1100884 alternator

[D S.]

On eBay

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=150029094198

I am told that this is a reproduction by an alternator restoration firm I use and comparing the photo to my original alternator there appears to be 'subtle' differences. I questioned the seller about its authenticity and got no answer. Any thoughts?

Thanks,
Scott

[Dick W.]

Re: 1100884 alternator observation

Scott, I cannot tell by the picture if it is a restamp, but by looking at the sellers buying history it appears he bought this alternator as a restamp. Sure is a odd coincedence that he bought an 884 dated 0B3 as a restamp and now has an original 884 dated 0B3 that is original.

Just an observation, not an opinion

[Gerard F.]

Pretty high price for a front case

One could probably have bought fully operational replacement for about 1/5 of the present bid. One would think the guy would have at least tested it.

If you have a correct front case, one can always find a replacement rear case and guts.

Jerry Fuccillo
#42179

[Gerard F.]

Look at the last item the seller bought

at $157.50. The guy is full of baloney.

Jerry Fuccillo

[Michael H.]

Re: Look at the last item the seller bought

Yes, baloney, at the very least. Here's the link to the page where he purchased this "restamped" alt.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=33573&item=8067657364

[D S.]

Revised 1100884 eBay listing

Well, now....the seller added the information that should have been included in the original listing. Here is the amended information:

I HAVE RECEIVED SEVERAL QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS ITEM .

FIRST I PURCHASED THE FRONT PART OF THE ALTERNATER LAST YEAR AT ENGLISHTOWN NJ SWAP MEET. THE REAR WAS MISSING AND HAD NO GUTS.

I RECENTLY FOUND THE CORRECT, 70 ONLY, REAR PART AT CARLYLE PA A FEW WEEKS AGO AT THE CORVETTE SHOW.

I HAD BOTH PARTS CHECKED BY A COMPANY THAT HAS REBUILT ALTERNATERS FOR YEARS , CARR &HAGNER IN COLLINGSWOOD NJ AND THEY SAID IF IT WAS RESTAMPED THEY COULDN'T TELL.

UNFORTUNATELY I CAN NOT GUARANTEE THIS AND YOU SHOULD ASSUME FOR BIDDING PURPOSES IT MAY BE A RESTAMP.

[Dennis D.]

Re: Revised 1100884 eBay listing

If this guy was wise enough to realize that case/date was for a 70, good for him. He also waited until he found the correct rear, and then had it built. This doesn't hurt what he claims it to be IMO.

Unfortunately, not being upfront about it, makes you wonder if anything he says is true. I wouldn't buy it unless I could see it,which I can.

I'm sure it will still bring a good number

[D S.]

Re: Revised 1100884 eBay listing

I will be the first (and was) to tout reproductions as I have here in the past. When the prices of some original parts such as the 1100884s, 5-port pumps, brass recovery tanks are so exorbitantly high and so hard to find I welcome reproductions. But be up front and honest about it particularly in a format such as eBay. I bid on that 1100884 and was alerted by American Armature in Dallas that it was a restamp. I am now requesting a bid retraction. Closer inspection of the one on eBay as compared to the photo of the one on the 1970 Corvette Registry (Photographic Library>Mechanical) revealed the subtle difference between the two front cases.

[Dennis D.]

Re: Revised 1100884 eBay listing

Scott

I agree 100%. Do your homework. That registry comes in handy.

FYI, I saw 5 port washer pump repro's at Carlisle. Guy did a nice job with the piece. They're popping up on ebay now. Keeping my eye on the markups

[Terry M.]

Re: Revised 1100884 eBay listing

Scott -- I tried to find the photographic Library on the 1970 Registry site, but couldn't locate it. Can you help me?

[D S.]

Re: Revised 1100884 eBay listing

While I have two originals, one of which I rebuilt myself, I have been watching those reproductions for people that I try to find parts for. There appears to be two types. One doesn't have the exact body plate configuration and the other, currently on eBay, looks to be a match. At $200 that is far better price than the orignals at $400 and up.

[D S.]

Re: Revised 1100884 eBay listing

My bad. I missed one step. Resources>Photographic Library>Mechanical Here is the link and it is third from the bottom. But take the time to look at all of the other information on the Registry. Quite interesting.

http://corvetteforum.net/c3/1970registry/mechdetails.html

[Terry M.]

Re: Revised 1100884 eBay listing

Thanks Scott -- yes there are some other interesting bits of information there.

[Joe L.]

Re: 1100884 alternator

Scott-----

I can't say much about the stamping. It does not look quite right to me, but I would not conclude, for sure, that it's a restamp based upon that. One thing that I think does, possibly, provide a clue as to the possibility of a restamp is that the case has been bead-blasted rather heavily. By itself, that's not too unusual. Many commercial rebuilders do bead blast alternator cases and many rare original part numbers/dates are on alternators that have been through commercial rebuilding operations at some point in their lives. However, in COMBINATION with the slightly "off-spec" stamping, it does provide a clue. That's because the bead-blasting could also be used to "obliterate" evidence of removal of the original stamping.

One thing I know for virtual certainty: this is not a situation in which a SERVICE or REPRODUCTION drive end case half (i.e. not originally stamped) was used to "create" the alternator. This configuration drive end case was discontinued from SERVICE more than 35 years ago. I have NEVER seen an NOS example for sale. Also, I do not believe that it's currently reproduced.

However, I can tell you that the drive end (front) and split ring (rear) case halves are correct for a 1970 application. These case halves, by themselves and irrespective of "numbers", are quite rare.

As I've said on many previous occasions, "numbers" and "dates" are part of configuration but they are a VERY small part. My opinion would be that this alternator has about 90-95% correct original configuration even assuming that the numbers are not original.

[Dick W.]

Re: 1100884 alternator

Joe, there is a reproduction, abiet fairly good, of the correct early 10SI front cases. They are lacking the DR logo, but so did some of the original cases. There is one individual that has the correct roll stamp setup. It will get very hard to tell the stamps from the originals. Sorta like the cylinder cases.