Re: 1969 Chevelle
 

My trans stamp for comparison:
https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/pics...6-imgp2552.jpg

Re: 1969 Chevelle
 

Hi guys. To me restamping a block isn't much different than if you have an incorrect alternator, carburetor or starter and you go out and get a proper date coded one; its still not the one that came with the car, however the car is still correct none the less. I guess the argument would be the engine is the heart of the car; whatever, it is what it is. I saw someone recently replace the full floor, from the cowl back, both quarters, trunk lid, both front fenders and a door; this isn't even much different that a re-body. That tag on the Chevelle sure looks good to me and the restoration job is impeccable. IF I had that kind of money I would buy that car back, of coarse, it doesn't hurt to have all of the original documentation for it, photographs from 1969 when it was new and the original emblem from the grille and dealer sign off of the back. I'm getting to old to even clone a car but if I was going to, that would be the one; I loved that car. Doug.

Re: 1969 Chevelle
 

Doug, as we discussed on the phone, and when you put it that way as stated above, I see your point. In the grand scheme of things in life, the re-stamp motor isn't life threatening. YES we replace plugs, wires ALTERNATOR & CARBURETORS. So why not the major components like block, trans and rear end??? My only thoughts on that is MAYBE the car hasn't had as hard of a life, been pieced together from scrapes laying around a shop or is "more original"? Sorta like a nice survivor being possibly more desirable then a resto car. There only original once!

In a case where a high value car (such as this Chevelle) the re-stamp or "matching numbers" only leads to one thing, HIGHER SALE PRICE. I personally look at cars that are "NUMBERS MATCHING" as born with parts and therefore more original and subsequently worth or valued higher.

But the post from the restorer just rubbed me the wrong way. They have "possibly" mis-lead a buyer, yet LEGALLY covered there butts, when he posted:
" Also to note that in the ebay ad it just states numbers matching. No one has claimed them to be born with."
That statement just seems misleading to me? I think numbers matching is born-with. But whatever!!!!

Re: 1969 Chevelle
 

Re: 1969 Chevelle
 

So how does a vin stamp bounce in aluminum produce the much heavier impression over the top of the very light partial characters? A first very light hit and then the stamp bounce produced the very heavy stamp impression? That makes no sense. So if it is two double stamps then, the guy stamping the Muncie after assembly barely hit it enough to get anything other than the partial C, and then fully stamped it properly? Then the next guy stamping the vin during assembly also barely stamped the vin, only enough to get 4 lower partial letter curves, and then had to fully stamp the vin properly? Both guys forgot how to stamp aluminum on the same trans, anything is possible I guess.

Re: 1969 Chevelle
 

Doesn't have to be a bounce. Could be a second assembly line attempt. Here's a photo of the born-with block in my SD Firebird. There are four separate VIN stamps of varying depths. (All the same VIN, thankfully).

https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/pics...-block_vin.jpg

Re: 1969 Chevelle
 

Hello.

My father was the second owner of the blue copo, that was sold in PEI. The first owner was in the service, as Summerside had an air force base back then. Sometime after dad sold it, it was wrapped around a telephone post. Also, at some point after dad had it, perhaps related to the wreck, the 427 engine and manual transmission were transplanted into a local Camaro. Quite a few years ago, a gentleman in Halifax wanted to put the pieces back together. He had the car, but needed the engine and transmission, which were still in the same Camaro. He bought the drivetrain, and supposedly put it all back together. I have not seen the car, but assume that a good restoration was done, as I heard a small fortune was spent bringing her back to her former glory.

Re: 1969 Chevelle
 

Thanks for signing up and posting that info.

Re: 1969 Chevelle
 

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: quik9r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: P.J.</div><div class="ubbcode-body">yes I probably saw the car every night at Harvys I remember Turk though. I was also there the night the white 67 Camaro
302 came in 4 speed 456 gears,The first one in Torotno I beleive.. Shook the windows when it was idleing beside the building.The guys name was Ron I beleive
He gave me a ride in the car up the 400 shifted the car at 7800 rpm in all 4 gears csared the S--- out of me.WOW. The car did 1260s in the quarter with tires and headers.
The fastest car at the time was not a chevelle it was a 67
Boeumount was owned by a JIM ????.Dark green No one knew what he did to the motor to so fast.Man that brings back lots of great memories.
PJ
PJ </div></div>

That dark green 67 Beaumont was from Streetsville, Ont I believe, L88 with lots of work.

Quik9r</div></div>

There was a Green 1967 Beaumont SD around our area called &quot;Poison Ivy.&quot; BBC, 4 speed, straight axle. Fastest car around here. He was a friend of my dad's. When I saw the description above, I automatically thought of this car. It was also my parents' wedding car!

Re: 1969 Chevelle
 

Welcome Clarkie [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/biggthumpup.gif[/img]

Dan