CE Block

[ko-lek-tor]

... insight on the stamp and why the number starts with a zero.
Regards, Terry

As stated in an earlier post , it started with 0 because it is a 1970 engine. The data in the link in an earlier post pertains to the 1969 model year only. The block was made early in the 1970 model year. I have a 70 CE engine and that 1st number is always the the last digit of the year made pertaining to 1st gens.

[Terry69RSZ28]

Bentley,
Thanks for the clarification regarding the serial number.
Very much appreciated, Terry

[ZLP955]

I think this has become confusing.
As I see it -
The stamp is CE0A06759.
CE= Chevrolet Engine
0= 1970 MY issued
A= refer to other threads and posts relating to what this is believed to mean.
06759= serial number for this particular block.

The serial number beginning with 'zero' for a Flint-assembled V8 is what I wonder about, not the previous zero that means the block was assembled in the 1970 model year. According to the Service Bulletin (see link posted previously), the block of serial numbers assigned to Flint V8 didn't begin with zero, that was to be used by Flint L6.

May well be genuine, but I queried it because Terry is considering buying this block (and it's pretty expensive as noted), so in all fairness I think it needs to be discussed.

Bentley - are you saying that the blocks of serial numbers assigned to Tonawanda, Flint V8 and Flint L6 changed from the 1969 MY to differ in the 1970 MY (and possibly beyond)?

[ZLP955]

OK so I went back through all the CE data that I have compiled to date, and found one more data point that has a similar stamping:
3970010 block, cast date E 23 0, pad stamp CE0B00122. Not sure if it was machined at Flint or Tonawanda, but regardless, it is another serial number that doesn't appear to conform to the numbers assigned to each engine plant.
Trying to find who contributed that data to see if there was a photo of the pad stamp to compare with.

[bcmiller]

The A and B were used when the initial block of assigned serial sequence numbers was exhausted.

There is also some thought that there may have been some difference in the way that complete short blocks and bare blocks were stamped starting in 1969. Further study is needed in this area.

[ZLP955]

Kurt posted a document a little while ago that he found that related to the A, B etc but thought it best to avoid focussing on that, since it was just the serial number that was unusual, at least in my mind.
Agree about the need for more research, especially since all of the photobucket images posted in the big thread I started about CE blocks are pretty much worthless now, due to PB deliberately blurring the images for non-premium paying accounts......

[ko-lek-tor]

I think this has become confusing.

...Bentley - are you saying that the blocks of serial numbers assigned to Tonawanda, Flint V8 and Flint L6 changed from the 1969 MY to differ in the 1970 MY (and possibly beyond)?

Perhaps I'm premature in my assessment ? Tim I usually defer to you as I highly regard your analysis of this and about anything you reply to. I don't know if that was a yearly rule of thumb to how blocks were numbered? I was making a supposition and giving a plausible reason, as to how or why this block was stamped the way it was. Ian not an authority.  I'd say William would have the most insight to answer or interpret the stamp.
I ,also , said, in a previous post, to look at the build date stamp by the starter on the mating surface. I doubt that would be stamped if the stamp on the pad was bogus?

[ZLP955]

Personally I think it's a genuine stamp, but based on my understanding of the Service Bulletin, seemed to be  an anomaly in the serial number. I may have misunderstood your post Bentley?
Problem with trying to understand CE blocks is that there are so few data points available, it seems that past 1969, practices did not always follow the Bulletin formats, and I'm still yet to find any documentation that an owner received upon having a bare block or partial/fitted engine put in under the 5/50 warranty.
Still learning, but always enjoying!

[bcmiller]

I posted years ago what I thought about value of CE blocks. For years they have tended to end up in my possession whenever one comes up for sale locally.

Block values for a car in my opinion in descending order.
1. Of course the original block for the car.
2. A CE block with paperwork - noting replaced under warranty. (rare to find)
3. Correct original suffix block with wrong VIN for the car.
4. CE block with no docs.
5. Any other block.

The CE blocks in general are not worth much more than any other block, yet are kinda cool. But anyone can piece together an engine and come up with a story.

The CE stamp in question is probably original, but overpriced in my opinion. Of course other opinions may vary. 

[KurtS]

CE0A06579. Pretty standard CE block. I've seen other 70 service blocks that begin with 0. They seemed to be running thru the numbers too fast and changed the stamping rules because of that.

[ZLP955]

Thanks Kurt!

[Terry69RSZ28]

Much appreciated, Kurt!