1968 chevy ii l78

[brent396]

Motor stamp ??? What do think if it's good that car is a deal he says paper also https://www.hemmings.com/classifieds/cars-for-sale/chevrolet/chevy-ii/2294424.html

[napa68]

Love the car. The stamp.......not so much.

[L78M22Rag]

Love the car too.

I’ve seen a lot worse stamps, so I’m curious what napa68 and others like or dislike.

[JRSully]

I think the MQ... stamp "could be" real, the Nova/VIN stamp, no. Those #s shown on the Dyno run seem weak for a L78, unless they ran it through the smog and exh manifolds.? Looks pretty clean otherwise

[Supergas990]

The Dyno sheet only shows they ran the motor up to 5,300 rpms. Pretty soft run.

[Bill Pritchard]

I'm no expert, but the '3' and the '4' in the motor's CON VIN stamp look rather unusual to me.

[WILMASBOYL78]

The date stamp for the engine assembly is pretty early...the 68 L78 Novas didn't start hitting the streets until mid-late April. Most of them were produced in June/July...many at that same time the Gibb cars were built.

I will compare the stamping to our original engine and report back. If the car and paperwork are correct, the price is a bargain.

And by the way....if this one doesn't do it for you...give me a call, we have one in the garage looking for a new home :cool2:

-wilma

[68 Chevy II]

Still too many unknowns with the sellers description. Vague on what paperwork is included, and no pics of the trim tag, trans, rear, etc.

Also, the engine stamp is very early for a car with that particular chevy II vin # from the small number of real, original driveline cars I’ve seen in person. The vin stamp is noticeably different to me also.

Might be numbers matching per say but maybe not original driveline.

[WILMASBOYL78]

Our 'born with' original drive-line car was built in early July 1968...engine assembly date is about 40 days later than this date...VIN is about 22,000 higher in sequence.

I still need to compare stampings...photos don't really show any factory broach marks :hmmm:

-wilma

[Hotrodpaul]

Hard to believe that the original motor survived as it was a race car. Big blocks had a tendency to drop valves and destroy blocks and heads.

Paul

[Mr. Chevy]

There are more "numbers matching" cars than ever before... LOL

Rich

[68 Chevy II]

Not going to disclose the exact vin # I'm comparing this to, but this example brent 396 posted is nothing like earlier built cars I have viewed. It's way less than 10s of thousands also, not saying it's a bad car, just the engine stamp pic.

[napa68]

Love the car too.

I’ve seen a lot worse stamps, so I’m curious what napa68 and others like or dislike.

Helmut,

IMO, the assembly stamp is too far back on the pad. I don't think the stamp gang would fit that close to the cylinder head. Certainly, there are others on this site who are better versed in this than myself.

I would treat the car (and price it) as a stamper.

Tim

[mprice]

I have seen a lot of Tonawanda stamps that are as close to the head. ITs my opinion the Tonawanda stamp was hit before the head was on. I wouldn't condemn any car for that alone.

[WILMASBOYL78]

I have seen a lot of Tonawanda stamps that are as close to the head. ITs my opinion the Tonawanda stamp was hit before the head was on. I wouldn't condemn any car for that alone.

I agree about the Tonawanda stampings, being done before the heads were bolted on. But, this pad doesn't seem to have any factory broach marks and the VIN stamp concerns me.

[WILMASBOYL78]

I did a comparison against the factory stampings on our born with engine...there are numerous issues.

In my opinion this is a "stamper"....of course some may see it differently, but based on others I have looked at, that is the way I see it.:scholar:

-wilma