CRG Discussion Forum
Camaro Research Group Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Ramjett54 on January 02, 2012, 05:58:52 PM
-
take a look at this Ebay auction why would it not have a vin?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/DZ-302-Block-/300633104550?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&vxp=mtr&hash=item45ff2120a6 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/DZ-302-Block-/300633104550?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&vxp=mtr&hash=item45ff2120a6)
-
My gut tells me real, but the casting date doesn't seem to jive with the pads date. April 14, 1968 cast date, and a June 11, 1969 pad date?
Could it be both...real and a restamp? The font looks pretty darn good on the pad.
-
If the block casting number is #3970010, (the number 397010 is mentioned in the body of the ad) then the casting date is probably April 14, 1969. This block started in April 1969. As far as the VIN, then it could be located down by the oil filter.
Still there is a two month lag between casting and engine assembly....although the 302 engines did have more time lag than the other engines.
-
Just blew up the 3rd pic...you are correct. It is D149 & not eight. In that case, one vote for real.
And, I still say it could be a factory restamp.
-
The VIN should be over the oil filter. More than likely has one, just is very hard to see, being stamped into the rough casting.
http://www.camaros.org/drivetrain.shtml#PadStamps
-
Looks real to me.
-
Thanks
The seller did find a vin down near the oil filter
so its probably the Real Deal
-
I think the pad is real. What's the VIN?
> And, I still say it could be a factory restamp.
Factory restamp is an oxymoron.
-
Factory restamp is an oxymoron.
Oxymoron or not, I think you know exactly what I meant......... Doesn't a pad need to be ground smooth to eliminate another number before it can be changed ??? >:( IMO...A Restamp is a restamp no matter who's doing it.
-
I don't know what you are talking about. I see no evidence of a grind-out / change of the pad by the factory.
-
All I'm saying; If it were me looking at this car for purchase, I would certainly want it investigated more than we've done here. But that's just me. I am not attempting to sway the author one way or another, simply stating an opinion.
My point as stated, and just my opinion; the pad "could have" been altered. I also think it is difficult for anyone to reach a consensus one way or another without a better pic or an on-site inspection. But, even at that poor resolution (to me) the pad appears to be altered, whether by the factory or by an individual. There are marks that clearly go against the grain.
And to the point of my last post...I don't think your oxymoron comment is correct. The above pic shows a factory re-decked pad. It was clearly done to replace an old number. Isn't it a pad that has been re-decked by the factory ???
-
Forget it...zoomed the pad to 400 and it looks fine. Someone just got a little aggressive with a hard edge tool of some sort.
-
A grind-out is when the factory removes the incorrectly stamped code. It's messy and uneven, unlike this pad. And I've only seen two Camaro pads like that over the years.....