68Z28 #'s

[JohnKY]

A friend of mine is somewhat interested in this 68Z on ebay, and has asked for me for some input.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1968-Chevrolet-Camaro-Z28-RS-4-Speed-Numbers-Matching-302-V8-Very-Rare-/332184613242?hash=item4d57bef17a:g:K2IAAOSwhQhYzFlh&vxp=mtr

I'm looking for opinions in the deck stampings on the engine.
There is, obviously, a discrepancy in the assembly date on the pad - Nov. 29 (11/29/67), and the casting date on the block - Dec.22 (L 22 7).
The pad numbers don't really look fake to me, but I'm not an expert on pad stampings.

The heads are dated Sept.15 (I 15 7)
Intake - Oct. 4 (10 4 67)
Trans - Dec. 5 (T 05)

Everything seems to line up with a 12B car, except the block casting.

Is it possible, or is there any noted instance of, a block date being mis-cast. so to speak? Doesn't seem like it would be hard to mistake an "L" for an "I".

[1968RSZ28]

124378N356369

Paul

[69Z28-RS]

Is the L227 cast date a DEC or NOV casting???   Would line up well if it was for Nov 22...

[1968RSZ28]

Is the L227 cast date a DEC or NOV casting???

L is December.

Paul

[bertfam]

It's an "I" with a little casing "glop" (for want of a better word) next to it.

Here's another example (see below). This one even has a little "glop" next to it.

Ed

[1968RSZ28]

Here's the photo of the block casting date from the listing...



Paul

[JohnKY]

Bertfam
I thought of that as a possibility, but the spacing between the digits seems to be equidistant.
 I guess it could be an"I" though.
Thanks for your opinion.

[bertfam]

If you click on the picture it'll take you to the hosting site. From there you can enlarge it using the "+" symbol at the top right.

I cropped it (see below) and you can clearly see the "leg" isn't attached to the "I". It's just a casting flaw, like the line at the bottom of the first "2".

Ed

[bergy]

Sure looks like L 22 7.  If you're not buying the "leg" on the L, then the "leg" on the first 2 is suspect.   As is the "leg" on the 7 (crooked).  The photo that 1968RSZ28 posted looks pretty clear.  Any cast date under a magnifying glass becomes subject to interpretation.

[KurtS]

I'm not convinced on the engine pad.....

[bcmiller]

Me either.  There is more than one thing that I am not thrilled about.

[JohnKY]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but during the VIN derivative stamping process, the engine and trans were stamped at the same time using the same stamp. Is this right?

Edit:
Just checked the tech article by JohnZ on Camaro assembly process, and yes, they were both stamped at the same time with the same stamp.
That does raise some questions with me about the VIN stamp.

And

Am I seeing things, or is there a "ghost" image of a "18" directly to the left of the VIN stamp? On a slightly downward angle.

[bergy]

Most of you know this, but remember that these blocks were cast in molds made out of a mixture of (primarily) sand, southern & western bentonite (clay), and water (to activated the clay as a binder).  The iron was poured into the mold at about 2,650 degrees.    It's not surprising to see some mold wall movement and to have small details like date stamps get distorted a little.

[JKZ27]

I know this has nothing to do with the engine stamps but the wheel shown is a K19. Paper in the picture says K18. On the car they all appear to be the later narrow slot wheels(K19).

[cook_dw]