Noticed something interesting on my LT5...

[A26B]

Originally Posted by 1989ZR1#74

....... So why was MM mark on #2299 restamped? The fonts on the MM restamp appear to be the same. They appear to have been done to document not to deceive (ie like a 63 Corvette Restamp) Perhaps you could send your friend the link for the picture and ask him what he thinks.

Can do. He's on an extended weekend vacation, but will be home tomorrow. I'll work on an answer.

VIN stamp. This LT5 perhaps was destined for another 90 Corvette at BG but was diverted to #2299 that would explain the VIN restamp again to document not to deceive. At what point was the LT5 assigned to a ZR-1? how much time is there between assignemnt and installation?

Someone else can answer that better than me. I will recount a story that Ryan B. & I worked on a bit. He acquired a 405 new, crate engine with a build VIN stamped on the engine. We "acquired" the current owners contact info & found out the ZR-1 has a numbers matching engine, WITH THE SAME VIN AS THE CRATE ENGINE. Through a few phone calls we surmised that the first engine was VIN stamped @ BG (like all engines), placed in the car, but on final inspection may have had finish blemishes & was removed & replaced with another engine that was VIN stamped with the same VIN. The removed engine was sent back to MM, then back to GM crate engine inventory, still with the original VIN intact.

So, things do happen that are not in accordance with the standard procedure.

It does not seem plausible that an outside repair shop would go through the effort to restamp the block. Nor would they have access to the correct stamps/fonts etc. So I would think this had to have originated at MM and BG.

Agreed..

[1989ZR1#74]

Originally Posted by A26B

Can do. He's on an extended weekend vacation, but will be home tomorrow. I'll work on an answer.



Someone else can answer that better than me. I will recount a story that Ryan B. & I worked on a bit. He acquired a 405 new, crate engine with a build VIN stamped on the engine. We "acquired" the current owners contact info & found out the ZR-1 has a numbers matching engine, WITH THE SAME VIN AS THE CRATE ENGINE. Through a few phone calls we surmised that the first engine was VIN stamped @ BG (like all engines), placed in the car, but on final inspection may have had finish blemishes & was removed & replaced with another engine that was VIN stamped with the same VIN. The removed engine was sent back to MM, then back to GM crate engine inventory, still with the original VIN intact.

So, things do happen that are not in accordance with the standard procedure.

Agreed..

Wow that is again more neat info. So there was a history of LT5s being pulled after the VIN deravation is stamped and placed back in inventory. So that could be an option.

[A26B]

Well, I would hesitate going plural and counting this as a definite occurance, but after analyzing all the tags on the engine & crate and talking to GM personnel, it is the most likely circumstance. Fact remains, there are 2 engines with the same VIN, one is in the ZR-1, the other is a crate engine.

[1989ZR1#74]

Originally Posted by A26B

Well, I would hesitate going plural and counting this as a definite occurance, but after analyzing all the tags on the engine & crate and talking to GM personnel, it is the most likely circumstance. Fact remains, there are 2 engines with the same VIN, one is in the ZR-1, the other is a crate engine.

You are correct. Only theories, but it "appears" that an LT5 could have been stamped with a VIN deravation and then not installed in that same sequence numbered ZR-1.

I guess I would ask what if that crate motor was sent back to BG what would the VIN stamp look like?

What was the reason that the 405 LT5 was not installed in the correct ZR-1?

[A26B]

Originally Posted by 1989ZR1#74

You are correct. Only theories, but it "appears" that an LT5 could have been stamped with a VIN deravation and then not installed in that same sequence numbered ZR-1.

I don't think so and don't mean to imply that possibility. The 1st engine had the VIN stamped on it at BG & put in the car. When the 1st engine was removed at BG, another, un-stamped engine was taken from inventory at BG & then stamped with the same VIN at BG, making it the 2nd engine & put into the car. In essence, both engines would be, for all practical purposes the correct engine for the car.

I guess I would ask what if that crate motor was sent back to BG what would the VIN stamp look like?

By "that crate motor" you are referring to the 1st engine that became a crate motor after the 2nd engine was installed. I think the engine went to GM warehousing stock and not to BG after leaving MM.

What was the reason that the 405 LT5 was not installed in the correct ZR-1?

I believe there are 2 correct engines for the subject ZR-1. The 2nd engine which is in the car now & correctly matches the car VIN, and the 1st engine which ended up being a crate engine with a VIN. I'm guessing the 1st engine VIN should have been stamped out at some point after it was replaced.

[1989ZR1#74]

Originally Posted by A26B

I don't think so and don't mean to imply that possibility. The 1st engine had the VIN stamped on it at BG & put in the car. When the 1st engine was removed at BG, another, un-stamped engine was taken from inventory at BG & then stamped with the same VIN at BG, making it the 2nd engine & put into the car. In essence, both engines would be, for all practical purposes the correct engine for the car.

By "that crate motor" you are referring to the 1st engine that became a crate motor after the 2nd engine was installed. I think the engine went to GM warehousing stock and not to BG after leaving MM.

I believe there are 2 correct engines for the subject ZR-1. The 2nd engine which is in the car now & correctly matches the car VIN, and the 1st engine which ended up being a crate engine with a VIN. I'm guessing the 1st engine VIN should have been stamped out at some point after it was replaced.

Jerry, You responses are terrific. I appreciate the time you have taken to reply.

Earlier you stated "The dealer received authorization and was shipped a new crate engine from GM stock (not Mercury)." So was the Same VIN derivation 405 LT5 (double vin) placed in this same stock source? What if a dealer was sent the 405 LT5 (double vin) as a warrantee replacement would they have XXXX out the Vin?

Eric

[A26B]

Originally Posted by 1989ZR1#74

.......Earlier you stated "The dealer received authorization and was shipped a new crate engine from GM stock (not Mercury)." So was the Same VIN derivation 405 LT5 (double vin) placed in this same stock source? What if a dealer was sent the 405 LT5 (double vin) as a warrantee replacement would they have XXXX out the Vin?
Eric

When I worked as a mechanic in a GM dealership, long,long ago, warranty work involving engine replacement required authorization from the district warranty inspector. That's the authorization I'm referring to.

I see where you are going with the next question regarding the GM engine stock source. All I can say is I don't know the answer. Same is true regarding whether the dealer would xxxx out the VIN. My guess is probably not.

From what I understand, engine replacement was not a common ocurrence and this double VIN engine deal is probably a one-of-a-kind happening and that's how the VIN escaped intact on the 1st engine.

[1989ZR1#74]

Originally Posted by A26B

When I worked as a mechanic in a GM dealership, long,long ago, warranty work involving engine replacement required authorization from the district warranty inspector. That's the authorization I'm referring to.

I see where you are going with the next question regarding the GM engine stock source. All I can say is I don't know the answer. Same is true regarding whether the dealer would xxxx out the VIN. My guess is probably not.

From what I understand, engine replacement was not a common ocurrence and this double VIN engine deal is probably a one-of-a-kind happening and that's how the VIN escaped intact on the 1st engine.

And the strange 'OP's block restamp is probably a one of a kind as well. As a longtime NCRS member we have attempted to deal with these issues on the judging field, like a 87 Calloway at a Denver Regional with only 1000 miles that was not judged because the "B2K" was missing on the SPI. We went around and around to try and figure out why it appeared to be a factory B2K but was delivered to Calloway without the B2K. Or why my 84 with 3000 miles has tires that are 1 month newer then the car but no evidence has ever been shown that they were changed. Or why #004 has non ZR-1 seats and radio.

Not that #2299 will ever be judged or need to justify the stamp, I am very curious how two stamps in two places were wrong.

I alway like to try and wrap my brain around these even though I have no skin in the #2299 game.

[bdw18_123]

Originally Posted by 1989ZR1#74

... Time to order your build sheet and invoice to find out when it was built and when it was shipped. If there was a large gap maybe it was waiting to get a new LT5.

I do need to order the build sheet since the build date area is unreadable on the one I pulled out of the crossmember. However, I do have an original invoice which appears to document the transfer of the vehicle from GM to the dealership from which the car was sold from and lists all the options, pricing & other things. I can take a picture of it and post it if that will help, maybe you guys can help me decode it.

There are several dates on this invoice, listed as follows (I'm not sure what the last two mean):

INVOICE 5/24/90
PRICED 5/22/90
SHIPPED 5/24/90
EXP I/T 5/29/90
INT COM 5/29/90

So that means my car sat at the dealer for about 6 months before it was sold to the P.O. on 11/22/90. Since my block has a cast-in date of 3/7/90, that means the build date of my car should fall somewhere around March of '90 I would think. Are there any dates anywhere on the car itself that would give a clue as to what the build date was?

Originally Posted by 1989ZR1#74

...
Not that #2299 will ever be judged or need to justify the stamp, I am very curious how two stamps in two places were wrong.

I always like to try and wrap my brain around these even though I have no skin in the #2299 game.

Agreed, my ZR-1 is definitely not an NCRS candidate, but I like learning about stuff like this and I'm also very curious as to why both stamps from both manufacturers were redone. My Z might have an interesting history and I want to learn about it.

Originally Posted by 1989ZR1#74

... Another thought/theory, "Mary" the inmfamous BG lot driver who in 1990 was cold starting ZR-1s at WOT and grenading the LT-5s must have taken out several LT5s. What process did Chevrolet go through to replace these engines? What did they do with the damaged blocks? when did Mary stop killing LT5s? Could #2299 have started it's life with a new block because Mary killed it? That would make #2299 an interesting footnote in the lexicon of ZR-1 history. ...

Who was this "Mary" person and what kind of moron starts a car at WOT??

[bdw18_123]

Any thoughts on the dates in my above post?