[1969 Ram Air]

Both of my 69's have "weak" two digit engine codes so I agree, it's possible that a previous owner wanted the YZ to stand out better for people to see it. Also, one of my VIN stamps isn't centered on the block and all the numbers didn't get stamped, so the worker simply moved the punch over another inch and stamped it again.

[1967Clone]

$20K and reserve not met?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

[The Boss]

Originally Posted by mmarx

Does the EUN line up with build date? Block cast date is K219...

Mike

It would appear to, however there is a Baltimore built IV Judge WW block which doesn't fit with this.

http://www.wallaceracing.com/cgi-bin/eun.cgi

Different question however, has anybody ever had a VIN stamp that begins with anything other than a 2 ?

[Tellyshavilli]

Originally Posted by The Boss

It would appear to, however there is a Baltimore built IV Judge WW block which doesn't fit with this.

http://www.wallaceracing.com/cgi-bin/eun.cgi

Different question however, has anybody ever had a VIN stamp that begins with anything other than a 2 ?

I did have a block that the vin. was lead with a 1 . Which is definately a mistake as the 2 stands for pontiac application and a 1 stands for chevy. This was a Norwood block and to make it even more strange the block looks it has a camaro vin. as it starts in the 500,000 range way to high for a ta . No boss its not painted orange and could you imagine the owner of the camaro that might have got that motor when he put his foot into it !

[Thunderkiss65]

If you look at the background behind the YZ you can see the block has been peened. Its not smooth behind those letters. Someone erased the old letters with a hammer.

[RicksGTO]

Telli, could the block you are talking about with the 5xx,xxx vin be from '72 since the Firebird that year started at 500,000?
As said above, the partial VIN on the Judge block should start with a "2", not the extra "0". I looked at that several times before it hit me. The normal format of 20Bxxxxxx contains the normal nine digits and the Judge blocks partial VIN contains ten, of course that is my opinion.

[The Boss]

Originally Posted by Tellyshavilli

I did have a block that the vin. was lead with a 1 . Which is definately a mistake as the 2 stands for pontiac application and a 1 stands for chevy. This was a Norwood block and to make it even more strange the block looks it has a camaro vin. as it starts in the 500,000 range way to high for a ta . No boss its not painted orange and could you imagine the owner of the camaro that might have got that motor when he put his foot into it !

Of course he could brag to his friends that he had a big block!

[Tellyshavilli]

Originally Posted by RicksGTO

Telli, could the block you are talking about with the 5xx,xxx vin be from '72 since the Firebird that year started at 500,000?
As said above, the partial VIN on the Judge block should start with a "2", not the extra "0". I looked at that several times before it hit me. The normal format of 20Bxxxxxx contains the normal nine digits and the Judge blocks partial VIN contains ten, of course that is my opinion.

My motor is a 1970 ,Jan. date and cast 979914 with a ws code and a 10n500xxx vin. stamped on bottom , The stamp was either set for a camaro by mistake or he was drunk.
You are correct on the Judge it has a extra 0 leading the vin. stamp. But just like my block as an example there were a lot of mistakes being made .

[Ram Air IV Jack]

Originally Posted by slowgto

Jason,

I started this post, and I still believe that YZ stamp is not original. Since I can still see the factory machine lines on the block, I already know it wasn't ground down, so measuring the surface does not prove anything to me.

I have seen double stamps before, but in this case there are numerous marks in the block code area, like someone worked on it, to cover up the original stamp. In addition the font is not like the factory one on my car. Look at your YZ next to the one I added in the photo. If it was a factory double stamp, it would at least have the correct font.

I have not questioned the car being a Judge. I'm sure it would sell well with no motor. A buyer will look at it, make their own opinions, and decide what the car is worth on their own. Don't worry too much about the chit chat on the internet.

-Doug

I think the photos Doug posted here says it all. You be the judge.

[The Boss]

NOT THE ONLY ONE!

Sorry guys, just got a photo (thanks Brian) on another 70 WS block from a Baltimore Judge - sorry for the blurry picture, but you can clearly see there is a digit "0" before the 2.

My apologies for raising any doubt.

I can post a better picture when he gets it back from the machine shop.

[The Boss]

EUN is close too - 0323056 I think?

L109 Block casting date.

[bop-restoration]

This is pretty interesting find on here. 2x cars within days of each other being built in the same factory.


1970 Sierra Yellow Judge

Baltimore Built Judge YZ code
UEN 0301914
Date of Block K219 November 21 1969



Baltimore Built Judge WS Code
EUN 0323056?
Date of Block L109 December 10 1969

Both VIN stampings with a 0 in front of the VIN.


Would love see some more proof of the Baltimore car stampings out there!!!!

A huge thanks to those of you who truly are trying to find the answers to these riddles out there. There has to be more of these out there still, please send us some pics.


And by the way, i am not a newbie by any means to this site, i just got a new ID that coincides with my business name, before i chimed in here the other day. I have been into this long before the internet was ever used.

I wouldn't be on here defending the authenticity of our 1970 Judge Convertible unless i was sure it was not a forgery, this Judge wouldn't be worth spending years in jail for.

Jason
B.O.P. Restoration
317 374 7105
www.bop-restoration.com

[74SDformula]

I do not believe anyone here has questioned that this is a "real" Judge. Rather from "our" experience the block stamping looks to be "tampered with". It may very well be the "numbers matching" block but the block code, in my humble opinion, has been screwed with. Here is another photo of what I believe to be an unmolested block stamping.

[robz]

Would someone really trying to change the engine code do such a crappy job at it (making it that obvious)??? I also think it was either done at the factory or one of the previous owners making it more visible....

On a different note, I think JasonD should buy and restore it just like that Oshawa Judge he just finished...

[1969 Ram Air]

I don't believe the factory would take the time to "hammer down" the first stamp. But, it does look like there is a "Y" under there. I've seen some pitiful restamps, so who knows what people are capable of doing.

[baron_]

Noone else gets tired of people threatening libel left and right?
Ridiculous.

[Mr_GTO]

Interesting car.

[da judge]

I'd love to see that picture of the girl first owner in the high school parking lot.

[JLHarper]

I've got a BALTIMORE built 70 JUDGE:

YZ eun: 0301551

Shipped 2-12-70.

Have to get more info, dont remember. Think its J and K on most eng components.

[BLKBRD]

I would question the stamping. I've got a block with a correct EUN and application stamping, but incorrect VIN stamping for the associated date code. Bottom line; someone tried to create a replacement block, but didn't take it all the way. I spent years trying to authenticate my block and eventually determined that it was not the original. I was able to determine that it was restamped with original factory GM stamps by an individual known to posses a complete set of vintage factory stamps.

Sometimes it doesn't pay to do your homework!!!