ZL1 engine

[SuperNovaSS]

Just heard back from the machine shop. No cracks or flaws in the block. So it should be for sale soon. It will need new sleeves to make it a 427 again. It now has sleeves that make is a 510. He's checking the heads now. I'd rather sell it to someone here than put it on Ebay, but still have no real idea of value.


Jason

[yountto]

Put it on ebay if you are afraid of selling it too cheap...I know ill be there come the end of auction time...

[T Billigen]

I have a question? Say you sell an engine like this on e-bay, how much commision do you have to pay to e-bay ( say you get 20K?)

[yountto]

The ebay fees pale in comparison to the taxes that need to be paid on the profit....

[SuperNovaSS]

I've decided the price will be $17,500 providing the heads come back with a OK. Included will be the block, heads, crank, intake(163), oil pan, timing cover, and push rods.

Jason

[GMH454]

Does the block have its studs, do the heads have the original rocker arms.
AND....did you find any markings in the block ?????

Is there any sign that the stamp pad was ever stamped ???
There are a variety of unique stampings on these engines and it might not be the familar style ???

[SuperNovaSS]

The mains were studed. There were head studs but they came in a box, not in the block. I will know better on the stamping when I pick up the block, but rpoz11 said he checked it over well and saw nothing. It did have a series of numbers opposit the casting number but I did not know what they meant.


Jason

[rpoz11]

Basically, this block appears to be a latter issue of the original from the original molds. I'd bet most that this was a early 70's re-issue based upon demand. As Ive heard, and Im NO authority on it, the original run was made, stopped after enough warranty blocks were poured, and then re-poured again later for a small final run. I did not see any VIN stampings on it whatsoever. With the smaller 2 in the 3946052 casting number, I will bet my Camaro on it that this was a 70-73 re-issue. The heads I think were 73 or 74 dated and the 163 was obviously not correct for it; I would like to allow the new current owner to finish off here on this since it is now in his hands.