Dedicated to the Promotion and Preservation of American Muscle Cars, Dealer built Supercars and COPO cars. |
|
|||||||
| Register | Album Gallery | Thread Gallery | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Become a Paid Member | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Not sure if this will help but here is a picture of my 327 engine stamp. This engine is in my 56 and is not original to the car.
__________________
<span style="font-weight: bold">John Chevelle and Tri Five Parts 56 210 66 Chevelle </span> |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
hi the 1 and i are not the problem the024 is not right in my opinion
__________________
Barry Allan |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
hi the 1 and i are not the problem the024 is not right in my opinion [/ QUOTE ] Thanks for the opinion Barry. The 024 is correct. I assume your not an authority on the issue; however, I appreciate the opinion. Received lots pictures to confirm the stamp is original. Including the one attached above. Thanks again. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
How can anyone tell one way or the other when it is painted?
Jason |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Unless you're comparing to another pad pic with a very similar date and same suffix, there's no way to tell for sure. Add it that it's out-of-focus and painted and any guess is just that - a guess.
I have several close TKO pics, this one looks OK, but there's a couple of things that may be a problem. Can't tell without a better pic (preferably with no paint...).
__________________
Kurt S - CRG |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Here are some 0s, 2s & a 4 for comparison. These are confirmed originals.
Verne ![]() |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
Here are some 0s, 2s & a 4 for comparison. These are confirmed originals. Verne [/ QUOTE ] Thank you. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|