Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Chevrolet / Chevrolet Corvette / January 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Need some assistance on this one 65 Vette Engine?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Nancy Rothschild - 03 Jan 2006 04:32 GMT
327 Long block casting #3782870, Code FOIO4HA, casting date of L304 was
running when removed from car in 1968. Heads casting #3782461, cast dates
E84, they have been removed.  This was in an FI car.....Brian and Nancy
briankmeyer@hotpop.com
WayneC - 03 Jan 2006 05:38 GMT
> 327 Long block casting #3782870, Code FOIO4HA, casting date of L304 was
> running when removed from car in 1968. Heads casting #3782461, cast dates
> E84, they have been removed.  This was in an FI car.....Brian and Nancy
> briankmeyer@hotpop.com

3782870 was a common casting used in the 62-65 timeframe.
Block is not from a vette ("HA" and casting date says it's likely from a
stick shift sedan; 65 FI vette would have been "HG", ...or "HN" if it
had transistorized ignition). Casting date is Dec 30, 1964. Seems like
there is a digit missing from the F0104HA code, recheck the stamping.

3782461 heads were used on all 65 vette small blocks; 1.94 intakes, 1.5
exhaust; cast May 8 in 64.
Nancy Rothschild - 03 Jan 2006 06:56 GMT
Rechecked four times and this is the number for the code.  I know that this
came out of a 65/66 FI car with 2500 miles on it.  Have the police reports,
and that is were the confusion is coming in.  The car was rolled in 66 and
sat in my father's garage for about a year.  He took the motor and
transmission out and it sat in the corner of our shop after a liberal
greesing until his death in 2001.  We were going to sell it, and already
sold the FI unit and manifold and were told that this was not the correct
motor.  Is it possible that Chevy made some concessions in 65/66 or possible
that this motor was used as a replacement for a blown motor?  We do not
know, but the history is a little strange versus records.  I have a 1969 L88
aluminum heads and air in a ragtop........and have the build sheets to prove
it.  Chevy archives say they never built the car.  Anywho, what would the
engine code HA fall under?  It has a "purple stripe cam" and flat top
pistons in it and it has not been tampered with since it came out of the
Vette.  The only thing that I can think of is that someone blew the original
motor and the dealership covered its butt by dropping in another motor.  Any
ideas on this?
> > 327 Long block casting #3782870, Code FOIO4HA, casting date of L304 was
> > running when removed from car in 1968. Heads casting #3782461, cast dates
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> 3782461 heads were used on all 65 vette small blocks; 1.94 intakes, 1.5
> exhaust; cast May 8 in 64.
Tom in Missouri - 03 Jan 2006 07:53 GMT
1965   HA    327   4 spd tran, std     275 hp   4 bbl  full size

Do you have a scan of those papers on the '69 L88 with air?  That would be
interesting to see.  Can you post those somewhere?  I think as interesting
as those would be you could get away with attaching them here, even though
'Key will yell about it.

Best guess on the engine is that someone swapped it rather soon after the
car was made.  It could be the owner had a full size Chevy also and pulled a
swap which was not unheard of.  The '65 FI engine would not have had flat
top pistons.  It was 11:1 compression and had small flat domes.  If the guy
knew he was about to be repossessed, he might have swapped out the Vette
motor into his Chevy.  Or maybe he was drag racing the Chevy on dark country
roads.

> Rechecked four times and this is the number for the code.  I know that
> this
[quoted text clipped - 34 lines]
>> 3782461 heads were used on all 65 vette small blocks; 1.94 intakes, 1.5
>> exhaust; cast May 8 in 64.
RicSeyler - 03 Jan 2006 16:32 GMT
>1965   HA    327   4 spd tran, std     275 hp   4 bbl  full size
>
>Do you have a scan of those papers on the '69 L88 with air?  That would be
>interesting to see.  Can you post those somewhere?  I think as interesting
>as those would be you could get away with attaching them here, even though
>'Key will yell about it.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!! If we didn't really love him, we wouldn't tease him!

>  
>
>  

Signature

Ric Seyler
Online Racing: RicSeyler
GPL Handicap 6.35
ricseyler@SPAMgulf.net
http://www.pcola.gulf.net/~ricseyler
remove –SPAM- from email address
--------------------------------------
"Homer no function beer well without."
- H.J. Simpson

WayneC - 03 Jan 2006 20:12 GMT
> Rechecked four times and this is the number for the code.  I know that this
> came out of a 65/66 FI car with 2500 miles on it.  Have the police reports,
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> motor and the dealership covered its butt by dropping in another motor.  Any
> ideas on this?

Kind of a moot point, isn't it? No one will purchase it as a bonified
'65 FI block, so does it matter who made the swap back then? Besides,
the block is a common one, and could only have any elevated value based
on the stamped numbers... but even if "HA" were valid for a '65 FI car,
in this case any vehicle "resurrection" based on this engine would be a
bogus car unless the original frame and body can also be found.

F0104HA still doesn't compute for me, perhaps someone more knowledgeable
can tell you it's "replacement block number 10" for 1964 or some such,
but I doubt it; unless the stamping is a mistake, there needs to be
another digit in that "0104" sequence, or you are misreading the first
"0" digit and it's really a 3, although even a 3 (March) is an unlikely
month to assemble a December casting.

Warranty replacement blocks usually have a "CE" stamp code, they would
not have the "HA" code; so it's far more likely the original engine was
(perhaps blown and) replaced with a passenger car short block.

>>>327 Long block casting #3782870, Code FOIO4HA, casting date of L304 was
>>>running when removed from car in 1968. Heads casting #3782461, cast
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>>3782461 heads were used on all 65 vette small blocks; 1.94 intakes, 1.5
>>exhaust; cast May 8 in 64.
Tom in Missouri - 04 Jan 2006 06:19 GMT
Casting L304 ==> Dec. 30, 1964

Assembly stamp F0I04HA ===>
    F = Flint
    01 = Jan
    04 = 4th day
    HA = 1965  327-275 hp manual trans 4 bbl full size passenger

It all fits.

Now the next question, are there any other numbers stamped next to this
assembly stamp?

>> Rechecked four times and this is the number for the code.  I know that
>> this
[quoted text clipped - 56 lines]
>>>3782461 heads were used on all 65 vette small blocks; 1.94 intakes, 1.5
>>>exhaust; cast May 8 in 64.
WayneC - 04 Jan 2006 16:10 GMT
> Casting L304 ==> Dec. 30, 1964
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> It all fits.

Sure enough... my thinking was screwed up on the date code, I kept
thinking the 4 was the year, but actually the year digit (if present)
comes at the beginning of the second part of the stamping.
Tom in Missouri - 05 Jan 2006 05:51 GMT
Don't worry about it.  Try this one on and see what you think.

F0II3JE   7109346

Anything wrong?

>> Casting L304 ==> Dec. 30, 1964
>>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> thinking the 4 was the year, but actually the year digit (if present)
> comes at the beginning of the second part of the stamping.
WayneC - 05 Jan 2006 07:15 GMT
> Don't worry about it.  Try this one on and see what you think.
>
> F0II3JE   7109346
>
> Anything wrong?

67 Vette 435hp w/iron heads, assembled Jan 13, 1967, and vehicle VIN
looks consistent with that...
but stamping should have a "V" prefix, not an "F"
Barking Rats - 05 Jan 2006 07:20 GMT
> F0II3JE   7109346
>
> Anything wrong?

Ooooo. Let me play...

Ummm, I don't think the F plays well with the JE. HE yes, but not JE. JE
and T go together like Jello and whipped cream.

Here's waving to ya - \||||

Owen
___

'67BB & '72BB

-- not affiliated with JLA forum in any way -- alt.autos.corvette is
original posting --
___

"To know the world intimately is the beginning of caring."
    -- Ann Hayman Zwinger
Tom in Missouri - 05 Jan 2006 14:36 GMT
You guys caught it faster than the guys over on the NCRS tech board.  A guy
posted the picture of the pad and you would be amazed at those who thought
it was the spacing, the broach marks, or something else.  They missed the
obvious - the F on a big block.

Big Blocks were all T.

>> F0II3JE   7109346
>>
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
> "To know the world intimately is the beginning of caring."
>     -- Ann Hayman Zwinger
Barking Rats - 05 Jan 2006 17:04 GMT
> Big Blocks were all T.

Just for those not aware of what the F and T mean: F means the engine
was from Flint, Michigan; T means the engine was from Tonawanda, New
York. There are very rare instances of cross-over between the two
factories - in 1965, 327/#3858180 castings - but the rule is that Flint
made the small blocks and Tonawanda made the big blocks.

Here's waving to ya - \||||

Owen
___

'67BB & '72BB

-- not affiliated with JLA forum in any way -- alt.autos.corvette is
original posting --
___

"To know the world intimately is the beginning of caring."
    -- Ann Hayman Zwinger
WayneC - 05 Jan 2006 17:15 GMT
> You guys caught it faster than the guys over on the NCRS tech board.  A guy
> posted the picture of the pad and you would be amazed at those who thought
> it was the spacing, the broach marks, or something else.  They missed the
> obvious - the F on a big block.
>
> Big Blocks were all T.

Tom,
Actually, I can't pat myself on the back. I caught it, but for the wrong
reason... big blocks are all "T" code for Tonawanda, but my
understanding is that in 1967 the code for Flint small blocks was
changed to "V". If that's so, you might say there's a mistake in the
mistake example.
Tom in Missouri - 06 Jan 2006 06:01 GMT
Do you think it might be a restamp? :-)

Wonder what the rebuilder/restorer had to say when the owner came back from
his first judging or critical Corvette get-together?

>> You guys caught it faster than the guys over on the NCRS tech board.  A
>> guy posted the picture of the pad and you would be amazed at those who
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> is that in 1967 the code for Flint small blocks was changed to "V". If
> that's so, you might say there's a mistake in the mistake example.
WayneC - 06 Jan 2006 07:52 GMT
> Do you think it might be a restamp? :-)
>
> Wonder what the rebuilder/restorer had to say when the owner came back from
> his first judging or critical Corvette get-together?

He said "Sorry about that. Gimme another seven grand and I'll replace
the block with one that has a better counterfeit stamp. Better yet, make
that ten grand and I'll change all the VIN stampings in case the judges
made note of this VIN. Oh... by the way, did they tell you what the
stamp SHOULD have said?"
Tom in Missouri - 06 Jan 2006 15:47 GMT
I think this one is known.  They have posted it a few times on the NCRS tech
board.  Go there and do a search for worse stamp or worse restamp.  A guy
named Michael Hanson posted it.

>> Do you think it might be a restamp? :-)
>>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> note of this VIN. Oh... by the way, did they tell you what the stamp
> SHOULD have said?"
Barking Rats - 06 Jan 2006 08:03 GMT
> ...my understanding is that in 1967 the code for Flint small blocks
> was changed to "V". If that's so, you might say there's a mistake in
> the mistake example.

Is this true? I've not heard/read that - Tom?

Here's waving to ya - \||||

Owen
___

'67BB & '72BB

-- not affiliated with JLA forum in any way -- alt.autos.corvette is
original posting --
___

"To know the world intimately is the beginning of caring."
    -- Ann Hayman Zwinger
Tom in Missouri - 06 Jan 2006 15:47 GMT
From 1957 to 1966, an F prefix was Flint.  From 1967 on, V prefix was Flint.
T prefix for Tonawanda, NY, was on very few small blocks in '65 and possibly
some in late '64.  There have been some supposedly original '64s with a T
block.  Of course, all big blocks were T.

If you have an F on yours, you'd better start talking to that previous
owner. :-)

>> ...my understanding is that in 1967 the code for Flint small blocks
>> was changed to "V". If that's so, you might say there's a mistake in
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
> "To know the world intimately is the beginning of caring."
>     -- Ann Hayman Zwinger
Barking Rats - 06 Jan 2006 17:22 GMT
> From 1957 to 1966, an F prefix was Flint.  From 1967 on, V prefix was Flint.
> T prefix for Tonawanda, NY, was on very few small blocks in '65 and possibly
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> If you have an F on yours, you'd better start talking to that previous
> owner. :-)

Thanks, Tom - I didn't know it was changed to V, having two Ts and all...

;)

Here's waving to ya - \||||

Owen
___

'67BB & '72BB

-- not affiliated with JLA forum in any way -- alt.autos.corvette is
original posting --
___

"To know the world intimately is the beginning of caring."
    -- Ann Hayman Zwinger
Nancy Rothschild - 06 Jan 2006 22:52 GMT
What is it worth?
> 327 Long block casting #3782870, Code FOIO4HA, casting date of L304 was
> running when removed from car in 1968. Heads casting #3782461, cast dates
> E84, they have been removed.  This was in an FI car.....Brian and Nancy
> briankmeyer@hotpop.com
Barking Rats - 09 Jan 2006 05:21 GMT
> What is it worth?
> > 327 Long block casting #3782870, Code FOIO4HA, casting date of L304 was
> > running when removed from car in 1968. Heads casting #3782461, cast dates
> > E84, they have been removed.  This was in an FI car.....Brian and Nancy

Given that the block is a non-Corvette item, that's going to be
dependent on what it really came from as far as collectable status and
value goes. Find out what car the HA engine option came in and you'll
have a start there.

The heads were indeed Corvette items from '61 through '66 - with yours
dating to May 8th, 1964. In '64, all Corvettes with optional engines
used those head castings. In other words, only the base 250 hp engine
didn't use them - so they could be used in 300 hp, 365 hp and 375 hp
engines. I don't know if there were valve size differences between the
models. Not knowing that, they very well could have been used in a FI
car, but that doesn't make them any rarer than if they came from a 300
hp car. Value? Not a clue but it shouldn't be difficult to find recent
sales examples.

Here's waving to ya - \||||

Owen
___

'67BB & '72BB

-- not affiliated with JLA forum in any way -- alt.autos.corvette is
original posting --
___

"To know the world intimately is the beginning of caring."
    -- Ann Hayman Zwinger
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.