Possible find 67 L30/M20

[Jeffro67]

Thanks JohnZ, that would make sense that the suffix  stamp would be applied in the engine shop.

Jeff.

[Jeffro67]

GOOD NEWS!! Jay has confirmed for me that the engine I have, is the original engine that came in my 67 Camaro. He also still has the 4 speed that was in the car, but now I am going to be paying through the nose for it, just like the vin tag. Probably because I have been bugging the crapola out of them. My L78 dreaming is officially over. I posted pictures of that bare front pad.

[Jeffro67]

Another Pic.

[1968RSZ28]

Is it me or the photo?  I don't see any numbers on the engine pad...     

Paul

[Stillwater Camaro]

What you can't see the numbers ....  

 He is showing that there are no numbers stamped on the pad. It appears to have been decked.

[Jeffro67]

Is it me or the photo?  I don't see any numbers on the engine pad...    

Paul

What you can't see the numbers ....  

 He is showing that there are no numbers stamped on the pad. It appears to have been decked.

Ya, Paul and Stillwater, I know, that's what I've been saying. It must have been decked like you said. I have this engine! it came in the trunk of the car when I bought it. Me and the guy I bought it from, (not Jay) didn't know it was the original. It looks like there may have been a E near the middle and then a little ways down a V but that's all. Off to the left it looks like there may have been a row of very tiny numbers starting right at the pad edge. Not sure though.

Jeff.

[Stillwater Camaro]

The row of tiny numbers would be the VIN. If you can use a crayon to fill what's left of the depression and wipe the rest level with the metal, a hand held magnifying glass may make the numbers visible enough to read. That is the number that will tell you if it is the original engine.

[KevinK]

The row of tiny numbers would be the VIN. If you can use a crayon to fill what's left of the depression and wipe the rest level with the metal, a hand held magnifying glass may make the numbers visible enough to read. That is the number that will tell you if it is the original engine.

   ...Was the VIN# stamped on the '67 L30's? ...I didn't think it was(it wasn't on mine...), ...I could be wrong, ...maybe the did on L30/M20's

[Stillwater Camaro]

The row of tiny numbers would be the VIN. If you can use a crayon to fill what's left of the depression and wipe the rest level with the metal, a hand held magnifying glass may make the numbers visible enough to read. That is the number that will tell you if it is the original engine.

   ...Was the VIN# stamped on the '67 L30's? ...I didn't think it was(it wasn't on mine...), ...I could be wrong, ...maybe the did on L30/M20's

The consensus seems to be NOT and if his block has remnants of a VIN, it strongly suggests non-original.

[Jeffro67]

Crayon did not work. What looks like charactors are not depressions, May just be my imagination.
 How many 325 hp optioned 67s are in your guys data base? Remember it would not be a L30 engine, an L30 engine is defined as 275 hp. You say it would have no number but why would they stamp (all) 295 hp L48s and (not)? a much better car such as one with a 325 hp engine.
 That is a very premature statement that you have made.
 I am going to look at the M20 trans this weekend that is supposed to be also original to the also. Do you want to shoot it down right now before we see the numbers on it too?
  Remember, A data base is a data base because you are continually adding and compiling data to it. If at some point you stop adding data to it and call it the (all) stanard norm, then you would have your own personel luxury of excluding particular examples.
 Rich has communicated to me that there is only one other car in the data base with an early build date as mine. That does not sound like a very big data base at all, or else I have a really, really rare car indeed.
 If the M20 comes through and has the correct numbers you will have to add to your data base or you truly will not be benefiting the community you claim to be.
 Also, you members may not be as informed as you think you are,
 Example: the very first responce to my thread was Quote:" rear is wrong, should be a 12 bolt round rod".  unquote.
 I know the rear is probably not the original due to the late date stamp, but that was  a wrong statement because I believe my car was an early 10 bolt non radius rod  transition car and I think Rich or Kurt would attest to that fact.
 So, there's my vent, Oh well, nothing personel.

 Jeff.

[Jeffro67]

Also on November 5 or November 25 a member named Lars Sweeden made a post about his 67 wanting information. He only made two posts I believe. My vin is 142144 and his vin by memory was 142845 both cars LOS cars. Does anybody know how close theese cars would have been togather on the assembly line? and is there any way to contact Lars know?

 Thanks in advance, Jeff.

[Jeffro67]

That Lars Sweeden posting was in year 2007 and I believe he was posting from the country of Sweeden.

Jeff.

[Stillwater Camaro]

Jeff, NOBODY is shooting down your car.....   The known facts, so far, are that it appears to be an early build L30/M20. There was NO 325hp 327 in a 67 Camaro. The 325 hp rating was for a L34/396. If the small block engine you have is indeed the original, that eliminates a big block car. If the aluminum Muncie transmission that you are going to look at has the matching VIN to your car, then it very well could be a big block car and the small block you have can't be the original UNLESS the engine is a 302. The car very well may have come with a factory 10 bolt axle, as you point out, and it then wouldn't have a radius rod either. You are correct on that point. The fact that is has the stiffener plate under the rear seat for the rod, indicates that it is from the mid-year, transitional period, where GM was attempting to address the severe wheel hop in the higher hp, manual trans cars. I know you are excited and are still hoping you have a 1 off, super rare car, but the odds of that are pretty remote.
The reason GM stamped the VIN in the 350's was because it was considered a high performance engine and at greater risk of theft than the 275 hp 327. The 327 had been around for a number of years and the 350 was brand, spankin' new in the 67 Camaro ONLY.
The M20 designation for the transmission in the tt decoder was for ANY 4 speed equipped car. It is confusing because Muncie used that designation for one of their transmissions. M20 behind a 327 would've been a Saginaw brand, cast iron case, transmission. That will be the first thing to look for when you view the "original" trans that he has. A lot of people don't know the difference between a Saginaw, Muncie or Borg-Warner 4 speed trans and the owner may be mistaken as to what it really is.
By the way......my 67 was built about 1200 after yours. Build date 2C and is from Los Angeles too...... My car does have an original 12 bolt axle with the bracket provision for the rod, but no evidence of one ever being installed due to the transmission being an automatic and not as prone to the wheel hop issue.
Hang in there, man. It's still exciting and I'm very interested in what you have yet to discover, as are probably others...

[Jeffro67]

Wow! I had no idea you had a 67 2C car. Thanks Stillwater, I guess I get to excited on this car stuff. It's just a darn car. What's your color?

Jeff.

[Stillwater Camaro]

Here's a link to my webshots album. It was originally Granada Gold with Black deluxe interior. True SS/RS, missing original engine and trans....

http://rides.webshots.com/album/557974721HYToph?start=0