Engine dating question

[hurlbird]

thanks very much. no"8" before the T in the samples you provided? I would have thought there would be one?

[J_Speegle]

thanks very much. no"8" before the T in the samples you provided? I would have thought there would be one?

Most do and that was what was expected but some got missed as evident from the examples. Appears I put in (top one) a Dearborn example. My mistake so I might update that picture with one (both from 68 NJ) with and one without the "8"

[hurlbird]

thank you great info. I appreciate the new pics

[shelbymann1970]

And then we get into the weird stuff. A March built 68 GT350 auto car. Never been apart .All known owners and all owners said original engine not out until the prior owner pulled it and NEVER looked for numbers. Well we did after my friend bought it. All casting numbers are great for the car's assy date and the numbers on the engine match the trans. I repeat-they match each other. The problem? A smaller font size and numbers we've never seen before. Notice the grime that was cleaned off to expose the engine numbers and the trans numbers. We are talking a 302 and auto not a 428 4 speed. Patina said never been out in decades. Sure it isn't "matching numbers" but it is believed by all prior owners stating as such as being the original engine.  3rd pic is an Atlanta 302 J code engine that happened to be date coded right for my old 68 Shelby so it went in it. Notice 1 number is real light in the gang stamp but can be seen with the naked eye.

[Coralsnake]

Have you checked with the club to see if there are any warranty records?

[shelbymann1970]

Have you checked with the club to see if there are any warranty records?

I thought we went through that a few years ago discussing that point  but will check the registry. If it was indeed a warranty issue I wouldn't expect the date codes to be correct for the car especially when the car sold new in May of 1969 over a year later but it could have been a factory issue and corrected before going to AO Smith? Would there actually be records for that?

[CSX4781]

And then we get into the weird stuff. A March built 68 GT350 auto car. Never been apart .All known owners and all owners said original engine not out until the prior owner pulled it and NEVER looked for numbers. Well we did after my friend bought it. All casting numbers are great for the car's assy date and the numbers on the engine match the trans. I repeat-they match each other. The problem? A smaller font size and numbers we've never seen before. Notice the grime that was cleaned off to expose the engine numbers and the trans numbers. We are talking a 302 and auto not a 428 4 speed. Patina said never been out in decades. Sure it isn't "matching numbers" but it is believed by all prior owners stating as such as being the original engine.  3rd pic is an Atlanta 302 J code engine that happened to be date coded right for my old 68 Shelby so it went in it. Notice 1 number is real light in the gang stamp but can be seen with the naked eye.

A friend here owns a 68 GT350 with the original engine,  has those same fonts for the VIN on the block. Everything matched IIRC (when the car was built vs casting date, block casting number,  etc). Car is -14xx. Was actually sold new at Schmidt in Baltimore.

Dave

[J_Speegle]

A friend here owns a 68 GT350 with the original engine,  has those same fonts for the VIN on the block. Everything matched IIRC (when the car was built vs casting date, block casting number,  etc). Car is -14xx. ......

Always a good idea IMO to compare details to other cars same plant and production period since those will be the best. Other plants, years and such really mean little in comparison. With this you can discover patterns and sub patterns if that is the answer.  It's not like the worker, in the example of stamping VINs on engine and transmissions got a different set of stamps to just stamp them for only one car then went back to the "normal" expected stamps.

[Coralsnake]

Warranty work would reflect only what the dealer did if they submitted a claim. The font size is not a concern in my opinion.

Maybe there is a reason the car sat for a year? The dealer could have switched this out before the first owner ever saw it.

I have memos from Northwestern saying they swapped a motor in a new car. This was to satisfy the customer for a warrantied motor. That means someone else ended up with a replacement and probably never knew it.

They also swapped out rear axle gears. Im not saying thats what happened in your example just providing some context

[hurlbird]

the 69 seem to have been stamped all together as a gang.. The 68 seems more free hand to me.

[shelbymann1970]

the 69 seem to have been stamped all together as a gang.. The 68 seems more free hand to me.

The OPPOSITE of what you said. 68 302s are gang stamped while 69 351w are all over the place.

[shelbymann1970]

And then we get into the weird stuff. A March built 68 GT350 auto car. Never been apart .All known owners and all owners said original engine not out until the prior owner pulled it and NEVER looked for numbers. Well we did after my friend bought it. All casting numbers are great for the car's assy date and the numbers on the engine match the trans. I repeat-they match each other. The problem? A smaller font size and numbers we've never seen before. Notice the grime that was cleaned off to expose the engine numbers and the trans numbers. We are talking a 302 and auto not a 428 4 speed. Patina said never been out in decades. Sure it isn't "matching numbers" but it is believed by all prior owners stating as such as being the original engine.  3rd pic is an Atlanta 302 J code engine that happened to be date coded right for my old 68 Shelby so it went in it. Notice 1 number is real light in the gang stamp but can be seen with the naked eye.

A friend here owns a 68 GT350 with the original engine,  has those same fonts for the VIN on the block. Everything matched IIRC (when the car was built vs casting date, block casting number,  etc). Car is -14xx. Was actually sold new at Schmidt in Baltimore.

Dave

Thanks. I understand engine swapping and such but while I don't gamble i'd like to see the odds of both engine and trans being swapped out at same time given diff stamped numbers and why now on  2 cars they are date coded correct. Now my 69 428 SCJ 4 speed Mach1 I bought and all prior owners said original engine. I found no numbers on the block or heads when I bought it(numb matching doesn't mean much to me but original style engine does). May 9 build with a sept  cast block in it. No numbers. Easy, warranty block. Maybe the OO thought the engine was "fixed" when he got it back. But to find both engine and tranny replaced and date codes match up is pretty darn odd. My take is looking at warranty engines they had no stampings on them. But these 2 cars have it both the engine and trans. A mystery we may never find out on. Is it possible for me to get in contact with your friend to compare notes? Thanks. Gary

[Coralsnake]

You seem to be focused on the date codes matching. If it was done early (before being sold) the likely hood the date codes would match would be exponentially higher.

What happens with other displacements might be entirely different. Everything has to be looked at a case y case basis in my opinion. Sometimes you are just not going to be able to explain it.

[shelbymann1970]

You seem to be focused on the date codes matching. If it was done early (before being sold) the likely hood the date codes would match would be exponentially higher.

What happens with other displacements might be entirely different. Everything has to be looked at a case y case basis in my opinion. Sometimes you are just not going to be able to explain it.

+1 as  I agree on that I also think this is one of those cases where we won't be able to figure out what is up. It is the stamped sequence which bewilders me as I've seen enough warranty replacement engines and no numbers on them-or maybe these 2 302 cars are ones with warranty numbers? Again why both engine and trans and not one or the other(stolen drivetrains?) 2 cases now. It is just plain weird.

[shelbydoug]

I own my 68 GT350 sine April 4, 1972.  As far as the engine block being stamped with the chassis serial number, what I found when I pulled out the engine, it was stamped 8  149.

That's it. No T. Only the first three numbers of the Ford number. I didn't record the assembly date at the time.

I have another 68 302 block that has no chassis ID's in it at all.

If you ask me, this is all par for the course for Ford and it just might be that the procedures varied at each assembly plant. That's where the chassis number would have to be applied. Not at the engine assembly plant.

Frankly with Ford's casuality about substituting non-production line parts in service parts as an example, this is just how they worked. They could give a "flying fig" about what Concourse Judges would think today. They'd probably tell you something "off the record of GET A LIFE!" so to speak?