Restamp ?

[YenkoYS100]

Is this a restamp ? I ask as the last #3 font does not match the others. There is that funky stamped deeper on one side look also.


Here is the auction link :
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=1830220718

Here is a '68 block that I picked up awhile back.




[Edited by YenkoYS100 (05-27-2002 at 01:51 PM).]

[Kurt S]

Actually, I've seen a lot of pads that look like this one. Notice the 6/9 are the same, as are the M's.
Neither stamping looks real suspect to me. I'd check it out more, but I sure wouldn't write this one off.

Heck, if you were going to restamp a block, why put a VIN on it? And if you did, you'd probably make all the fonts the same....

[Edited by Kurt S (05-27-2002 at 10:44 PM).]

[Jeff H]

I would think that the stamper might have run out of 3's in that smaller size and substituted a 3 from another set to do that VIN. There are a lot of 3's in that VIN. My VIN is stamped lighter on the left and heavier on the right. The DZ part of my block is pretty light as well and you can still see the broach marks.

[TimG]

The second stamp is great. The broach is evident and extends past the pad. The numbers 6 and 9 are interchangeable in stamps if reversed, the three has a flat top and this is correct. The depth is correct and you can see where the stamp has actually pushed up the metal around the letters and numbers. If a car with the T0329MT stamped on the block were for sale, I would not let the stamp stand in the way of the purchase.
I think that as we see more and more restamps we become unsure of an original stamp factory stamp really should look like. I know that this was not a science, just guys with a hammer on the assembly line. Some things are clues, though. The extremly light 0 on the first stamp, no broach marks, crooked letters, these would make me shy away from this being an original Tonawanda stamp. There are cases where they had to pull extra numbers out. I looked at a 69 big block with a November 11 stamp. The actual stamp was TIIIIIL. The engine designation was IL in this case. There were three different I and 1's. I am sure they did not have enough I's to go around. I just think that there are clues for engines and cars that you have to look at.

[Edited by TimG (05-28-2002 at 08:36 AM).]

[Stefano]

Sometimes it is the ones that are too correct which may also be suspect.

[TimG]

How true. In the early 80's there was a 68 L88 that was in Houston, TX. This car had a funky "1" in the engine code stamp that should have been a "I". Most folks thought it was a restamp because of this wierd stamp and number. The "1" was stamped by hand and was a mess. Three years later another L88 showed up with the same funky "1" in place of the "I" in the engine code. The serial number of the car showed that is was built one car after the other L88. They built two in a row with the same defect. The cars verified each other.

[Unreal]

I'm not in to restamps, but if I were going to the trouble of restamping a VIN on a block, I'd use the same stamp for the last "3" as I did for all the others! But then if I were selling a bare block, I know I would not go through the trouble of changing a VIN. We know 323 is a 396 block, some 2 bolt and some 4 bolt. Would you machine to 4 bolt, and retap the oil pressure outlets, all in an effort to fool someone into thinking they were buying an L-78 block?
If you were restamping to make a "numbers" car, then maybe...

Again, I'm no stamp expert, but I'll bet the last "3" did not come out, when stamped on the line. So the worker grabbed a 3 off his workbench, and stamped the final number.

[Mako]

Hi All,
ItÃs interesting and funny to read this. All the time and speculation put into some numbers stamped on a block. Other than cars, I collect and sometimes sell vintage guitars and the same conversations come up. If one part does not exactly match another part then suspicions and rumors start. We can spend countless hours pondering this, to the point some may loose sleep. All I can add is that like car factories or guitar factories, these things were being pumped out one after the other, they did not give a damn who would look at these numbers, they were trying to keep the line going or loose their jobs. They were just waiting for Miller time and to get the hell out of there I would imagine. When I was a mechanic at a local Buick dealer in 1973 I saw some bizarre stuff on brand new cars.

I agree with those that would say if the numbers looked too perfect I would be leery. With guitars and cars, after you been around them long you can literally tell a fake across the room. The numbers become secondary.

So, as I used to tell my guitar buddies, if you werenÃt standing beside the guy that made it then donÃt make a statement that you know for a fact something is one thing or the other.

Can I drink my Miller now?

[TimG]

True, but before I shell out my money for an unrestamped/original engine car, I am going to do my research. I will let you know that I have walked away from a number of cars that I thought did not pan out, I could have been wrong, they may have been original. When it came time to sell, I would have been in the hot seat. Your point about telling a fake from across the room is correct. I have seen plenty of guys get burned on restamped cars. It is serious stuff if you get taken. There is nothing wrong with a restamp as long as it is priced as such.

[Mako]

I hear that! I have to agree. One of the things I think about when buying a car is the day I am going to sell it and how the buyer will react to questionable items.

Now a days you have to figure it's fake until proven otherwise. Documentation is the key. I think half the cars I see in the Antique Car For Sale section of my local paper says Low Original Mileage. The first thing I tell the seller is if you don't have doc on the mileage than don't even try it.
Thanks,
Mako