Engine ID?

[Windsor]

Got ahold of another '68 383. Trying to figure out what it is out of (if possible). Would the '68s have forged cranks? If I remember right when I looked at the one in my car, it had a wide parting line. I don't want to pull the pan on the 2nd motor. I found this number on the bottom of the block behind the oil pan on the driver side on the machined surface. PT383R22102315. I checked a couple sites that said it was a couple different things. One said Plymouth Fury taxi, another said Plymouth "other".

[69CoronetRT]

That's not a VIN number; that's the engine assembly number.

PT- Trenton engine plant
383=CID
R=regular fuel. I'll guess it does not have an HP stamp on the front pad.
2210=engine assembly date = August 16, 1967
2315=engine assembled that day.

Have you looked on the back of the block by the oil sending unit for a VIN number?

[Windsor]

Thanks. Yeah, no other stamped numbers that can be a vin.

[John_Kunkel]

August '67 build would be an early '68 engine, many standard performance didn't get a VIN stamped.

[69CoronetRT]

August '67 build would be an early '68 engine, many standard performance didn't get a VIN stamped.

John, the opposite of that statement would be that HP engine's did get a VIN.

Controversial subject....

We do know that some plant's started stamping VINs on engines earlier than other plants.

Until you can establish when each plant started stamping engines, you cannot compare, say, an early 440HP engine from STL to an early 440 from the Jefferson plant, which may or may or may not have stamped any engine at the same time, and determine the reason for the VIN was solely the HP factor. Anecdotal comparisons of engines are somewhat valid but not proof that HP assemblies did get a VIN and non HPs did not. The problem with only having a block without a VIN and not knowing what it came out of is that you cannot know if it came from a car built at a plant that may or may not have stamped the VINs as a matter of standard procedure when the block was installed.

To determine if the HP stamping was a factor in a car getting a VIN stamp, you have to compare similar engines from the same plant that would have both assemblies on site. For example, you'd have to compare a non HP 383 to an HP from Lynch Road, STL or LA plant with similar assembly dates. Finding any 318, 273 or /6 with a VIN negates the HP theory. Finding any HP block without a VIN negates the theory. Finding a C body without a 440 TNT assembly and a VIN negates the theory.

In my mind, there is no logical production based reason for stamping HP engines only. You would not pay someone to stand around and stamp only HP engines when the percentage of HP engines would be small compared to total production. You'd pay them to do every engine regardless of HP or not.

This is a valid topic that deserve in depth research. It won't be easy, but it could be done and it would add value.

To date, I've seen no credible evidence supporting the HP/non-HP stamping theory.

[John_Kunkel]

August '67 build would be an early '68 engine, many standard performance didn't get a VIN stamped.

John, the opposite of that statement would be that HP engine's did get a VIN.

No, the opposite of that statement would be many HP did get a VIN stamped....no absolutes.

Controversial subject

For sure. The uncertainty is based on the difference between the model year and the calendar year.

[69CoronetRT]

August '67 build would be an early '68 engine, many standard performance didn't get a VIN stamped.

John, the opposite of that statement would be that HP engine's did get a VIN.

No, the opposite of that statement would be many HP did get a VIN stamped....no absolutes.

Controversial subject

For sure. The uncertainty is based on the difference between the model year and the calendar year.

thank you.

[cudaken]

John and 69, if you guys would like I can drag out my 68 Road Runner block and take a look. I know it will not be a defining truth of all, but I am 100 % sure it is the one the car came with when Dad bought it new. Pretty sure it was made in St Louis, vin starts out as RM23H8G22####

I have seen one 68 383 motor from a 68 Charger, none HP (we think) that had a partial vin. Had very little rust, so it did not come from St Louis! 

Windsor, all 383 had forged cranks! 

Cuda Ken   

[Windsor]

Thanks Ken.

[69CoronetRT]

John and 69, if you guys would like I can drag out my 68 Road Runner block and take a look. I know it will not be a defining truth of all, but I am 100 % sure it is the one the car came with when Dad bought it new. Pretty sure it was made in St Louis, vin starts out as RM23H8G22####

I have seen one 68 383 motor from a 68 Charger, none HP (we think) that had a partial vin. Had very little rust, so it did not come from St Louis! 


Cuda Ken   

Ken,

That's very gracious of you.

My guess is the RR should have the VIN due to the higher VIN number (22****) and the plant.

If the other 383 did in fact come from a '68 Charger, it was not an HP assembly but it would still be interesting to know the VIN. If it was a STL built car, I would expect a VIN to be there. If it was from Hamtramck, it would be interesting to see how low of a VIN it has.

[cudaken]

69, about when was my Road Runner made? I m not a numbers guy unless it is on a time slip.  I think Dad brought home in Feb, but I was 10 I think.

Cuda Ken

[69CoronetRT]

69, about when was my Road Runner made? I m not a numbers guy unless it is on a time slip.  I think Dad brought home in Feb, but I was 10 I think.

Cuda Ken

It's hard to tie VINs and SPDs before 69. Here's about as close as I can get.

2200** has an SPD of 415
224*** has an SPD of 422

[John_Kunkel]

Windsor, all 383 had forged cranks!  

All '68 383's did but some '70-'71 were cast.