Warranty Block Stamped CE2N26716

[69RALLYSPORTZ28]

Has anyone else seen the stamping on a possible warranty block include the letter "N" after the engine assembly year?

[ZLP955]

Started trying to track CE data a while back, and there was one block that also had an ‘N’ on the pad - CE4N23342. It was a 1973 cast 512 small block.
Here’s a link to post 103 of that thread, showing the tabled data points: http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?topic=12873.msg138225#msg138225
Do you have similar details on this CE2N block, I.e. casting number and cast date:

[bcmiller]

We haven’t definitively figured out what the N means so far.

Possibilities.
1. Notation for night shift? But at least prior to 1972 these CE engines were done on OT shifts or weekends.
2. Notation to designate between a fitted block and a complete engine.



I think it started showing up after the 1971 model year at Flint.

[69Z28-RS]

The 1968 GM letter specifying the CE blocks (and CT transmission) specifies that position in the sequence to be a progression letter to allow higher numbers...   ie     CEYrnnnnnn, then CEYrAnnnnn, then CEYrBnnnnn, as far thru the alphabet as required.  It IS surprising that they had enough Warranty engine replacements to progress as far as 'N' thru the alphabet, but I believe at that time, GM had a 5 yr powertrain warranty...

Perhaps between '68 and '71 or '73, there was a further expansion or clarification of the warranty replacement parts??   If we can find such a clarification it might be explained further, but without that there are any number of conjectures that one might make to explain it, rather than go by the GM letter we do have...

[bcmiller]

I am 99 percent sure the N is NOT due to progressing through the alphabet in any one year. I have a CE4N23342 block that has a casting date of early September 1973. That’s the first run through the 20000 to 49999 sequence.

[ZLP955]

I have a CE4N23342 block that has a casting date of early September 1973. That’s the first run through the 20000 to 49999 sequence.

So that is your block I referenced above Bryon? I didn’t track the data contributors in that original spreadsheet, and many of the pad photos have been lost due to the photobucket situation.......
I had listed yours with a comment that the ‘N’ pad stamp was an anomaly, now maybe it should be an outlier. But with only 2 data points thus far, probably never be able to determine a plausible theory.

[bcmiller]

I will see about posting pics of it directly in the thread. The N will not be seen as an anomaly after 1972 once there are more data points. With 40+ engines and/or bare blocks, I don’t have space to keep collecting. But if I run across CE blocks, I usually buy them. So if I find more, I will post.