Engine Question & Opinion

[Claude Edwards]

Question folks there is a 327 engine listed on ebay, item number 2443134320. The engine came out of a 62 pickup and has the numbers that would match a 62 vette. The engine has a suffix of U (as in F0528U) on the build date can anyone tell me the meaning of this particular suffix designation, most of the siffix's I show have two letters. Second question as I understand 870 blocks went into trucks but is it kosher to interchange into a vette if the numbers are date matching or would it be viewed as having a truck engine in your vette. Opinions please.

 

[ChuckG]

The blocks are ALL the same, regardless of whether they were in a passenger car, bus, truck or Corvette. Chevrolet made the "870" block for use in all their cars. The only differences are internal, i.e., cam, pistons, compression, etc.

SO, that block would be OK to use in your 62. I don't have any books that list suffixes other than Corvette, but the "U" designation probably corresponds to the original usage, in this case, truck, horsepower rating, and transmission. Chuck

 

[JohnZ]

I don't show a single-character "U" suffix in any of my references, but it's probably an obscure truck usage. In any event, what really matters is having the casting number and casting date correct for your car - that's where most of the points are (525 of the 613 points for the block); the pad is worth 88 points, and you'd lose 50 of those (wrong suffix and no VIN stamp), but you'd get the 38 points for the pad appearance.

 

[Claude Edwards]

Thanks folks, new the 870 blocks were the same but its always nice to have informed opinions on related items of note. Appreciate your input.
Claude

 

[magicv8]

The engine may be a good deal - depending on price - but I would want it magnafluxed - even if the vendor charged extra. If the block is cracked, the pad stamp, date, and casting number are irrelevant.

 

[StingRay6T3]

I've heard or read somewhere that the "870" casting numbers had two different sizes. The larger numbers were used for the Corvette and the smaller numbers with the passenger cars & trucks? Has anyone heard of this.

Damian

 

[JohnZ]

The 870 blocks were used all across Chevrolet car and truck lines, for many different applications, and there is no functional difference from one 870 block to another. Two different font sizes of casting numbers have been noted on 870 blocks, but whether that means anything remains to be seen.

 

[65TripleBlack]

Claude:


The 870 blocks used for non Corvettes were NOT THE SAME.

1. The date code for non Corvette blocks have a 2 digit year code(i.e. 63=1963), while Corvette blocks have a 1 digit year code (i.e. 3=1963)

2. Non Corvette 870 blocks do not have the small square plug in the front of the block, near the water pump.

3. The size of the part number characters is larger on the Corvette blocks.

Joe

 

[ChuckG]

The differences are in the fact that blocks were cast both in Tonawanda, New York and Flint (Saginaw) Michigan. Flint blocks only are correct for Corvettes in 1962.

Flint blocks have the single digit date code, i.e. A 1 2, whereas Tonawanda blocks have two digit date codes, i.e. A 1 62. Only Flint blocks have the pipe plug mentioned above, and the casting number on Tonawanda blocks is smaller than Flint.

The block that Claude originally asked about on EBAY was designated F XXXX, meaning it was a Flint (Saginaw Foundry) block. Tonawanda blocks have T XXXX stamped in their designation. Chuck

 

[65TripleBlack]

Chuck:

Yes, I am aware of the differences between Flint/Tonawanda 870 smallblocks. That is what I spoke about in the post just prior to yours.

I looked at the block on Ebay, and it is, indeed a Flint 870 block, and so it is appropriate for a Corvette. The fact that it is STAMPED with a Flint code is not proof positive that it is a Saginaw block. It could have been a T block, shipped to Flint for machining and assembly. The proof lies in the date code (E242), and the large characters (3782870). I'm sure it has the pipe plug, too, it is just not shown in the pictures.

"Tonawanda blocks have T XXXX stamped in their designation. "

This is only true for big blocks.
In 1965, there were a small number of Corvettes produced with Tonawanda 3858180 smallblocks. These were stamped at the Flint engine plant, just like the Saginaw 870's, and thus, have a "Fxxxxyy" designation. At NO time between 1962-1965 were Tonawanda 870 smallblocks used in Corvettes.

Joe

 

[Claude Edwards]

So folks, since I am stiring up the dust on opinions what would be a reasonable ball park price for a 62 rebuildable "870" Flint block.

 

['63split]

Hello,

Just to make things a little more interesting I recently purchased a '63 coupe that has the correct numbers stamped on the front engine pad, serial #, F= flint and RD = 300hp but it has a 5 on the top back of the block which would indicate the engine is a corvette engine but cast in 1965 and not 1963 when the car was assembled.
I was going to try to locate an engine with the correct casting year number but it wouldn't, of course, be the correct pad stamped number as I currently have now. That's my dilema.

Best Regards,
Mike

 

[JohnZ]

At NO time between 1962-1965 were Saginaw foundry 870 smallblocks used in Corvettes.

Joe

Joe, I don't agree - ALL midyear small-blocks were cast at Saginaw, including all 79,678 #870 blocks used from '62-'65; the only exception was the very few 8180 Tonawanda blocks used for a brief time during 1965. Chevrolet did NOT ship block castings from Tonawanda to Flint Engine for machining/assembly except for those few 8180's.

If you're talking about 870-block engines machined and final-assembled at the Saginaw Service Parts engine shop, your statement is correct; all midyear small-block Corvette engines were machined and final-assembled at Flint Engine (I worked there).

 

[65TripleBlack]

John:

You are absolutely right. That was a typo. I should have typed "Tonawanda" instead of Saginaw. I'm sure that if folks who understood the meaning of that post, like you did, would have been "confused", but someone with no knowledge would have been misled.

Thanks. I'll fix it.

Joe