation would take me right out of Flight contention. Is there any truth to this acceptance of "CE" engines?

Thanks
Bill

[Michael H.]

Re: CE Engine Blocks

Bill,

I'm not sure how the judging goes on "CE" replacement blocks but I'm pretty sure your friends car won't have a correct 67 casting number block as the "CE" stamp didn't begin until 1969 or 1970, if I remember correctly. By 1969, the service block for his 67 would have had a different casting number.

[Richard S.]

Re: CE Engine Blocks

Only if your friends name is Roy Sinor......

There are quite a few long discussions on this subject in the archives. If the CE block was installed under GM's long term warranty it's part of the original history of the car. It's as much original to the car as the first block was.....it's just not the block the car left St.Louis with.

[Jay G.]

Re: CE Engine Blocks

I have a 67 Chevelle SS 396 Convertible purchased from the Orginial owner 4 yrs ago. In Nov of 68 he and his brother bought 396/350HP block CE or counter exchange block to install. The 68 had the NEW spin on type oil filters. Thus the change. The pad is dated with NO CE configuration or nos, broach marks intact. The org block sits on my engine stand. So I believe the CE didn't show up until 69. Altho the Nov TO1130JC would be correct for 69 Chevelle etc.

[lyndon sharpton]

Re: CE Engine Blocks

if they did not use the CE term block in 67 what would be the block for a warrnty job? was it a over the counter block?

[Michael H.]

Re: CE Engine Blocks

I've never agreed with that line of thinking Rick. First of all, just because a block has "CE" stamped on it doesn't necessarily mean that it was replaced under warranty. Every new short block that came through that parts system since about 1969 had the "CE" stamping, so it could have been purchased over the counter and installed by an owner. This was very common in the late 60's/early 70's.

Even if the block were replaced under warranty, what does that have to do with the originality of the car? The transmission case may have also been replaced under warranty and have incorrect stamp/casting numbers but that doesn't get the current owner any points for originality, and it shouldn't. The same is true for cyl heads, carburetors, alternators etc etc. If the original is gone, it's gone, even if replaced under warranty.

I agree with the ruling that if the block has at least the correct casting numbers, it should receive credit for that, but I don't understand what the "CE" stamp has to do with anything. I think a lot of people are confused about the CE stamp. It was not just on warranty replacement blocks.

If the block in "the friends car" has the "CE" stamp, that means it had to have been replaced no earlier than 1969. Prior to that time, no short blocks were stamped, at all.

If a complete engine assy is replaced with a new GM unit, it would have had the typical/correct Tonawanda source/date/suffix code stamped on the pad. If this assy was replaced under warranty in the mid/late 60's, it was required that the dealer (mechanic) transfer the VIN stamp numbers to the new replaced engine. (Roy's 67 comes to mind)

In the late 60's, there were a LOT of new short blocks being sold over the counter and it was common practice at that time for Chevrolet to warranty new short blocks for a limited time. Unfortunately, for Chevrolet, some of the people that purchased these partial assy's were somewhat less than honest and they were returning "other" assy's that had exploded, for warranty replacement. Chevrolet had no way of determining the origin of a block if there wasn't any info on the pad. The "CExxxxxx" stamp in 69 helped to end that practice.

[Jim T.]

Re: CE Engine Blocks

Know for a fact that the CE stamping was used in 1970, my original owner 70 has one and has the correct block casting number and was cast before my car was built.

[Michael H.]

Re: CE Engine Blocks

Jay,

There were some short block assy's that came over the parts counter during any model year that may have had the engine source stamp in place, such as the one in your car. If the replacement block was the same as the current model that GM was running at the time, it could very well have been plucked off the line and sent to service. This is the exception, not the rule though. Typically, only complete engine assy's had this info stamped in the pad as at the time of assy, no one knew what engine the short block was going to turn into. In other words, that one part number/short block, could have ultimately been used for several different complete engines, such as Camaro, pass car etc etc. Each would have had a different suffix code, so stamping the pad would have limited the blocks usage to the particular car that the code called for.

By the way, the "CE" stamp stands for "Chevrolet Engine". PE, Pontiac Engine etc. etc.

[Michael H.]

Re: CE Engine Blocks

A warranty replacement block, or any other over the counter block in the 50's/60's until late 68 or early 69, would have been "blank pad".

A warranty replacement block assy was the exact same as a "for sale to the public" block assy. There was no difference. There was no unique part number for either. They were one and the same. I know there was discussion to the contrary here on this board a while back but this was definitely not the case in the 50's and 60's.

[Michael H.]

Re: CE Engine Blocks

I agree Jim. My best guess is mid 1969. I vividly remember what office I was in when that paperwork describing the new "component ID" came across my desk and I know for sure I was in that little cubicle in mid 69 to mid 70.

[Wayne W.]

Re: CE Engine Blocks

Now lets carry this logic a little farther. This car is completely original



Everything that has ever been done to it is part of its history.

[Wayne W.]

Re: OOps the Picture *NM*

[Jay G.]

Re: CE Engine Blocks

Mike, Makes sense to me. I do know the 67SS I have was bought from Marhoffer Chev. Canton Ohio (still in biz) in Aug of 67. Came to Colo in May 74. The org. owner, with his brother went back to Marhoffer bought the 68 396 Block from the Parts Dept. Over the counter. Nov of 68. I guess does support the notion the CE stamp did not show up on these Warrenty Blocks until much later. Thanks Jay

[John H.]

Re: CE Engine Blocks

The "CE" engine stamp program (and the "CT" transmission stamp program) was announced in the April, 1969 edition of Chevrolet Service News.

[Michael H.]

Re: CE Engine Blocks

Thanks John. I knew it was in that time period somewhere. Do you have the original paperwork on that?