Opinions on a distributor stamping

[BCreekDave]

Does this look like a re-stamp?
It looks like the diameter is original.

[HawkX66]

I'm not an expert, but I don't like it for a few reasons. I have the diameter from my 1111498 if you want me to compare it.

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/469/32113890101_d7a74edb56_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/QVN5Gn)

[the427king]

Looks good known date too

[Thomas]

It looks like it is etched and not stamped.

[BCreekDave]

I was trying to compare it to a known good one here. It looks kind of etched too, but I guess some look this way. Maybe when they get some age and then are cleaned?

[clopo]

Why is the 1 different on the 019 on the first one as compared to the one on BCreekDaves 019 stamp

[BCreekDave]

Why is the 1 different on the 019 on the first one as compared to the one on BCreekDaves 019 stamp
Good catch. It is the same as the 1 in the date code.

[the427king]

Heres one with the same raised 0 after the 2 ...first 3 digits are unlike either here.

[BCreekDave]

Safe statement to make that the "1" style could float from the date to the part number in any of the locations in the part number?

[the427king]

I have had several real 1111437s with the first three 1s with a tail and base.... Im guessing if the restamper had 3 1s ,hed have a 4th without going to a different font since all valuable distributors need 3 to 5 1s.......

[BCreekDave]

Here's another data point on this. Exact same date and the same fonts as the first one. I'm thinking it legit.

[DW31S]

Not to hijack, and I’m no expert either, but that 1111498 looks like the “9” started life as a “3”.

[cheveslakr]

The real 9 should have a distinct radius on top and bottom where the round meets the tail.

[HawkX66]

Not to hijack, and I’m no expert either, but that 1111498 looks like the “9” started life as a “3”.
Uh, no... And the 9s are one of the reasons I don't like the OPs. Might be the angle of the pic though.

[x77-69z28]

Dave, is this for your car? I'm no expert on stamping S so I will let the experts decide. The date seems early for an 04B car. My 04D Van Nuys car has an 0C18 distributor.
Buddy

[BCreekDave]

Yeah, its for my car.
It may be a bit early for an 04B. Not sure what the cutoff would be. There was a guy with a 69 04B that had an original dizzy that he said was a December date. Since production didn't get rolling on the 70's until January there may be a bit of latitude there. My original starter is a January build.
An 0C18 would be ideal.

I also ran across this post on NastyZ28:
http://nastyz28.com/threads/1112019-dist.144801/page-2#post-1513685

[L78steve]

It is my opinion that the 019 has been restamped.

[bbbentley]

Not to hijack, and I’m no expert either, but that 1111498 looks like the “9” started life as a “3”.

Apology for answering hijack, but...From a long time observer of “499” distributors, I have noticed this type “9” that you speak about. If you look, say on eBay, at “499” authentic dizzys, the 9 looks the same as this “498”

[firstgenaddict]

Here's another data point on this. Exact same date and the same fonts as the first one. I'm thinking it legit.


This distributor has the same characteristics for the NUMBER 2... short tail and seems like an abbreviated edge on the curve in the 2 as well.

[BCreekDave]

Well right or wrong its mine now. I won the auction at 560. One other bidder. No time for buyers remorse. I actually thought it would go higher.
It was the last part on my list. Thanks for everyone who participated with comments.
70lt1z28@nastyz28

[x77-69z28]

Being as there was two distributors with the exact same stamping, I would say it's legit, a tad early, but legit.
Buddy

[L16pilot]

Good score Dave :)