#CE L88 427BBC long block value

[TimG]

I don't know if their being realistic, but the criteria says that all dates should precede the build date of the car. They don't make any mention of CE blocks in judging manuals and they really don't treat a CE block any differently than a bare pad on a block. They judge five critical items pertaining to the engines; the casting number (350 points), the casting date (175 points), the broach on the stamp pad (38 points), the VIN derivative (25 points), and the engine assembly stamp (25 points). Forty five points equals one percentage point, so if your casting number is not correct for your car, you're at a Second Flight right out of the gate. It's important to know that if you put a 1969 L88 motor in a 1967 L88, your going to receive severe deductions whether it's a CE block or a block with nothing on the pad. You can argue to a judge all day long about how the original owner of the car told you that the engine was lost under warranty, you can even have paperwork to document this. The bottom line is that casting number, casting date, broach, VIN stamp, and assembly stamp are the only thing that determines the point deduction, not the CE designation, if any, on a block. It's a very easy judging process that allows for an owner of a car without an original engine to find a nearly correct engine and have a car that can Top Flight.

I owned a car with the original engine and the pad was lightly radial decked during a rebuild before I owned the car. This was a 25 point deduction in judging since all the other elements were correct. NCRS viewed this about the same as if my radio didn't work. It's important to know that if any of the five critical items are out of line at Bloomington Gold judging, the car is only eligible to receive a Silver Certificate no matter how well the car judges. They call it "Boxing" the car because these items are in a box on the judging sheets.

You're better off with a blank pad than a CE block, in my opinion.

[L34Pace]

Although CE coded GM warranty blocks are a perfectly legitimate part of the history and purchase agreement between a new owner and General Motors they are treated like any other non original block by most, if not all, top level judging ctiteria and clubed like a baby seal. To put it bluntly we hold the POP warranty book in the highest regard when authenticating a vehicle but give ZERO consideration to the contents contained in it. From an historical perspective it seems to be a disservice to the TRUE heritage of these examples fitted with GM CE warranty blocks or other components likewise covered under the original GM purchase agreement. The logic that a CE block would be better suited for judging criteria if dated prior to the vehicles build date just exemplifies the injustice. Or in my own words ignorance.

[TimG]

It's not an injustice, it just chronicle order.

[L34Pace]

I understand the idealistic approach to the judging guidlines. My question is it "true" to the heritage of the vehicle and manufacturer's intentions? As a follow up question should a warranty component therefore be judged in the same capacity as a "restoration" component?

[427.060]

If I'm reading this right, you are saying that you are better off with a decked restamped correct date engine than a warranty replacement engine. I guess this is why I read about the Corvette guys not having a problem with restamped blocks.
James

[427king]

If im reading this right, you are better off when bringing a car to the ncrs to have a correct dated impala stamped block in a corvette than a correct CE block that happens to be later than the car[which is usually how they came]...doesnt make any sense at all..

[TimG]

How many legitimate, documented CE block cars are out there in reality? Probably very few. Where do the exceptions stop?
Do you think that if there was an exception made for a CE block that CE blocks would be forged? I certainly do. This seems logical since they use the "master pad library" to help verify the legitimacy of an engine and a CE block would have really no reference. It would be easier to stamp a CE block with a number than to stamp the VIN and assembly derivative on the pad. Cars are judged to a standard of "as delivered from the factory" not as delivered from the dealer or as delivered after warranty work from the dealer. CE blocks are not as delivered from the factory.
By the way, Corvette guys do have a problem with restamped motors. They are a fact of life, but if you buy a car professed to be an unstamped block and it turns out to be one, that's a problem in my book. If you know going in that it's a restamped block, then that's fine. It may have a problem in judging, though.
I personally like the system the way it is, I'd have no problem buying a nice car with a CE block and even having it judged. I'd accept the points penalty while having it judged at NCRS or at Bloomington and live with the result. I'd rather the present system not be diluted. As much as I love Baldwin/Motion cars, bring one for judging and see what happens.
Your CE block could have ended up in a boat just as well as a Corvette. Yes, a correct casting number and correct casting date Impala 427 would be well received for judging in a Corvette I think that would be neat and I could live with that.

[427king]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, a correct casting number and correct casting date Impala 427 would be well received for judging in a Corvette I think that would be neat and I could live with that.


[/ QUOTE ] While there may not always be proof a CE motor came in a specific car, an Impala 427 has no chance of ever being installed in a corvette. The problem is people will bring the ncrs whatever it is that they desire. I personally know of two local guys ,one had a double stamped vin on his one owner 64 300HP car, the other had a 63 corvette where the vin on the engine and trans were one character off. BOTH guys took those original parts out of thier cars and restamped what the ncrs said was acceptable . Thats the ridiculous part.

[Xplantdad]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, a correct casting number and correct casting date Impala 427 would be well received for judging in a Corvette I think that would be neat and I could live with that.


[/ QUOTE ] While there may not always be proof a CE motor came in a specific car, an Impala 427 has no chance of ever being installed in a corvette. The problem is people will bring the ncrs whatever it is that they desire. I personally know of two local guys ,one had a double stamped vin on his one owner 64 300HP car, the other had a 63 corvette where the vin on the engine and trans were one character off. BOTH guys took those original parts out of thier cars and restamped what the ncrs said was acceptable . Thats the ridiculous part.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is why I am so glad that I enjoy driving my Chevelle...and that I don't worry about the trivial stuff...LOL

[TimG]

The NCRS group that I’ve been a member of for nearly 20 years would never recommend or encourage anyone to destroy a valuable and original piece of history to make it conform to a judging manual. I’ve judged and had judged many cars and it’s just not the case. I’ve presented for judging cars with extremely low miles and amazing originality that have factory anomalies. Sometimes I’ve been docked points, sometimes not.
My 1965 16,000 mile 250 horse powerglide coupe built three days before the end of production had lots of strange things including a severely ground pad. The engine was, I believe, originally destined for a manual transmission car, but was ground and stamped for an automatic. The carburetor was coded for a manual transmission and I wouldn’t change it because it was the original dated unit. The penalty was 12 points and the judges told me not to change it as they felt it was original. I gladly took the hit. The engine passed with flying colors and is used in Al Grennings “strange but true” seminar. I’d recommend attending his seminar to see what NCRS will view as acceptable and reasonable. They are truly a great organization and a knowledgeable group of supportive people. I brought a very late 1968 Corvette for judging and it has a 1969 “pebble” type housing around the center gauges. Certainly not correct, but I wouldn’t change it. I later verified its originality by looking at an original owner ’68 Survivor that was a few cars earlier with the same “pebble” housing. I was glad I didn’t change it.

P.S. Both of the cars you noted would fly through Flight Judging with a 25 point deduction for the stamping items.
That's the same deduction that they would receive if a cigarette lighter didn't work. I don't think that validates the cost of restamping a motor.