Block Stamp Review

[Chris Patrick]

300 views and no comments but 2

Yes, Mark, I think the 2nd #3 is a restamp of the IT block. The concensus of a few others where I found these pictures is that #1, 2nd #3, and 2nd #7 are restamps.

I find it interesting that here on the NCRS group, who are supposed to know these things, no one has picked them out, or even took a guess!

It gives me a lot of faith in asking an NCRS judge to advise me on a car to buy. No wonder Al Grenning gets $2000 to verify a stamp pad. If you are afraid to comment on originality here, and possibly be laughed at if wrong, how can you judge originality on a judging field where the consequences are much more severe?

[Troy M.]

Re: So which are Restamp or Original?

1- restamp
2- restamp
3- restamp
re3- restamp
5- real
6- real
7- real
#1 re7- restamp
#2 re7- real
9- real

Next?

[Roy B.]

Re: 300 views and no comments "Chris"

You are but a few people that will put your self out there to ask or show pic. As I do. Many people are reluctant to replie do to some one els saying different.
12 or a few more are the same people using this forum which is a drop in the bucket of the 16,000 members I think are in NCRS.
There are many arguments over any year JM and the confusion is rampant among many members and judges . Because of the engine pad numbers argument many members and "I" stay out of it- what's to be gained ? As you said many restamp pass the JM or Corvettes bought by people that think their correct . Many buyers now look at an engine being re stamped like many repro item = so what!!
Many old time hobbyist may care but I don't think the new generation much cares. They repro everything and anything . But I like your grit!!

[Chris Patrick]

Re: So which are Restamp or Original?

2 - I thought this one was real. A few others where it was originally posted thought so, but several thought it was a restamp, too. The double stamp on the assembly stamp is not that unusual. The 5 looks funny, but jives with other 5s stamped in others. The VIN looks right, even though some are heavier than others. The spacing looks off by eye but it looks right when you place a grid over it to check spacing like Michael Hanson talked about on here months ago.

3 - another double stamp. I thought this was real and it seemed several others did. The VIN looked correct. The pad looks buffed out and broach marks can't really be seen, but that happens sometimes.

[Troy M.]

Re: So which are Restamp or Original?

#2 If you look at the VIN second "1" you will notice it does not have the same font (specifically at the bottom) with known originals.

#3 Looks like the assembly was done with two "gang" holders. "TOI" was done with one and "I9JE" was done with another. Measure from the bottom of the pad.

Just my take on them.

Troy

[Chris Patrick]

Re: So which are Restamp or Original?

#2 - I think the lack of the pronounced flare to the leg of the second 1 is because it is so lightly stamped. Notice the last digits come out lighter than the first, which did happen occasionally.

#3 - visually, it looks wrong in the picture, but take a transparent grid and place over the stamp and you see each character centers on 1/4 inch (for this picture) and the bottoms align. The 1 is taller than the others, and makes the top look like there are two angles, but with the grid over it, I only see the 1 being taller.

This is why it is hard to judge by photos. I think both of these are a question unless seen in person. And unless you or I owned the car since new, there would be no way to be absolutely sure. Maybe that is why no one else dares to get involved.