Engine Vin Stamp
 

The Vin Stamp has a misstamp at the end. Was this common? 70 Norwood Trans AM

Yes, mis stamps are fairly common. my 77 T/A had a ghost stamp on the engine number itself where the stamper must have double tapped, and it bounced.

Does that stamp have 29N at the front?

:confused:

Yes, it begins with "29N"

This isn't the original engine for the 70 TA then?

:confused:

I believe it is. Block Casting # 9799914, prefex WS 0585920

If there were inconsistencies with the engine/stampings - would you rather know them
- or would you rather Not Know Them ?

Sometimes its a delicate situation for an owner.
Just need to confirm your wishes before more is discussed probably.

Nope, I'm definitely interested to verify the originality. I am not questioning anyone's authority, just trying to get it straight.

Just wanted to know how you felt about some "possible" bad news first.

29N
the 2 is a Pontiac designator
the 9 indicates it was an engine for a 1969 production car (you have a 70)
the N indicates Norwwod plant

When a double strike happens on an engine VIN at faktry -
basically the whole group is restruck.
They use a gang stamp holder fixture - not each number stamped individual.
All characters should be in a perfect strait line with each other on each "strike".
And all should share the same font and size.

Restrikes can take on many appearances - heavier or lighter to one end than the other - a bit misaligned from original strike - etc...
i had some sample pics but cant locate them.

The next issue is that a WS would not have been instituted at Norwood in 69

Best things to do:

Wipe your engine VIN area cleaner with lacquer thinner - or sand it cleaner with 180 grit sandpaper and take more pics.

Get the date code from around distributor mounting hole. (B149 for example)

Clean or sand your WS stamp and take some pics.

Then post the pics /findings.

RAM AIR III BLOCK
 

THE S ON THE WS LOOKS A LITTLE WEAK

I WOULD BET MONEY THAT BLOCK IS A RESTAMP

Is the 122912 the last 6 numbers of the car's VIN?

:confused:

400guy: If you've got the PHS documents for this car, you can also verify the engine unit number on the car "Billing History" form.
It should match 0585920 (or at least the last 4 digits of that number)
It might show: WS5920

Looking through my EUN page, it appears the EUN is within range of the engine and the date code.

I'm wondering if the stamper didn't screw up the '9' along with the other digits?

Does it look like a '2' under the top '2'?
(looks like it may be something else)

The area around the stamped VIN looks original and not ground on.

Cool engine.

:)

Just to sum this up........(if I'm reading the codes right?)

We have a 1970 400? block cast on May 19/70 in a 70 T/A vin (228870N122912) that was built in the first week of June 1970 with a block code stamp WS & partial vin of 29N122912?

Is your car a survivor,restored OR basket case?

Is displacement (400) cast above pan rail behind fuel pump?

Has block cast # below rear of PS cyl.head been tampered with or modified?

affirmative

I have the PHS invoice, but I do not see a "billing History" form

partial stamp is 29N122912

EUN won't be on any form from PHS on any car after 1968 unless you have GM of Canada documentation.

The car appears to be original except a re-spray, but in excellant condition

The Block casting # has not been tampered with

I will have to verify the (400) cast tomorrow

their is two other partial VINs you can look for also. One on the Cowl under the Passenger side guard under the heater blower motor. Might be hard to see but will be their.

The next is on your gearbox but it will be hard to see without taking a thousand photos blindly but if your gearbox is out it will be easy.

Not wanting to hijack this thread.........,BUT while I have ALL of the "eagle eyes" here...what's your take on THIS block stamp....?

So...The consensus is a miss stamp from the factory? Everything else on the car is stamped and date coded correct so I have no reason to believe that the engine was re-stamped.

If it were me, the next step would be to check the locations where Fremont and Atlanta stamped their VIN's. The normal area (where yours is stamped now) remains clean and fresh for pickings on most Atlanta and Fremont blocks.
-- just saying - its another possibility.

I've seen quite a few (dozens) mistamps/double strikes-
but just have never seen one where a chunk popped out under a couple digits and then had just a couple/few hand stamped singularly.

It seems like they would have just moved over and hit the gangstamp again.
{speculation}
But much quicker for a line worker.

The 9 being in the year model placement "could" have been an error made by someone doing the devils work who wasn't fully up to speed on all details. fwiw

That late in the game - a faktry worker would have been well acquainted with the 0 by then. And mistakes CAN happen, i realize.
Just laying it out there if you want to exhaust all possibilities.

:usa2:

The "Gang stamp" holder was manually "loaded" Different one used for the VIN, and at a different time. This is Human error. Could be the zero dropped on the floor,or the guys stamped so many 69's, it just happened they threw in a 9. To get whats shown, the last digits, the holder would have been empty aside from the last two, which means it could have gone sideways on a direct hit. Also notice the vin number mess ups are a lot more common than the Engine builders stampings?
At 45 cars a second rolling off the Norwood line, its totally believable

45 cars a MINUTE,is that right? :confused:

Appreciate all the input and expert opinions. I am going to go ahead and commit to buy the car today as a numbers matching engine.

45 cars per hour is correct.

That's actually a little on the slow side, as most of my (truck) experience has been 60 jobs per hour and the Pontiac plant would gust up to 70 per hour during peak times. Feeder conveyers and the body/paint shop would run faster than that to keep a slight buffer at all times.

K

Where on the block would the Fremont and Atlanta blocks be stamped? I was under the impression they were all stamped in the same location.

Fremont had a habit of stamping the partial VIN up high and to the left of the engine code and engine unit number just below the deck for the passenger head. Sometimes it will be upside down or at any angle they felt like stamping. Not sure if Atlanta stamping was in another spot or similar so someone else will have to chime in on that.

lol no mis spoke, a car every 45 seconds, still that IS fast, and one of 3 was was a Pontiac

Atlanta was doing about the same thing as Fremont.
The area circled in Red is where they usually stamped their VIN's.

Leaves the "normal" area all nice and virgin for the devils work.
Majority don't know about this.
Its not an area most would clean and check for evidence of previous stampings and/or lack of broach marks or inconsistent broach marks. Thin spread of filler or heavy prime-paint will usually cover these stampings nicely as those plants generally tend to be lighter depth.

This is probably a bit too advanced detective work for most to grasp.
But those blocks are the prime candidates for this type work.

This block also looks to have heavy paint materials on the facing
particularly in the upper extremities.

Doesn't mean for any fact at all, that there has been any monkey business.
Just means an advanced buyer might do more thorough investigations.
And be completely satisfied when all measures are exhausted and passed.

we all spend our time and money in different ways.

OK...I have added 3 more pictures on the photobucket link showing the Block Casting Number, The "400" Casting, and I sanded and rubbed the area you indicated and did not find any evidence of previous stamping.



http://s1115.photobucket.com/albums/...rotter54/70TA/

It takes years and years and hundreds of various specimens to get a good grip on block stampings. Too much for a crash course all in one shot over the internet.
Not many here are in tune with all this.

The EUN being in synch means very little. It mostly follows the dating, and the dating is undisturbed and within reason. Although on the tight side.
And we have no way to document your EUN.

It is a 70 400 block.
They used that part number in 69 and 70.
Most were 2 bollt main - some 70's were 4 bolt main.

The VIN stamp on that block has no less than 5 different defects.
I have never seen one this messed up that was legit.
(*not saying this one is absolutely bogus - only saying what i said)
We sometimes see them with 1 or 2 defects.
Most have zero defects.

With that in mind - i/me personally - would go to the full extent.

It doesnt look like you did anything in the "Fremont/Atlanta" zone.
It needs to be wiped down with lacquer thinner to the metal.
If anything is hiding - its disquised UNDER the paint - and there is plenty of paint there.
Especially compared to only remnants of factory paint at the rear of the engine.

In this particular case - i would wipe down the whole passenger side front face from the WS code all the way down to the oil pan.

This should be a 4 bolt main block also.
They are not used in many Pontiac applications.
I would remove the oilpan and verify that also.

If i found nothing tampered in the bare cast iron after removing all said paint - and it was a 4 bolt main block - i would be satisfied.

Naturally you are free to do as you wish.

Just supplying first hand knowledge of what goes on, and how to protect yourself.
Money aint cheap , and neither are matching #'s 70 TA 4 speed cars.

Compare that VIN stamp, to this other one.
Run a strait edge under both VIN's in the pictures.
The ghost 8 is not aligned - nor is anything aligned after 1229 - looks like about 4 different characters - 2 of those should have aligned with the rest.

And why is an 8 even in there.

Huge gap after 1229.

The 29N that should have been 20N (done 3/4 the way through 70 model year - not beginning of 70 model year)

The Size and Font of the last 1 and 2 , are not the same Size and Font as the other 1 and 2's. Check them out visually and with measuring calipers.

i specialized in buying and selling Pontiac engines for about 10 years in the 80's and 90's. Have seen all sorts of oddities , and forgeries. Can never be too careful.

This one is either tampered - or the goofed uppest factory VIN stamp i have ever seen.
so its 50-50 at best.

Someday you might have to sell it.
Better to find out as much now, than later.
i don't stand to gain or lose a dime on it, just trying to help as many as i can.


http://forums.maxperformanceinc.com/...5&d=1354678630
http://forums.maxperformanceinc.com/...6&d=1354678697
http://forums.maxperformanceinc.com/...7&d=1354678764

By that i meant wiped down to the bare cast iron with lacquer thinner.

I have been watching this thread and agree with everything BVZ and some others have noted. Thank you for the education on this topic.

I am also curious to see if the wipe down of the passenger side reveals any sign of a stamping. If not, then the curiosity would rise in that the 29N1229 does look factory gang stamped on virgin broach marks, and if no other signs of a factory stamp on the block, Then these thoughts come to mind:

A. The 29N1229 could be a factory boo boo as BVZ has noted, but with only two errors.... the 9 instead of 0 and incomplete final two numbers. Even those two errors are pretty large in my mind, especially the 9. I don't know the process for setting the gang, but in my mind I can see the line worker just changing the sequential last digit or so engine by engine, and never touching the front part of the gang letters.

B. Maybe along the way in the last 40 years someone noticed the flaw and started banging on the block to finish the vin (but of course this doesn't explain the ghost 8).

C. If a restamp why would the restamper put the wrong year in, partially gang and mess up the year and last two digits so badly? That part doesn't add up.

Just my 2 cents.

In the final assembly plant any time we messed up a stamped VIN on the frame the correct process was to "X" out the offending digits and restamp the correct digits directly above (by hand, individually). Not sure if the same procedure was used or required in the engine plant.

The block shown here (with the phantom 8) - that's pretty messy. Doesn't look legit to me.

K

New pictures posted. I rubbed and fine sanded for a couple hours. I didn't discover any other markings. I'm still of the thinking that it's the original block. And I agree with 165th's logic of why would someone restamp an incorrect # on the block. It's probably doesn’t matter at this point since the owner didn't accept my offer. I'm certainly not comfortable upping my offer since I am reluctant to own another "storied" car anyway. Thanks everyone again for all the expert input...much appreciated.

http://s1115.photobucket.com/albums/...rotter54/70TA/

Never ran into an "X"ed out VIN on a '68-79 Pontiac V8. Have carefully examined an obscene amt of blocks in original cars, in partscars, at swappers, at machinists, friend's collections. For the decade plus I had a core deal going on 400 Pontiacs, used a Forney wire wheel on face of each Pontiac block to reveal the partial VIN's of every one I brought in. When sold, I noted the date cast, ASM number, partial VIN, & if block had ever been bored. All in old logbooks.

On several blocks in original cars, I have ran across two partial VIN numbers, one laid over the other at an angle. It took careful cleaning & study with magnifying glass to get all of the digits of the 1st partial VIN.

400guy, imo, it's a good deal the seller did not take your offer.

FWIW, I would expect the likelihood of engine serial no. (MUN) errors to be low. The Pontiac engine plant only built Pontiac V8s so the MUNs were always in the same location and sequential. The vehicle VIN stamps on the block were added at final assembly just prior to the engine placement in the chassis. At all plants there were a variety of engines and / or chassis (Norwood for example had Pontiac V8s, Chevy 6s, small blocks and big blocks, at VN it was even more varied as they built both A and F cars). The probability for variation in location and misstamps would be much higher at final assembly, as locations varied alot as well as numbering sequence, as cars were not run down the line in exact VIN sequence in those days, like they are today.
As to this vehicle in question, it looks odd that the last two digits were restamped, and very poorly. The "original" stamp looks to be "29N122918". Now if this were the actual original vehicle, the odds that an owner of "20N122912" would later come across the 29122918 block and restamp it (so poorly) are about NIL. Probably an in plant screw up but I have never seen one done so poorly, they are usually restamped with a simple restrike, but I try to never say "never"!

The "Fremont/Atlanta" zones are still uncovered. Not known for sure if any evidence is waiting under that paint or not.

One scenario that "could" apply - and usually does on older restamps -
majority of folks have no idea what all the data even means.
They just try to mimic stuff from another block they have seen. Usually that block is of different vintage or of different plant. etc
Have seen some wackies at swap meets and on internets.

Maybe they found access to a 7 place gang stamp - then goofedly tried to do the last 2 digits by hand. Too much specualtion to list all possibles or even try to explain this mess. Its on the verge of retardation its so screwed up.
I cant work within that aura of confine.

And the fact that a first day rookie was on the job that day doing VIN stamps is also a chance. But he really went overboard on this example.

I have my own "best chance" theory that involves this beginning as a factory goof with a day 1 clutz who installed the 9 by pure rush / stupidity. With the same rush and stupidity either left out the last 2 digits - or didnt install them right and they fell out before he whacked it. This is IF nothing was found when full face was bare metal. But it really looks to have had more tamperings since it left the factory - perhpaps in another car.

A DMV inspector of the day and time would have red flagged one of this nature if it had gotten involved in a theft related or chop shop scenario.

In the end, one could convince themself this is the born with block if they wanted to - but good luck and best wishes convincing all others when time to resale comes up.

This is a scenario where the block would be more believable if it were actually modern day restamped by a pro - than as it is now. :eek: :2cents:

It does appear to be a genuine 70 WS from some car in 1970. At minimum.
Just a shame it has those defects. Hard Luck Hard Sale

X out VIN Example
 

Here is a pic of an X out VIN like Keith discussed. This is on a 71 455 HO GTO motor tha i pickup in Detroit 25 years ago. I certainly thank 400Guy for putting this out for discussion. I can see the factory screwing this up that bad. A forger would have done a better job! I too see that they struck the new numbers with larger numbers.

By the way if this block belongs to someones 71GTO 455HO, Let me know.

I am going to revive this thread because this car has come up for sale again and I am looking at it.

Like the OP posted, the VIN stamping on the block was an immediate red flag for me. I have not looked at the car in person yet, but saw this issue in the photos that the owner sent to me. I found this thread by doing a VIN search on the internet.

In reading through this entire thread, it appears that the majority here feel this is about a 50/50 shot of being the original engine. I have thought this through and came up with some questions that may clarify this a little better.

1) If this is a restamp of the block code, why would someone restamp a block with WS when that code was not used in 1969, especially if the EUN number falls in line for 1970?

2) If this is a restamp of the partial VIN, why would someone stamp it for 1969 when according to 2manyTA's, the block casting date is May of 1970, well past the date of any 1969 production?

3) Can anyone verify if the 1969 VIN would actually match up with a known production of a 1969 Firebird?

I am looking forward to thoughts on these questions, especially with the knowledge that some of the posters on this forum have!

FWIW I have seen MANY 1970 Birds ( from 6 cyl to Ra cars) built from 12C to 04D that have a "9" in the Vin stamped on the firewall , NOT a correct"0"
I believe some of the Engine stamping issues happened due to the fact that Pontiac built engines for the 1970 model year cars many months before 1970 production began.
They were also building "69" engines at same time.
I am pretty sure they had issues with the "0" all over the place.. Broken stamps, missing stamps, not enough stamps.
On THIS car, since its been gone over already, what I would do is drain the oil, let it sit, and SCOPE it . Even with the partial windage tray ( if its on there), you should be able to see if its a 4 bolt.
If it is, Its probably original as rest of numbers seem to indicate It is.
That screw up in stamping looks a but much for a re stamp.
If you have ever seen the last SD built ( yellow car) , that engine stamp(s) is a disgrace and far exceeds this one.
Good luck.. :)

although I don't think it has been mentioned in this thread, I believe that extended 1969 model year cars were being built - at least they were for the Firebird;
I believe the change over happened in January.

I re-read this thread, and had guessed that if nothing else looked out of place, odds are it was a stamping error.

I would wager that no one who was restamping a block would stamp a 1970 model year engine as a "9", and no one stamping an engine for a 1969 vehicle would use a 1970 casting.

Your point is exactly the questions I asked above.

Owner decided that I had too many questions and that he was going to sell to someone else. I am sure the car will resurface again as it is supposedly headed for Nebraska.

70 TA Block stamp question
 

I recently purchased this car from Dave Hall at Restore A Musclecar in Lincoln, Nebraska. Just to close the loop on this thread I verified this car is legit all numbers match date codes correlate to build date of car. She is legit. Pics attached, including four bolt mains.

Still doesn't jive right.
Engine and Trans get stamped by the same person with the same gang stamp on the assembly line.

Hard to make sense out of one stamp being 29N and one being 20N from same guy using the same gang stamp.
The Trans stamp looks more like the offender in this case.

I just picked up a 71 Trans Am with the original WC 455 HO. The last digit should be a 1 and its a 0.