[Mike Huff]

I have been researching my 400 engine block as follows:

Stamped Block code: WW
Stamped Production code: 0719693
Casting # 9790071
Date Code: D309
Stamped VIN code 29X155150

Please correct me if I'm wrong on any of these, but WW is the 1969 RAIV 400 cid 370hp, built April 30 1969. The "X" in the VIN denotes the KC Kansas Assy Plant (the VIN stamp is not very deep and only the top portion of the X is visible).

Currently, this rare engine is in my 1969 Trans Am Replica. Unfortunately, it has the 48 casting heads (not correct), but the distributor is #1111253 dated 9D24 (very close to the block casting date).

I would really like to know if this car still exists or it was junked. Any information that anyone would give would be very much appreciated.

Thanks,

[2manyponchos]

9790071 is typically the standard cast in number on the block for 2-bolt main std 400 engines.

A 69 Ram Air IV block should have the cast "0071" ground off and stamped "2506" in it's place to designate a different assembly number which was with the 4-bolt main caps.

Just my opinion. Could this have been missed at the engine plant? Possible, but not likely in my opinion.

[Bermuda Blue]

you can send the partial VIN to http://www.phs-online.com/index.html and they will send you a copy of the original invoice.

there is also a car/block search site here http://www.wallaceracing.com/lostsearch.htm

post pictures of block (especially main caps) and more info can be provided

[Mike Huff]

2manyponchos (NO SUCH THING AS 2MANY!!!) Replied:

"A 69 Ram Air IV block should have the cast "0071" ground off and stamped "2506" in it's place to designate a different assembly number which was with the 4-bolt main caps."

This is the 1st I've heard of the factory grinding off and restamping the cast #. Mine has not been ground and stamped. Very interesting, but would make it easy to do a knock off forgery job!!!!!

It has been pointed out that the 69 RAIV should be a 506 casting, which I had seen on several other GTO websites. I have VERY CAREFULLY analyzed the stampings and the original machine marks from block manufacture (I am a Tool & Die Maker and know machining very well) and they appear to be in tact and not altered. The engine code and Production # are very good, not too deep and not uneven. They are very legible with no signs of later machining or restamp.
On the VIN stamp (Stamped VIN code 29X1@$150), the 1st 3 characters aren't very clear, only the top 1/2 of the characters are good. I have extrapolated them as follows 2= Pontiac, 9=1969 verified by the casting date code, X (at 1st I thought that it was a Y, but that didn't work for the factory codes) but the last 6 digits (Serial #) are very good.

I found on Wallace Racing's Pontiac Engine Code Search:
1969 400 370 HP WW M 10.75 041 722 1-4 7029273 RA IV Block Casting # 9792506 / 9790071.
According to Wallace the 9790071 block was also used for WW the RAIV.

They also show the 071 block for the WH RAIV 345 HP:
1969 400 345 HP WH M 10.75 041 722 1-4 7029273 RA IV Block Casting # 9792506 / 9790071.
Also, at Pontiac Power9790071 1968-69 400 265, 290, 330, 340, 350, 366 2&4-bolt.

They show that the 071 can be in both 2 & 4 bolt main configuration. I have not pulled the pan to check whether it is 2 or 4 bolt.

This engine was in my 69 TA Replica when I bought it and if they were going to restamp, they surely would have stamped it with the TA WH RAIV code..... Very curious!!!
Frankly, when I boought the TA, I was thrilled that it was an 071 block with a good date code (correct for a 69 TA)!!!! I realy didn't care about the WW stamping at the time, but since I have started researching, it has raised more questions than answers!!!Just speculating.... due to the low production #'s of the RAIV, could it be possible that they ran out of the 506 castings and due to time constraints used an 071 block for this order? I know for a fact that these things did happen occasionally back in the day. This might explain why most sites only show the 506 casting.

It is exactly this issue that I have posted this request for information and have very guarded optimism.

Thanks for all of your help!!!

[Tellyshavilli]

No gtos or firebirds or tas came out of x kansas plant . Prob. 2 bolt block that was stamped wrong . Check caps or if you can't post pic of front of block . Never heard of or seen a raiv block with wrong cast number . I've seen and owned a couple .

[Mike Huff]

I may be wrong on the KCK plant. On the VIN stamp (Stamped VIN code 29X1@$%50), the 1st 3 characters aren't very clear, only the top 1/2 of the characters are good. I have extrapolated them as follows 2= Pontiac, 9=1969 verified by the casting date code, X (at 1st I thought that it was a Y, but that didn't work for the factory codes) but the last 6 digits (Serial #) are very good.

Again, I haven't pulled the pan to see if it's 2 or 4-bolt mains and really don't want to unless I am absolutely sure of what I have. This engine is in a virtually showroom new car from top to bottom!!

I have attached a couple of pics for consideration.





I have considered contacting PHS, but I'm not sure if they could work with just the last 6 digits of the VIN (that is the only part of the VIN that I am absolutely sure of).

I appreciate all of your help and comments. The rusty old gear head community is our greatest asset!!!

[Bermuda Blue]

i find it unlikely that a 69 WW block would not have the 2506 "casting" number. You have to look at the main caps. this block is suspect in my opinion but i am no expert.

Here's a trick the numerous thieves in the pontiac hobby employ. Take a run of the mill 1969 WA block. Fill the A with epoxy and stamp a W in front of the existing W and voilà, you can sell a rare and valuable RAIV block for a handsome profit.

The Boss is very knowledgeable, What do you think Boss?

[Mike Huff]

I wholly agree that it is very unlikely that a RAIV would not be the 504 casting. I wouldn't be talking about it if it weren't for the Wallace Racing's Pontiac Engine Code Search showing the 071 casting for the RAIV.

I am very well aware of the restamp scam, as I am old!!! The problem is that when I bought the car, the seller made no mention of the RAIV engine. If you were going to restamp, I would think that the seller would hype it up to get more money and they didn't!!! After all that is the whole reason for restamping!!! Also, if they did restamp, why not restamp the 69 TA WH RAIV code? They were even more rare than the GTO RAIV (only 46 built).

None of this makes any sense.

I really don't want to pull the pan to check the caps unless I am pretty sure what I have.

Does anyone know if PHS can identify with only the last 6 digits of the VIN?

Thanks Again,

Mike

[Bermuda Blue]

Originally Posted by Bermuda Blue

you can send the partial VIN to http://www.phs-online.com/index.html and they will send you a copy of the original invoice.

PHS will work with partial vin which is stamped on the block. you could send them an email and ask if they can search using the last 6 digits.

[The Boss]

I'd be skeptical too for several reasons. No car that would have received it came out of that plant, wrong casting number and to my eye the "WW" is both two small in size and the center legs of the W appear to only go 3/4 of the way up - same as a WS or a WT block. All WW stamps have full height centers.

Judge for yourself - sorry it's not larger.

[Tellyshavilli]

Hey boss. Uncle junk has one of those 455 experimental blocks stamped GFY can u give us your expert opinion on that one to ? Maybe junk can post a picture . I believe their working on a Rizzo report as we speak.

[gregsgtos2]

As a previous owner of the legendary GFY block- I am 100% sure that it doesnt mean Good For You. This is a one of experimental and social changing block. Made by Pontiac for the armchair restoration experts.

[The Boss]

Isn't that block in Philly?

Haven't seen it - just heard the story. LOL!

[gregsgtos2]

Now residing in Wisconsin.

[Tellyshavilli]

Yes in wisc. And word is he's working feverioushly to get it to pass rizzo report

[The Boss]

Aren't you supposed to be in school?

[Tellyshavilli]

Don't you have some roofs to shovel off . I don't know who's worse to deal with 5th graders or py experts. Just give us your analysis on the GFY and don't concern yourself with what's going on over here

[The Boss]

Based on that response - I think the GFY is exactly the advice you should be taking right now.

As for the WW - would you agree it is somewhat diminutive in stature? Or to put it another way, if it was on a date, and it got to that moment, the girl would say "Oh that's nice." but wouldn't want to play with it?

[Mike Huff]

The Boss:

I'd be skeptical too for several reasons. No car that would have received it came out of that plant, wrong casting number and to my eye the "WW" is both two small in size and the center legs of the W appear to only go 3/4 of the way up - same as a WS or a WT block. All WW stamps have full height centers.

Thanks for the prompt response. OK, so the consensus is that this is a restamp. Frankly, my inquiry is not about the money. If this was a true RAIV block, I was going to start looking for either the original car or another GTO to wrap around it. I am more about preserving than making money. I just love these cars!!!!

Again, I want to thank you for the input and I appreciate your willingness to share your expertise with the community.

Have a Great Day,

Mike

[Tellyshavilli]

This block has touched off a lot of hostility or is if just the weather