What do you think of this pad?

[1969z280]

A friend of mine is interested in the following Corvette with this stamp pad. I have my own opinion but, I wanted to see what you guys thought before I taalked to him. Thanks in advance for your opinions, Ed

http://i972.photobucket.com/albums/ae209/meagan59/PICSFROMSELLER6.jpg

[1969z280]

Here's a better view.

http://i972.photobucket.com/albums/ae209/meagan59/blockvinandid.jpg

[m22mike]

Broch marks look kind of heavy... http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif, compared to a some I have seen.

JMO Mike

[MosportGreen66]

stamped.

[PeteLeathersac]

Broaches and stampings aside, it looks as if much more was decked off it may expose the waterpump bolt hole?.

http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/hmmm.gif
~ Pete

[SBR]

[ QUOTE ]
stamped.

[/ QUOTE ] I agree

[olredalert]

-----Am always suspect of stampings that are just too straight. As well, if you look at the broaching all the broach-marks are not parallel, and that just cant be.......Bill S

[Mr. Chevy]

Looks Bogus.......

Rich

[crash]

The VIN is stramped into the block and the trans at the same time, so I checked some trans cases for the type of "3" that was used...

I found 2 Muncie main cases as examples...

P9P13(sept 13th 1968) 19S703966
P9H06B(june 6th 1969) 19S731445

Both examples used round top 3"s not flat top 3"s...

I have not seen a Corvette small VIN(1968 and later) use a flat top "3"...

Hope this helps... Crash

[jl8dale]

If you zoom in a little on the vin stamp, I believe I can see the original stamping just above it. Decked and restamped with just the shadow of the original stamp barely visible.

[jl8dale]

Original engine ID is also present on top right of restamped number.

[1969z280]

Crash:

Good call on the trans stamp. Here's the pic and you were right. Thanks to everybody for their input, Ed

http://i972.photobucket.com/albums/ae209/meagan59/TRANSBUILDDATEANDVIN2.jpg