Inaccurate Partial VIN on Engine!?

[UforDinner]

 First and foremost, I would like to say thank you so much for Camaros.org, the website, the information, and all those who contributed! It truly is an amazing assimilation of information!

My question revolves around a 1969 Camaro I just purchased. I found it sitting in a field with 37k miles and what appears to be all original equipment.  It is the L65 option, as it's mostly dated February '69, 350/350 with multi leaf springs, 10-bolt, and all looks original.

Based on the explanation from the seller, it's all original as he got it from the original owner who passed away.  I know how little to trust these stories so I started slowly comparing all the vins and partial vins and build dates as I pull the car apart for restoration.

Absolutely everything seems completely normal, all numbers match and build dates are in the right sequential order etc.... except one very intriguing difference.

The partial vin on the engine, by this time in production from what I have read, had switched to down by the oil filter and mine is there.  It is has an L128 casting date and V0207HD build date which seems to match all the right details, build order compared to casting, 350 tranny and build date of car etc.  The very hard to read partial vin in the casting by the oil filter is the oddity because it is literally missing a digit AND it has an '8' stamped in place of a '0'.  The rest of the numbers are accurate and in the correct order... but it's just so weird!  I remember reading somewhere that sometimes they would use a different stamp if one broke and sometimes they would make mistakes but to see it missing a digit AND swap a digit? 

I know it's easy to be skeptical but honestly I'd bet my life savings this is the original engine.  I would really just love to hear some feedback from others about have you ever seen this, can you confirm it's happened on other engines, is there an explanation, do we know why or how?  Any documentation that shows GM workers would occasionally mess up?  Thanks so much for any help!!

Jason
Florida

[Stingr69]

HD L-65 is 350 cube 250 HP with a 2 barrel carb.  Pictures would help a lot.  Transmission VIN derivative stamp should match the engine VIN derivative stamp so we will want to compare them.  They were both done at the same time with the same setup according to normative practice.  The "L" September casting date but assembled in February makes me pause.  Those dates should be much closer. 

Not many would re-stamp an HD engine so time to look harder at the numbers pictures.

[HOT3O2]

Wouldn't an "L" casting date be December, not September?

[Stingr69]

Yes - I = September, so my bad.

[UforDinner]

Yeah, December casting makes sense and is in line.

I got an update... the transmission has:
Y9A31N which translates to me as Toledo 350 on January 31 Night shift of 1969. So these dates line up.  The transmission ALSO has an error, although it appears "corrected."  On the edge of the mounting flange is the partial vin, it matches my cars VIN.  What's funny is the last digit of my car vin is a 2... and the number stamped on the transmission was stamped ending in a 1 and then a 2 was stamped over top of it!!  It took me a minute to make it out but it's clearly a 1 and maybe the assembler said oh crap and just stamped a 2 right over top!  Haha

Attached is a photo showing the engine partial VIN... it's missing a digit AND has an 8 stamped in place of a 0!

It's so weird to me... but I guess makes sense if the stampings were literally being done by hand on the assembly line.  I just feel like certainly someone somewhere is still alive and worked in these plants and could tell stories about how the vins could have errors or corrections.

[Stingr69]

Seems possible that the gang stamp holder still had all the numbers in it from the previous car and it was re-used in error.  The error was likely discovered and then corrected.  I would believe it.

Sounds like a cool project.

[william]

Transmission VIN derivative stamp should match the engine VIN derivative stamp so we will want to compare them.  They were both done at the same time with the same setup according to normative practice.

That is not always true. There are documented original cars with correct VIN stampings that do not match.

[bcmiller]

Jason, what is the build month and week of this car from the trim tag?

[UforDinner]

Hello BCMiller,

02B .... Second week of February?

[bcmiller]

OK, as you suspected, that fits perfectly.  99 percent sure that is the original engine for the car.

Since it's low miles and has original components, would you be willing to share the data from the car for the CRG database?  Tag info, VIN, casting dates, etc. ?

[UforDinner]

I don't think I would be opposed to that!?  🤔  Who all has access to it? Are there any concerns with my entire VIN being saved somewhere like that? Thanks for your help!

[bcmiller]

I will send you a pm with details either later today or tomorrow.