Original 67 327 ?

[Inspector71]

With the information provided on this excellent web site, it is apparent that 1967 327's do not have the partial vin stamped on the block. My question then is it an accepted industry standard that if the cast date, assembly date and fisher body date all line up correctly then it is an original engine? How hard would it be to duplicate or find a correct date block?  I'm interested in buying a 67 convertible that I found on-line but do not want to waste my money if its not the original engine. I thank you in advance for your help and advice.

[69Z28-RS]

For cars/engines in years that did not get the engine VIN stamp, it's much easier to find a GM original engine that is 'A' correct engine for your car.  Even though it's not 'THE' born-with engine, without the VIN, it's impossible to prove that the engine didn't get installed in that car (assuming the date is within an allowable range, and all the associated parts/work match up correctly.  In such a case, there is no reason to modify any of the markings on the engine to be 'correct' for judging.

[Inspector71]

I'm wondering then how any 327 of that year is labeled as numbers matching if there is no absolute proof.

[JohnZ]

I'm wondering then how any 327 of that year is labeled as numbers matching if there is no absolute proof.

"Numbers Matching" has as many meanings as there are sellers, but the only one that matters is "born with"; on a '67 327, all you can really PROVE is "date-correct" without a VIN stamp.

[1968RSZ28]

I'm wondering then how any 327 of that year is labeled as numbers matching if there is no absolute proof.

Yup, for '67 the closest thing to absolute proof on engines that didn't have a partial VIN stamp would be that the engine assembly stamp would match the POP.

Paul

[JohnZ]

I'm wondering then how any 327 of that year is labeled as numbers matching if there is no absolute proof.

Yup, for '67 the closest thing to absolute proof on engines that didn't have a partial VIN stamp would be that the engine assembly stamp would match the POP.

Paul

And that doesn't positively nail it, as the engine plant probably built several hundred of that particular engine suffix that day, all of which will have exactly the same engine plant stamp.

[1968RSZ28]

I'm wondering then how any 327 of that year is labeled as numbers matching if there is no absolute proof.

Yup, for '67 the closest thing to absolute proof on engines that didn't have a partial VIN stamp would be that the engine assembly stamp would match the POP.

Paul

And that doesn't positively nail it, as the engine plant probably built several hundred of that particular engine suffix that day, all of which will have exactly the same engine plant stamp.

That's true.  For instance, if your '67 POP shows V1214ME as the engine assembly code, you could buy the following block (assuming the stamp is original) and no one would be the wiser!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1967-Chevy-Camaro-327-Small-Block-Chevy-Short-Block-Engine-3892657-657-302-ME-/370799640853?pt=Vintage_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item5655618115

Paul

[Inspector71]

Thanks for all the input although it's a bit disheartening as I now feel as though I'm chasing something that does not exist.

[69Z28-RS]

What are you chasing?? .. ie.. What is your goal?

[lakeholme]

What these guys are telling you is "industry standard" some 47 years later. 
What 67 are you looking to buy?  Give us a link.... or at least some pics and a description.
Answer Gary's question about your goal....
As to wasting your money, that depends on what you spend.  I wouldn't look upon a nice undocumented 67 as a waste of money....

[Inspector71]

Let me cut to the chase. The car that I'm interested in is listed on caronline.com. Marina blue convertible.  I would love to hear any opinions as I'm still doing my homework on it. As for what I'm chasing, a 67 Camaro convertible. Has to be number matching. All other options have varying importance in my mind. Thank you all again.

[lakeholme]

As in THIS ONE?
You have good taste! 

[Inspector71]

That's what I'm hoping will be "my one". any opinion? Let me clarify my waste money statement by saying that I simply do not want to overpay. I looked at what the car sold for at that auction and am now comparing it to what a similar car would cost at the same auction what is now 8 or so years later.

[69Z28-RS]

That's a nice looking car; work seems to have been well done, but you really have to see them in person to inspect closely and KNOW that to be true.   Personally, if 'numbers matching' were the big deal to me, I'd look for a 'never restored' car... as I believe you'd be more likely to find one with original mechanicals.    that one obviously has a lot of parts not put on any Camaro in 1967..   it just depends on what you want...?

[Inspector71]

Thank you Gary and Phil for your opinion and insight. It is well taken. In your opinion, after looking at the pics and info, do you believe it to be original to the car? Its obvious that with this particular engine in this year, it all comes down to a matter of opinion. You guys on here have more experience then I do so your thoughts are much appreciated.

[68 Ragtop]

Nice looking car.  The engine numbers are certainly inline with what is expected to be original. Just no proof that it is. Sometimes that's the best you can do.

I understand how some people insist on having the original engine when the most common first question asked at a car show is always "is it numbers matching" even when that person has no real idea what they are looking at. Why is it so important to you on a non high HP car? The value in this car is that the top goes down and it's a sharp looking blue!

I see the buyer paid 39,960 with fees at BJ in 2005, but that also means the seller sold it for ~32,900.

Also looks like it also sold at another auction just before BJ where the current owner bought it. Perhaps a dealer/flipper. What do you think it's worth today?

http://www.sportscarmarket.com/platinum-auction-database/1967-chevrolet-camaro_37226

[69Z28-RS]

What appears to be correct and original:
From the data provide, the engine appears to be original to the car.  The cowl tag date of 09C (production 3rd week of Sept 1966) and the engine data are compatible with one another.  The block casting #3903352 is a 1967 327 ci, 2-bolt block, Block Cast on August 23, 1966 (H236).   Tonawanda engine assembly on 6 September into a MM code assembly (327 ci wtih PG trans).   Most likely an original stamp, but stamp pad should be inspected for correct broach marks.  The '462' heads and the dates of Aug 5 and Aug 6, are compatible with the 1967 year and the date for the engine assembly.
It has Drum brakes and PS (most probably original although evidence not provided).   The deluxe (blue) interior is most probably reproduction original type.  The F paint code is correct for Marina blue.
What is not correct for 1967?
The intake is stated to be a '69 Z28 (2472 intake?) and carburetor from a '68 Z (4053 carb?) are obviously NOT original to this car or engine (but are worth considerably more than what it would cost to buy the original manifold and carb for the car.)  The HEI distributor is not original for the '67 engine.  The car supposedly was 'restored' (ie. rebuilt) during 2003-4 and quarters were replaced (due to rust or collision damage?)  that bears a closer inspection to determine the quality of that work.   The ZL2 type hood on the car is not original for the 1967 model year.

[Inspector71]

I didn't realize my simple question would have this much of a snowball effect but I'm glad it did.
 To answer Ragtop's questions, and I don't want to sound like an arrogant jack@, but I would prefer the original engine simply because that is what I prefer. I don't want someone else's idea of better then the original. As for what I think it's worth, That is the reason that I am asking these questions on here. I'm doing my best to come up with a number that both the seller and myself are comfortable with.
 I appreciate the info on the BJ auction as I didn't know how much the buyer fee's were as well as the other auction info.

[MyRed67]

What the guys are trying to explain is; that the numbers as far as what the factory provided, do all match up.  But, those numbers are for the most part, only date codes.  But, that being said is all that the factory provided for that particular car.  I am pretty much in the same boat.  I am 99% positive my car has the "born with" engine, can I absolutely prove it?  NO!  But I purchased my car in '86 and it had not been restored, it was a little rough and had been just sitting in an Apple Orchard for 3 or 4 years.  Every # that I did  find upon restoring the car and rebuilding the Engine matched.  But again, we are only talking Date codes. (That is all that can be confirmed)  I tell anybody that is interested that it is the original engine.  Just my 2 c's.

[Inspector71]

  Thanks Red as well as all who have offered their expertise. I do feel confident that the car in question does have its original engine and thus I have a better idea of what kind of offer to make on the car. Judging by the number of views this conversation has, I'm not quite sure if its still available.

[festival]

Pace setter stripe and CI hood look tasteful on this car.

[lakeholme]

Let us know what happens.  And remember it is easier to raise your offer than lower it after your original offer....