[Steve Hoog]

Is that just a smart ass comment, or are you going to make a point?

[Rzepka_R]

Guys,

I know of three 1966 blocks with the following....

L 15 65 -- 2353xx
B 20 66 -- 3478xx
B 26 66 -- 4099xx

Thing is, it's an extra interesting thing to know, that in general lower casting dates will have lower engine sequence numbers, but the month to month rate of engine manufacturing probably changed greatly from the begining of the year to the end of the production year. With the rough numbers we used before I'm sure early in the production year those monthly rate were maybe even double that.. A low casting date block could always have a higher sequence number, compared to another, as it may have sat around for awhile before getting machined. About the only thing you can bet on as a sure thing is a late casting code shouldn't have a very low sequence number.

Problem is when we get around to seeing how this sequence number would help us in a situation where we are trying to figure out if everything is correct, it really doesn't, the block casting date really tells you more.. If you have the Protect-o-Plate or PHS with it listed then it's as simple as seeing if it matches, but if you don't there isn't a single reason why someone would restamp a block with numbers just for fun, they'd only do it to match PHS or the Protect-o-Plate info they have and there are so many engine sequence numbers per day that you'd never be able to look at a date and prove what the number should be. So if someone has a correctly date coded block that they re-stamp to match the long lost original block sequence number, you'll never be able to know with any certainty that it was re-stamped by looking at numbers and matching it to other known numbers.. I suppose the only thing this knowledge would help us with was if someone re-stamped a block and made up fake paper work with the engine sequence number on it and it was a late block casting code and yet the engine sequence number they chose to stamp on the block was a very low number.. Chances are that someone would make the fake paperwork match the original engine sequence number on the block and not something they picked out of the air.. Probably not explaining myself well, but the sequnce number's only use is if you have the Protect-o-Plate or some PHS to match it to, otherwise it's a redundant piece of information that the block date code does a better job of helping you to determine if something is correct or not..

With people here saying they have had PHS paperwork in the past with the engine number on it, the one thing we all would need to watch for was someone that claims to have gotten the PHS years ago and they really have a copy that they doctored to have that number on it. When we'd get the PHS, we'd simply think they are now hidding it and would have no way of trusting that individuals papers.. Thing is the only thing we can know for sure is the block casting dates would need to make sense.. In a way, PHS is helping us out with this by not making it public.. Once it's public someone can easily re-stamp a correctly date coded engine and make it the "original" one and there would be no way to prove it happened.. At the same time not making it public doesn't keep any of us from getting taken for a ride. I completely agree with what some others have said, the safe way to do this that would help everyone is for PHS to simply answer a yes or no to a request to check if an engine sequence number is correct for the car.. We can't stop a soul from having a Protect-o-Plate and re-stamping another block to make it "original", but we can stop someone from ordering PHS paperwork to create such a block. If you do not have the Protect-o-Plate you'd have to write PHS thousands and thousands of times to pick the correct one out of thin air, but if you have what you think it the original and don't have the Protect-o-Plate then it's be completely safe for you to tell PHS that number and they say yes or no.. Any potential buyer of that car could do the same..

Happy Holidays,
Rich

[dancolkate]

- OPH,
Have anything valuable to offer?

- MUN task force,
We cannot be deterred. Last time I checked, it was a free country.
Now how do we get more exposure (MORE MUNS) outside this thread?

[dr-doug]

post something in the lobby

[md1twal3]

Question about this statement..."In a way, PHS is helping us out with this by not making it public.. Once it's public someone can easily re-stamp a correctly date coded engine and make it the "original" one and there would be no way to prove it happened.. At the same time not making it public doesn't keep any of us from getting taken for a ride. I completely agree with what some others have said, the safe way to do this that would help everyone is for PHS to simply answer a yes or no to a request to check if an engine sequence number is correct for the car.. We can't stop a soul from having a Protect-o-Plate and re-stamping another block to make it "original", but we can stop someone from ordering PHS paperwork to create such a block"

Let me be the "devil's advocate" here...What if I am a fellow with a rare combination and am trying to locate my original block for my legally owned car? Without the EUN, it seems that I am still faced with the inablility to do so, correct? (I can't count on the VIN identifying it for me, because they are already restamped)

In being the devil's advocate, I would also really like to understand why a fully correct and accurate restamped block (including the correct EUN) is really that much different than "original". A guy in our hobby can patch a body back together with what ever pieces from what ever car and it can be deemed original, why does the Pontiac community put such different clout in the driveline?....especially when a majority of the parts carry the same part number.

At least if the EUN were provided to those that legally own a vehicle, they could either confirm that what they have is correct, or "create" what is correct...

Again, just looking at it from a different angle, so don't tear me apart

[Steve Hoog]

Did anyone contact the POCI about this matter?

I know the GTOAA is considering the matter.

[taximan]

md1twal3,

I agree completely. This is exactly what I said in my prior posts.

I can't think of any good reason why PHS would have a problem with someone sending them a VIN and/or EUN for a particular car. They obviously are very happy to take your $35 and send you the build sheet, but they can either confirm or deny that the EUN submitted is correct for that car.

This way they are not releasing any EUN's, yet are helping Pontiac enthusiasts by informing them if the EUN is correct or not.

By not confirming or denying correct EUN's they are basically only protecting re-stampers, and penalizing unsuspecting consumers.

Can anyone on this forum or at GTOAA/POCI get Jim M. to discuss this ?

['ol Pinion head]

Originally Posted by steved400

Is that just a smart ass comment, or are you going to make a point?

Steve, Its a logical response... not one laced with conjecture & bullsh!t.
Remember... I'm not the one pushing the "argument" that Mattison or anyone else has the assembly numbers for '69 & later Pontiac V8's

[Steve Hoog]

What is the 17 years too late?

Building a database is probably a comical undertaking, but heck I'll try.

But the 17 year things, what is that?

['ol Pinion head]

Building an assembly number/date casting/VIN database today, one can't trust all the info. One needs to estabish a criteria for what info can be accepted. Why... too many engines been pieced back together, w/o respects to how (what original dated castings) were actually used. For many years, as long as the date was close, a buyer was happy, & an engine was assembled. Many of the cars that carried these "stock" engines have been sold & they're now represented as all numbers matching

Apologize that the 17 year comment was not that lucid. Will say this... maybe you too, should have started writing the casting dates, assembly numbers, & body build & plant numbers down in the mid to late 80's. Not just numbers off the rarer engines & cars, but if hardcore into late 60's & early 70's Pontiacs, the numbers off nearly every original '67-72 Pontiac one ran across. By doing so one has a clearer view of what Pontiac did.

[dancolkate]

OPH,
Funny how you refer to them as "assembly numbers". LOL

Also funny how you refer to this as an "argument". LOL

We''re just a bunch of guys that are obiously very much interested in the hobby. Who are you to jump into the post and imply that our chat equates to "conjecture & bullsh!t"?

If you KNOW this to be the case, please speak.....otherwise....

[Steve Hoog]

OPH

I agree that this should have been long ago by many people like myself, there was no forethought on my part.

As to the accuracy; or maybe honesty of giving up the numbers here in the forum, I would imagine the majority of people will be honest. Even if we can only gather a hundred engine numbers for 1969, I believe a pattern may develop. Even with an error or two.

Just have to see.

[dancolkate]

Steve,
I agree with you that a pattern will develop. I'll be on the lookout for as many EUN's etc. on-line and at upcoming Pontiac car shows and cruise nights.

Regarding OPH statement about collecting the info 17 years ago. This is B.S. in it's stinkiest form.

What about someone that was 11 years old during the 80's? How would an 11 year old kid have collected this information? And since it was impossible for him to do so, now he's S.O.L. and the folks with the answers don't see any reason to help.

All the more reason that we figure it out.

[Rzepka_R]

md1twal3,

About your first thought... I suppose if PHS has the numbers and would give a yes or no then you could still go out searching for your original block on that rare car. It would only stop you from placing an ad asking for it outright by the number, but if was such a rare combo there wouldn't be to many out there to ask PHS if it's right or wrong about. In other words if I'm looking for a WS block for a 1966 GTO and I need a casting date before a certain time, I don't think it would be an overwelming number of people telling me they have one that I'd need to ask PHS about. If you did place an ad for a WS block with a casting date before March and a sequence number of 345678 and you were willing to pay big money for what-ever the reason, you just opening the door for someone to create such a block that you are looking for..

About your second thought... In many ways I agree, what difference does it really make.. This is just my opinion, but the only reason it would be important to me was to have a better feeling about a car not being yanked out of a yard and brought back to life with just about everything being new.. I'd like to think my 1966 GTO is worth just a little more having lived a good life where it still has all it's parts that it came with from day one.. At the same time, I'm in the process of getting mine painted and to me that means total tear-down. So when it's all done it will be sitting there in a certain condition. If another car that needed everything and was pulled from a yard is sitting next to mine and is now in the same exact condition --- well, how do you put a price on which is really worth more? They are both the same now, it's just mine didn't need next to anything to get there, yet the other did..

In the long hull it's just another piece to a puzzle that tries to rate one car a little better then another and I suppose that isn't worth a thing until you want to sell it..

In my case, I'd like to think my interior would make the car worth more then the one sitting next to it. The carpet is new as the original started to get really fuzzy (but I have it, along with the part/date tag that was on it). The headliner was great, but there wasn't any way to blast the whole car for paint and save it (again though, I have it, can't remember if it's date coded with ink stampings on the back or not). My seats, door panels and everything else is all the stuff that came on the car originally other then the bottom of the one seat which I spent years looking for another orginal in perfect shape as mine had a tear. Don't know about other year GTO's but you can spot a repro interior from a mile away on a '66, the pleets aren't as defined on the new stuff..

So if I ever lost my senses and decided to sell, all these things combined with original sheet metal (you can tell by date codes there too on some parts) and all the drivetrain casting dates lining up great all start to paint a picture for a potential buyer that this is something just a little better then something that was pulled from a yard and rebuilt. Having a way to prove, without doubt, that the engine is the actual one it drove out of the dealership with is just one more piece to that puzzle.

If things keep going as they are with prices, things like this will all become just a little more important when trying to rate one car against another, but again, all worthless unless you're selling it..

Happy Holidays!
Rich

[Baron Von Zeppelin]

The Engine Unit Number/No. (that's what they call it on the billing history and invoices is the only reason why I like that term) is a "One Car - One Engine - Specific Number". Certain people don't need that info or care about it, or understand it's signifigance in todays $$$ Car Market. It also would help authenticate many Cars that are already owned and un-restored but have questionable dating but with proper VIN on block. It's a great "checks and balances" number that few have had access to in the past 35+ years that these Cars have been rambling around and taking different forms. It's nothing but a good thing for it to be authenticated and documentable.

Far too many variables due to various foundry locations, various manufacturing plant locations, unknown number of possible defective rejects, service replacement allotments, and even more....

A range could be determined to a certain +/- margin of error. But without the supporting documents to show the direct link from VIN to EUN the number is only serving half-task. I think I have passed across another man's work on the PY board and he seemed fairly dialed in and had some interesting engine production total logs revolving around plants and unit numbers. I will try to contact him. To start from scratch right here on our own would take year(s).

A "range" that could narrow it down to being from a particular plant in a particular time frame could perhaps help expose a March built California Car with a properly dated replacement engine that originally came from a Car that was built at another plant and now had a "non-corresponding EUN" for that assembly plant. That's about the very best WE could make it. Still wouldn't be gospel.

But here is the bottom line. There is no room for margin/error when you need an EXACT NUMBER. The documented archives where one engine unit number applies directly to only one Car are the only answer that counts as "gospel".

If you don't want/need to know your documentable EUN - you're already there friend. But some of us do, we aren't done with all of our "buying/trading/stepping-up/collecting" of Fine Pontiacs, yet.

[johnta1]

I have made a web page for collecting these numbers.

EUN web page

When I get a few entries, I'll make a page showing the results.
If any one wants this info also, email me.

[Steve Hoog]

John

Heck yeah, thank you.

[dancolkate]

- I''ve posted the request for more data in The Lobby.

- John, are you doing your own html? Can the info from your web page be easily/accurately exported to Excel?

[johnta1]

Yes, I'm doing my own.
It comes to me as text, could put it in a csv file probably.
If you want, I could have the info cc'd to you.

[Steve Hoog]

John

When you post what data you collect, let me know. I also was going to load an Excel file on my server, I can mirror the data you collect.