New Owner Needs Numbers Match Help

[William C.]

Re: New Owner Needs Numbers Match Help

Ok Shelton, you can use the VIN or your car to determine the approximate day your car came off the assembly line, there are calculators available to gain that information, all you need to do is supply the serial number for your car. Although a lot of emotion surrounds the issue, there is no practical difference between a block that the Flint engine plant built for a Corvette vs one for a passenger car other than the ID number applied to the pad on the front of the block, so since the engine had to be built and shipped (rail) from Michigan to St louis to be assembled in a Corvette (or passenger car on the other side of the wall at the St. Louis facility) your first step is to find a '63 327 block (or complete engine) with dating characteristics that predate the build of your car by a reasonable time period, generally a couple of weeks. Then you can decide from some of the remaining features on the car (tach redline for starters) what engine horsepower the car was originally equipped with. The 1963-64 NCRS Judging manual and technical guide have some insight into this process, and lots of members would be willing to help. One small flaw is that there are no clues as to a 250hp vs 300 hp configuration, so if the tach redline indicates a 250/300 engine, then unless you have aprotect-o-plate or other documention with the car, you will be on your own in that decision. Keep in mind that the first step is to study the car, and any paperwork that came with it to learn what it was, and then work towards returning it to that configuration. Once you have a pretty good idea of what it was originally, then you will know what you need to recreate that configuration, and it is up to you to decide how hard you want to work toward that goal. It can be a task that is as simple or as complex as you choose to make it, but the best thing to remember is the old carpenter's rule of measure twice, cut once! Do your homework first before you open your wallet and you will be far ahead when you declare your project "finished" (they are never DONE!)

[Tracy C.]

Re: New Owner Needs Numbers Match Help

....It is still illegal....

Gene, I am no student of law in the state of New York. To imply that stamping a VIN derivative on an automobile component is universally considered to be "illegal" elsewhere in the USA is a misrepresentation of fact.

tc

[Jim C.]

Re: New Owner Needs Numbers Match Help

There's ALWAYS going to be some serious debate on this topic. I'm definitely a purest when it comes to these things, and I know that my definition of "numbers matching" is VERY narrow and probably exceeds the official NCRS standards. But to be entirely clear, I'm not completely opposed to re-stamping a block or any other part that bears a VIN or VIN derivative. I'd rather see that versus seeing some totally incorrect engine under the hood. A re-stamped correct block is fine for RESTORATIVE purposes. It all comes down to one factor. If the block is then passed off as "original" and not disclosed as a restoration, then it's outright FRAUD. Under my (not NCRS) definition, a Corvette with an honestly disclosed restored block is still not "numbers matching" but certainly worthy of consideration for Fight Awards and recognition.

Jim C.

[Jack H.]

Re: New Owner Needs Numbers Match Help

Nicely, said, Clup! BTW, we should add that once you're a member of NCRS National, you're 'street legal' to join and get active with your local NCRS Chapter.

There, you'll find fellow NCRS members in your neck of the woods who've been there/done that to help you along the way. Yes, we have the Discussion Board, but NOTHING beats the help and advice of local folks in your neighborhood to look over your shoulder and HELP you along the way...

[Shelton H.]

Re: New Owner Needs Numbers Match Help

First, I'm glad I joined, and pleased that so many people commented. Several issues arise from all the responses.

I have the book "Corvette by the Numbers" Colvin, and learned a little scanning through the book. I understand that it isn't truly numbers matching without the original parts. However, I don't have a problem with restamped parts, and I would never misrepresent the car, and I don't plan to sell it anytime soon. I would love to find the original block and original transmission, and a matching carburetor, but I don't much care about the rest. I've seen too many BJ and Mecum shows where people sold their car for half or less what they had in it, because they overdid the restoration, from a practical financial perspective. I don't plan to do an all out frame off restoration, just enough to make it presentable and a better than average driver. I want to keep my cost at no more than I could sell it for, if possible. I am a CPA by profession, and very concerned with cost. I will possibly check Drivetrain and search for the original motor and transmission. I haven't had any luck finding owners that far back to see if they have knowledge of what happened to the original parts. I also had no luck with GM locating the original invoice, to see exactly how it was originally equipped. My probable plan is to locate a matching engine, transmission and carburetor, restamped if necessary, make some minor interior changes (as it is near perfect), find a spare tire carrier and jack, and repaint it. I have bought some replica Kelsey Hayes rims.

So, 3-6 months prior dating to Sept 62 (A2) is correct motor, trans, and carb date (someone please discuss this in detail) for this 63 Corvette?

And is there a particular order these parts should be dated (like should motor date precede trans, and carb date succeed motor and trans date?

Also, where might I find pictures of what every aspect of this car should look like?

Also, someone is trying to sell me a transmission with a serial number only 174 later in sequence than mine, which I presume must have had an A2 mfg date, but the date on the trans is Feb 1963. I'm assuming that can't be correct, as that trans date is likely 5 months later than the mfg date related to the serial number sequence. Someone please address this.

Also, I don't think it is likely this was originally a fuel injection engine, but how would I determine that? And what logic might I use in deciding if I should replace with a 250 hp or what?

Also, Corvette by the Numbers, Colvin, says the 3782870 casting code for this car uses numbers smaller than the 3782870 on other GM engines for Impalas etc. Is that correct? And can I conclude from this that the only way to get a correctly restamped engine (not an original numbers engine) is to remove a sequence number and an engine code and restamp them, since any original Corvette engine must have had a sequence number and engine code stamped on them?

One responder said the engine date should precede the mfg date by about 2 wks. Another responded 0-6 months. Someone please discuss this.


Thanks for all the help. I hope I can return the help to others as I learn more.

Oh, by the way, my 63 Corvette presently has in it a 1966 Corvette Muncie transmission and a 1965 Impala engine.

Shelton

[William C.]

Re: New Owner Needs Numbers Match Help

OK, you've covered a lot of issues here, and I'll try to cover most of them here, please don't hesitate to drop an email if you need explaination or I miss sonething. Essentially the sequence went like this, Engine castings were poured in a foundry in Saginaw Michigan about 40 miles north of Flint Michigan where all smallblock Corvette engines were assembled. Castings were dated with the date the core was made, so essentially the casting date has to preadte the assenbly of the engine by some time period. As the castings were recieved in Flint, (many truckloads per day) they went into a largely uncontrolled area of raw castings and then were fed into the machining processes. This was largely a "last in first out" inventory, so although the block obviously must predate the date of the engine assembly (in very rare instances same day is seen) the time of predate is somewhat variable, so NCRS provides a guideline for judging purposes of castings predating assembly by up to 6 months, although a day to a week are more normally seen. Engines were shipped without accessories so accessories, including carburetor were assembled at St Louis. That said, the parts all had to be shipped to St Louis prior to final assembly and St Louis inventory control was not "modern" but the final assembly date of the car now established a new timeframe for relating to parts installed at the assembly plant. Again, NCRS allows up to 6 months leeway in dating for most parts between the manufacturer's date and the assembly date of the car, although Typically the timing is a week or so, partially depending on the volume of use of a particular part. Think od the assembly plant situation, where the base alternator is used in 95% of the cars, and the high output alternator is used in only cars with Air Conditioning. The likelyhood of a longer date sequence in the low usage part is normal due to the volume differences in the oprion requiring that particular part. As to the Carburetor, it was installed at St Louis, and thus had to be manufactured and shipped to the plant before it could be installed, so the date would predate the final assembly date of the car by a reasonable time. As to Colvin's issue with the size of the numbers, it is one of several errors on his part in his otherwise generally useful book. I'm a little uncertain as to what you are referencing as A2, and september. What is the VIN number of the car? That will establish an assembly date you can work off of. September and "A" don't correlate well to any of my thought processes at this point.

[Kenneth S.]

Re: New Owner Needs Numbers Match Help

Shelton,

Ken

[Frederick W.]

Re: New Owner Needs Numbers Match Help

I, too, am relatively new to NCRS. I have two Corvettes, a 63 SWC and a 68 roadster. Both are numbers matching and original.
Over the last few months of tinkering with these cars, I have come to the conclusion that the "numbers matching" issue is a bad concept. I personally believe that a "restoration" block and restamping of VIN derivatives is a very slippery slope. Certainly only knowledeable and experienced "Corvette guys" can accurately define "numbers matching" vs. "all original". The general public, and most **new buyers** will naturally assume that numbers matching means the same as all original. While most owners of restoration numbers matching (non original) cars state they will never misrepresent their cars, when it comes time to sell to a somewhat naive new buyer, problematic sitauations can easily arise. It is very difficult for an honest seller to emphasize that their car is non original and restamped when someone has a check that they may desperately need. I've heard many say that "if the buyer doesn't specifically inquire, then it is not dishonest to simply not say anything".
Moreover, I am now in the process of obsessing on every part on my car, which I did not consider important initially. Intake and exhaust manifolds, all glass, radiator/surge tank, master cylinder, bolt head markings, clamps, hoses, etc. etc. My 63 was owned by the previous owner for over 30 years. It is all original, but when the master cylinder went out it was replaced at the dealer. Same with the radiator. If a hose went bad, it was replaced with a funtional piece using whatever hose clamp was easily available. This is just normal auto maintenance. Restoring all those little things gets extremely expensive. Why put ourselves through that?

Why not judge our cars on originality, ie. correct pieces, installation, configuration, and condition without worrying about the "numbers"? The end result would be essentially indistinguishable, and a lot less expensive.

[Joel T.]

Re: New Owner Needs Numbers Match Help

First, I'm glad I joined, and pleased that so many people commented. Several issues arise from all the responses.

I have the book "Corvette by the Numbers" Colvin, and learned a little scanning through the book. I understand that it isn't truly numbers matching without the original parts. However, I don't have a problem with restamped parts, and I would never misrepresent the car, and I don't plan to sell it anytime soon. I would love to find the original block and original transmission, and a matching carburetor, but I don't much care about the rest. I've seen too many BJ and Mecum shows where people sold their car for half or less what they had in it, because they overdid the restoration, from a practical financial perspective. I don't plan to do an all out frame off restoration, just enough to make it presentable and a better than average driver. I want to keep my cost at no more than I could sell it for, if possible. I am a CPA by profession, and very concerned with cost. I will possibly check Drivetrain and search for the original motor and transmission. I haven't had any luck finding owners that far back to see if they have knowledge of what happened to the original parts. I also had no luck with GM locating the original invoice, to see exactly how it was originally equipped. My probable plan is to locate a matching engine, transmission and carburetor, restamped if necessary, make some minor interior changes (as it is near perfect), find a spare tire carrier and jack, and repaint it. I have bought some replica Kelsey Hayes rims.

So, 3-6 months prior dating to Sept 62 (A2) is correct motor, trans, and carb date (someone please discuss this in detail) for this 63 Corvette?

And is there a particular order these parts should be dated (like should motor date precede trans, and carb date succeed motor and trans date?

Also, where might I find pictures of what every aspect of this car should look like?

Also, someone is trying to sell me a transmission with a serial number only 174 later in sequence than mine, which I presume must have had an A2 mfg date, but the date on the trans is Feb 1963. I'm assuming that can't be correct, as that trans date is likely 5 months later than the mfg date related to the serial number sequence. Someone please address this.

Also, I don't think it is likely this was originally a fuel injection engine, but how would I determine that? And what logic might I use in deciding if I should replace with a 250 hp or what?

Also, Corvette by the Numbers, Colvin, says the 3782870 casting code for this car uses numbers smaller than the 3782870 on other GM engines for Impalas etc. Is that correct? And can I conclude from this that the only way to get a correctly restamped engine (not an original numbers engine) is to remove a sequence number and an engine code and restamp them, since any original Corvette engine must have had a sequence number and engine code stamped on them?

One responder said the engine date should precede the mfg date by about 2 wks. Another responded 0-6 months. Someone please discuss this.


Thanks for all the help. I hope I can return the help to others as I learn more.

Oh, by the way, my 63 Corvette presently has in it a 1966 Corvette Muncie transmission and a 1965 Impala engine.

Shelton

Shelton;

If you have not already done so, I would recommend that you pick up the 1963-64 Judging Guide via this site. It will provide scads of valuable information and will explain may of the questions which you have... I've read mine cover to cover and while I have not had my '63 judged, I have used it as a guide to help me source parts and rebuild things...

As far as investment goes, my opinion here, if you get into restoration work on your car, you will almost always sink in more money than you will realize upon a sale, if that is your objective, you may need to rethink... Many folks, me among them, approach this more from the perspective of preserving history.. My '63 was a mechanical basket case when I got it... Today, five years later, I suspect it runs as well, if not better than it did when it came off the line... and everything under the hood is as original as I could make it... Some day when I get some extra bucks I will have it painted its correct Sebring Silver... today it is Riverside Red.. the final step to "original glory"... and then I will have her judged!

Couple of other points.. You can try to find your original drive train... Chances are remote.. You do see folks advertising that they have engine thus and such so there is always an outside chance... A more likely course of action will be to search out an 870 block with a casting date within 6 months of your car's build date.. Folks like Engines Limited can be a good source for blocks and can do "stamping" work as well...

As far as what your car originally was, there are a few quick things to look for... First, check the tach and see where the red line is... 6500 is a solid lifer car (340 or 360) 5500 is either a 250 or 300 car. Power steering was only available on the lower HP cars. FI cars mounted the air cleaner on the left inner fender so look there for mounting holes as well as backing plate inside that inner fender.

I guess that's it for now, good luck!

Joel

[Jack H.]

Re: New Owner Needs Numbers Match Help

Why not judge our cars on originality, ie. correct pieces, installation, configuration, and condition without worrying about the "numbers"? The end result would be essentially indistinguishable, and a lot less expensive.

Because, for right or wrong, the 'dating' issue IS part of the factory originality concept...

When we judge, absent discrete directives on the dating of this/that part, we view Originality along five lines: Finish, Date, Installation, Configuration and Correctness. To the extent that a given part deviates from typical factory production norms for a known original, 20% of the points allocated to Originality are lost for each consideration axis where discrepancy is observed.

So, the date aspect is NOT a 'killer' issue. A given car can STILL receive top award(s) during judging with a few dated parts being 'off'...

[Frederick W.]

Re: New Owner Needs Numbers Match Help

Why not judge our cars on originality, ie. correct pieces, installation, configuration, and condition without worrying about the "numbers"? The end result would be essentially indistinguishable, and a lot less expensive.

Because, for right or wrong, the 'dating' issue IS part of the factory originality concept...

When we judge, absent discrete directives on the dating of this/that part, we view Originality along five lines: Finish, Date, Installation, Configuration and Correctness. To the extent that a given part deviates from typical factory production norms for a known original, 20% of the points allocated to Originality are lost for each consideration axis where discrepancy is observed.

So, the date aspect is NOT a 'killer' issue. A given car can STILL receive top award(s) during judging with a few dated parts being 'off'...

Thanks Jack,

I wonder, though, if only 4 axes were used, ie. Finish, Installation, Configuration and Correctness, could we be better off. It would eliminate restamping issues, and associated confusion. It would reduce parts costs by increasing availability of potential supply, and really the car would be for all practical purposes exactly the same.
Alternatively, what about weighting the impact of the "Dating" axis such that it has much less impact than the other axes, which are arguably more important.
By way of example, my 63's Carter AFB has a 1964 date code. I have no idea why. It certainly looks like an original piece, has been on the car for decades, and is "correct" otherwise. Replacing it will be expensive, and risk negatively impacting the function of the car, which runs great with the current carb.
Just a thought for the group to consider. Meanwhile, I will continue to strive for perfect originality...

Fred

[Jim C.]

Re: New Owner Needs Numbers Match Help

I have to go with Jack on this one. A correct car from the factory was relatively specific. Whether we like it or not, parts came with numbers and/or dates that were cast, stamped, embossed, and printed on them. Anything the factory did was correct. Any part that was factory installed on a Corvette was correct at that very moment. The trick is trying to "correctly" determine what those parts were in relation to the specific model year of the vehicle in question.

If the objective is to restore a Corvette back to it's factory appearance, function, and utility, then specific parts with specific numbers, date codes and other markings MUST be worked into the equation. Otherwise, the word "correct" is meaningless. Putting correct parts on a Corvette without considering the "numbers," at best, makes that particular Corvette an "approximation" of what was "correct" from the factory. If we're going to continue to judge Corvettes, the "numbers" have to be considered when defining what is, and is not, correct. Corvettes with correctly numbered, correctly dated, original parts (even if re-built), should be treated as premium vehicles. The more of those parts that exist in one particular Corvette, the more correct that Corvette becomes.

In some ways, my Corvette still falls into the "approximation" category, but I'm always interested in making it more "correct."

Jim C. (Who is ABSOLUTELY insane about "the numbers!!)

[Jim C.]

Re: New Owner Needs Numbers Match Help

Fred,

I'd leave the carburetor on your car, for all the reasons you mentioned, including expense, risk to the car's current function, etc. But that's exactly what I'm talking about. The date on the part DOES matter for purposes of originality and correctness. The carb's date isn't correct. It's sounds like a VERY good "approximation" of what would have been factory installed, but for the date code. Is it worth changing? I don't think so. Even though the carburetor is the correct part, and is being used in the correct application, would you receive full credit for the part at a judged event? I'm not a judge, but I don't think so. The numbers must be considered in determining the overall correctness of a car.

Jim C.

[Frederick W.]

Re: New Owner Needs Numbers Match Help

I have to go with Jack on this one. A correct car from the factory was relatively specific. Whether we like it or not, parts came with numbers and/or dates that were cast, stamped, embossed, and printed on them. Anything the factory did was correct. Any part that was factory installed on a Corvette was correct at that very moment. The trick is trying to "correctly" determine what those parts were in relation to the specific model year of the vehicle in question.

If the objective is to restore a Corvette back to it's factory appearance, function, and utility, then specific parts with specific numbers, date codes and other markings MUST be worked into the equation. Otherwise, the word "correct" is meaningless. Putting correct parts on a Corvette without considering the "numbers," at best, makes that particular Corvette an "approximation" of what was "correct" from the factory. If we're going to continue to judge Corvettes, the "numbers" have to be considered when defining what is, and is not, correct. Corvettes with correctly numbered, correctly dated, original parts (even if re-built), should be treated as premium vehicles. The more of those parts that exist in one particular Corvette, the more correct that Corvette becomes.

In some ways, my Corvette still falls into the "approximation" category, but I'm always interested in making it more "correct."

Jim C. (Who is ABSOLUTELY insane about "the numbers!!)

Fair enough, Jim, but as a person who has invested considerable time, effort, and expense in pursuit of a car with all correct numbers, you are part of a "select" group.
The hobby as a whole needs to consider this issue. I would take exception with the statement "to restore a Corvette to it's factory appearance, function, and utility specific...date codes...MUST be worked into the equation". I would say the appearance, function and utility are impacted little or none by the date code. That is not to say the part should not be of the specific type used on that model year car, just that the date code itself has little impact on appearance, function, and utility. Does an intake manifold with a casting date of February 1963 really differ in appearance, function, and utility from one cast in April 1963?
I could certainly be wrong, but I still think the obsession with date codes is not a great idea.

Fred

[Jim C.]

Re: New Owner Needs Numbers Match Help

Hey Fred,

GREAT points!!! I don't know if I'm part of the "select group" or the "dumb group." My car is still a long way from being 100% correct. As far as function and utility, there's no difference at all. A correct date code, or even a correct part number matter not at all to either of those two factors. From an appearance stand point, again, they make ALMOST no difference. But when you're taking about accurate restoration and what that means, the numbers, including the date codes, do matter. Again, many of us, including me, are driving around in Corvettes that are "approximations" at some level or another, of what is factory correct and original. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that, but I do try to stay faithful to accurate restoration when replacing/rebuilding parts.

If a part is totally correct in every way, but for the date code, I'd leave it alone, particularly if it's expensive and still works fine. But if you're going to replace the part or rebuild it, why not find one with the correct part number AND date code? For purposes of judging, the dates do matter. I guess to some small extent, the numbers and dates do factor into the appearance of a Corvette, and therefore would have to be considered when trying to achieve a high level of accurate restoration.

I do see your point however. Does an intake manifold that's dated Feb. 1963, really differ from one that's dated April, 1963? No, not at all. Does it matter if the dates don't correspond to the build date of the car? Well, that depends on who you ask. I think a lot of us are trying to restore our cars to as close to factory correct and original as possible. Consequently the numbers and date codes do matter, and people do look at them. I guess that goes to the appearance of the part. That also says something about the originality of the car.

It's not just the numbers either. They're only a part of what makes a car correct. If we start ignoring them, or placing too little value on their meaning, what's next, the paint, the interior trim, adding options that were not originally on the car (like side exhausts for example). If a car is painted correctly with red lacquer, but the trim tag clearly states that it should be black, is that okay? Is that an accurate restoration? I say no. It's an approximation of a factory paint job. Lacquer paint was used, and its function and utility are fine, but its appearance is not correct. The car started out black. I think the same goes for the numbers.

Finally Fred, consider the source. I openly and freely admit that I'm a "numbers junkie." That's how I enjoy the hobby. I suspect that many others are not like me. Diversity is good.

Jim C.