[Matt Meaney]

in one sense it, looks like a correct restoration was attempted by a "Pontiac professional", but it fell a little short. then there are some claims that aren't backed up by the phs. finally, the incorrect block stamping takes the cake.
would this drastically devalue the car as a whole, over a engine that just wasn't correct? and what would be the market value of such a car with a faked vin stamp on the engine?

the car in question

https://boston.craigslist.org/sob/ct...812732750.html

[Ram4king]

I think your being kind saying a little short. Looks like a pos to me. Wouldn't touch it for 50k.

[ho428]

If it's the correct block, casting number, date codes and all, I have no issue with machining the old number off and re-stamping it, if done correctly. The block is just another part, and just like any other that can get replaced.
To say: Original" block is not correct though. Should say correct numbers matching block.

[johnta1]

Should say correct numbers matching block.

More like correct re-stamped block?

[ho428]

Originally Posted by johnta1

More like correct re-stamped block?

I don't think that's necessary in an ad, but it would be good to disclose it to a buyer.
If all the casting codes are correct it is the correct block, just not the original block.
Re-stamped blocks are allowed in a lot of judging, but it needs to be done correctly.

[Chief of the 60's]

Okay Judge experts..... Is that the correct wheel on that spare? If it is, when did GM use a Mopar wheel?

This looks like a Mopar wheel to me. Maybe I'm wrong?

[goatless]

Originally Posted by Chief of the 60's

Okay Judge experts..... Is that the correct wheel on that spare?

Not a Judge "expert", but... All Judges came with Rally IIs, so the spare would have been a Rally II.

[Chief of the 60's]

Originally Posted by goatless

Not a Judge "expert", but... All Judges came with Rally IIs, so the spare would have been a Rally II.

I was pretty sure of that but the wheel in this trunk sure looks like a Mopar wheel.

[chris66]

The trunk pan where it meets the inner wheelhouse looks suspect to me....

[chrome]

Originally Posted by ho428

If it's the correct block, casting number, date codes and all, I have no issue with machining the old number off and re-stamping it, if done correctly. The block is just another part, and just like any other that can get replaced.
To say: Original" block is not correct though. Should say correct numbers matching block.

WRT restamping blocks with different vin codes....

Giving anyone the impression that it's a "numbers matching block" is quite misleading. Certinaly not the accurate wording I would want described to me for a restamped block, especially when selling/buying under those terms.

[judger69]

In his ad He does say original numbers matching engine. Nope. Strike 1. EUN and the WS are not even close to reality. Strike 2. Intake Feb 1969. Strike 3. You are out.
Wrong rear end #.
PHS looks faked too.
Looks to be a nice car but not as claimed.

[chrome]

That's the problem with restamped blocks. Just because some show judges accept it, does not mean the car gets transferred to the next owner in an honest fashion.

As a judge myself, and buyer, it's way more valuable to me (and most of my collecting acquaintances) to leave a mismatched vin number engine stamped as such. If a replacement engine is used with the correct casting number, date code, and two letter configuration stamp, yet the VIN stamping is incorrect, leave it as is. It tells the whole story for the next owner, and lets the show judge know exactly what it is. Plus, it leaves the engine entirely original. The value of an unmolested block is far greater than a molested one.

Show judge opinions aside, from a buying and selling standpoint, it makes it more valuable, and way more honest. Personally, even if disclosed up front, I will never buy a restamped block of any condition or rarity. I will however, buy an unmolested block.

[Greg Reid]

Originally Posted by chris66

The trunk pan where it meets the inner wheelhouse looks suspect to me....

No kidding! Both sides.

[Ram Air IV Jack]

Originally Posted by chrome

That's the problem with restamped blocks. Just because some show judges accept it, does not mean the car gets transferred to the next owner in an honest fashion.

As a judge myself, and buyer, it's way more valuable to me (and most of my collecting acquaintances) to leave a mismatched vin number engine stamped as such. If a replacement engine is used with the correct casting number, date code, and two letter configuration stamp, yet the VIN stamping is incorrect, leave it as is. It tells the whole story for the next owner, and lets the show judge know exactly what it is. Plus, it leaves the engine entirely original. The value of an unmolested block is far greater than a molested one.

Show judge opinions aside, from a buying and selling standpoint, it makes it more valuable, and way more honest. Personally, even if disclosed up front, I will never buy a restamped block of any condition or rarity. I will however, buy an unmolested block.

Very good and I agree with this. Problem I've seen is the many claims you see today of the words "numbers matching". To some people this means something different than to others. In reality, most of these cars lost their original engines decades ago for a variety of reasons. Today however you see many of these cars advertised or bragged about by their current owners as "numbers matching". So what happened? Well fakes and restamps is really the answer. The fakes have gotten so good that it is difficult to tell any longer. I know a classic car buyer and he told me they don't like to see tank stickers sealed in plastic because they want to examine the paper. The fakes have gotten that good. Try finding an original WW RAIV block sometime but there are restamps out there. One Corvette author wrote there are more big block 60's Vettes out there today than were made by GM so it effects all classic cars. As I always say, caveat emptor!!

[tom s]

I have a 69 WS block in one of my cars,when I ran the vin it came from a 69GP!Tom

[meangene]

well i feel a little better that i have correct vin block in the car, i wish i could get correct date code heads and carb. my cousin bought it new from my dad in 71, my dad work for pontiac 56 years (1971 GTO), my brother bought it off of him this last year just to find out that the heads got taken off in the seventies and some hjgh compression heads put on and change back later with some #96 heads with wrong date code and wrong carb (71 stick carb single ring venturi) car a automatic

[Greg Reid]

Originally Posted by Ram Air IV Jack

Very good and I agree with this. Problem I've seen is the many claims you see today of the words "numbers matching". To some people this means something different than to others.

There was a long thread here a few years ago where one member was adamant that 'numbers matching' meant the correct part number. In other words, if it has the correct engine type and year then it's a 'numbers matching' engine. No one could convince him otherwise.

[72projectbird]

I saw that pop up on the local CL the other day.

It's a sharp looking car, but with the flaws in it I don't see anyone paying anywhere near what he's asking.

[judgeman6970]

Factory "no wheel lip molding" 1969 GTO Judge??

[wovenweb]

I didn't see this car in person and it did not sell, the VIN tag on this one seems odd:

https://www.leakecar.com/vehicle/338...iac-GTO-Judge/

Just the spacing on it.