Engine Pad

[Jim H.]

Engine pad (w/paint and stripped) of my '66 Corvette 427/390 engine (VIN 66-03104). I have no prior history or docs. Is it real or is it Memorex?, as they used to say. Appreciate your comments. 3104 Jan, feb, 2014 2nd set of eng pad 005.jpg3104 20140305_132614.jpg

[Edward J.]

Re: Engine Pad

Jim, It appears like a fresh stamp, maybe you have a restoration engine?? Broaching marks appear to gone. Did you use sandpaper when cleaning the pad? The first pic looks as though there may be something left of the broach marks but hard to say. How does the blocking casting date line up with the assy stamp date? Maybe post the casting date.

[Jim H.]

Re: Engine Pad

Jim, It appears like a fresh stamp, maybe you have a restoration engine?? Broaching marks appear to gone. Did you use sandpaper when cleaning the pad? The first pic looks as though there may be something left of the broach marks but hard to say. How does the blocking casting date line up with the assy stamp date? Maybe post the casting date.

Ed, the backstory is I own 66-02910 which I acquired NOM. I searched for the original engine and came up with this 66-03104 engine available from an NCRS member represented to be original rebuilt w/o decking the engine pad. 3104 was built the day after mine (10/13/65) so all the casting numbers and dates will work for me. It is probable that the engine pad, if original, was cleaned up by the rebuilder and I know it was then painted for long term storage. So while the codes, dates, fonts, and impression of the 66-03104 engine are fine, the condition may be too nice and the placement of the stampings is a little odd at the end of the engine pad. Under magnification, the longitudinal broach marks are there but there appears to be some scratching which could be part of the builder's clean-up. In short, I'm on the fence about this but will probably proceed given the condition of the engine available at a very fair price when compared to alternatives. Keeping the 3104 VIN stamping prevents present or future forgery issues. When I flight her, I guess there will be a debate on the pad.

[Jim H.]

[Timothy B.]

Re: Engine Pad

Jim,

I would wait to see what others have to say, it looks clean but the numbers don't look bad to me, FWIW. There may be others with the stamp low on the pad in that same time frame.

[Jim H.]

Re: Engine Pad

Tim, I surfed the NCRS archives for stampings and saw some high, middle, cockeyed, doubled, etc. I would think if someone were going to restamp this block, they'd likely play it safe and put way more English on the stamping than this one. In any event, I'm going to do as you suggest and see what else comes up on this thread. Thanks. JCH

[John H.]

Re: Engine Pad

Jim -

The relationship between the two could be the next day (the Tonawanda Foundry was less than 100 yards from the Engine Plant), or it could be several months - many different variables play into that span of time. On big-blocks, the engine plant stamp was done just before the cylinder heads went on the block.

[Jim H.]

Re: Engine Pad

Jim -

The relationship between the two could be the next day (the Tonawanda Foundry was less than 100 yards from the Engine Plant), or it could be several months - many different variables play into that span of time. On big-blocks, the engine plant stamp was done just before the cylinder heads went on the block.

John and Ed, the block casting date is I-12-5 (September 12, 1965) and the engine assembly stamp is 0929 or 15 days later.

[Jim H.]

Re: Engine Pad

Actually, 17 days later. Google indicates 9.12.65 block casting date was a Sunday (could that we right?) and 9.29.65 was a Wednesday.

[Edward J.]

Re: Engine Pad

John and Ed, the block casting date is I-12-5 (September 12, 1965) and the engine assembly stamp is 0929 or 15 days later.

Jim the casting date works just fine for the assy. date. As far as judging goes if the if the stamp pad assy date and broaching passes muster, you will only see a deduct for the VIN derivative.There are quite a few posters that must have a opinion on stamp.

[Jim H.]

Re: Engine Pad

Ed, John, and Tim, I've spoken to a few knowledgeable longtime NCRS members and at least one experienced NCRS judge who indicated it could be an original engine pad. But, they say, it looks awfully clean for a nearly 50 year old metal surface and the stamping looks a little too symmetrical and somewhat low on the engine pad. They're mixed in their approaches: about half start with "...it could be original but..." and the other half start with "...it may be a restamp, but..." No one points to any concrete attribute that makes it definitely a restamp, like wrong fonts, letter/number styles, improper impression, circular broaching, etc., but they have some reservations mainly due to condition and location. What would be great is if someone who has a BB somewhat close to this VIN 3104 posted a similarly located stamp. As you mentioned, my plan was to give up the VIN derivative points if I could earn the remaining engine pad and related points. We'll see and I'll keep researching. Thanks for your comments.

[Dick W.]

Re: Engine Pad

Enlarge the photo and look at the machine marks, just saying

[Jim H.]

Re: Engine Pad

Dick, I can't open the attachment. Can you upload the picture? JCH

[Dick W.]

Re: Engine Pad

Dick, I can't open the attachment. Can you upload the picture? JCH

Post #1 in this thread

[Page C.]

Re: Engine Pad

Hi Jim,
The CAR for engine 6103104 was listed for sale in May of 2009. It was ebay item#320366128433 in San Jose, Calif. It was vin 194376s103104. An AO Smith car red with black interior with a big block NOM.