Topic: 68 C code block

[ruppstang]

This week I disassembled a 68 C code 289. I was surprised when I found a block with a flat boss for the VIN and the block was actually a 289 block. Most of the 68 code blocks with the VIN boss are 302 blocks. This block casting must have been a very late 289 casting, every other 289 block I have seen had the full depression in the back.

[jwc66k]

What is the casting number?
Jim

[ruppstang]

I dropped it off at the machine shop today, I'll get it when I can.

[J_Speegle]

Couple of questions to fill in some things. Just a few off the top of my head

What did the VIN tell you about the car? 

When was the engine cast and assembled?

Windsor or Cleveland casting?

What method did you use to determine it was a 289 block rather than a 302?

[ruppstang]

It was from a car that I parted out about five years ago.  As I recall it was a May 68 Dearborn car. I think I have the door tag. The engine VIN matched the car.

I think it is a 289 block because of the 289 cast in the valley.

More when I can.

[ruppstang]

The projected build date of car is 07F.

The block casting is C6 AE

The assemble date is 7E 30.

My engine builder said he has done dozens of 289 and never has seen a block like this.

[spidernad]

This week I disassembled a 68 C code 289. I was surprised when I found a block with a flat boss for the VIN and the block was actually a 289 block. Most of the 68 code blocks with the VIN boss are 302 blocks. This block casting must have been a very late 289 casting, every other 289 block I have seen had the full depression in the back.

I had one of those before. C6AE-6015-C See pics below.
Since they had to start putting VIN's on the block starting in 68, I think they produced that block just to add the flat pad for stamping the VIN on.
Sort of a patch until the C8OE-A blocks came out which were 302 blocks but many were built as 289's until the supply of 289 cranks and rods were depleted.

[ruppstang]

I had one of those before. C6AE-6015-C See pics below.
Since they had to start putting VIN's on the block starting in 68, I think they produced that block just to add the flat pad for stamping the VIN on.
Sort of a patch until the C8OE-A blocks came out which were 302 blocks but many were built as 289's until the supply of 289 cranks and rods were depleted.

It is probably unlikely that one of these 289 blocks would be found even on a late built 67.   

[spidernad]

It is probably unlikely that one of these 289 blocks would be found even on a late built 67.

Don't know if you're able to view the pictures I posted but both the VIN stamped on the block and the engine assembled date are both from 68. (Assembled date May 28 1968)

[ruppstang]

Yes, I did see them. Thanks for posting them, it appears to be the same casting that I have. We have deducted in the past if we have seen the flat boss for the VIN thinking it was a 302 block in a 67 car. Even with the discovery of this 289 casting I still think it is unlikely that is was used in a 67 because the VIN stamping was started in the 68 model year.

[spidernad]

Yes, I did see them. Thanks for posting them, it appears to be the same casting that I have. We have deducted in the past if we have seen the flat boss for the VIN thinking it was a 302 block in a 67 car. Even with the discovery of this 289 casting I still think it is unlikely that is was used in a 67 because the VIN stamping was started in the 68 model year.

I agree. I think these were only used in 68 cars. All the 67 289 engines I've rebuilt were C5AE-E blocks which were used from 65-67. I definitely think this block was produced simply to add that stamping pad for 68. They probably just made that one change to the existing C5AE-E mold and gave it the C6AE-C number to distinguish it.

[J_Speegle]

I agree. I think these were only used in 68 cars. All the 67 289?s engines I?ve rebuilt were C5AE-E blocks which were used from 65-67. I definitely think this block was produced simply to add that stamping pad for 68. They probably just made that one change to the existing C5AE-E mold and gave it the C6AE-C number to distinguish it.

We see C6AE-C blocks made back as far as Dec 65 and slightly before. Believe from the other foundry than the C5AE-E that were being made at the same time. Believe I posted something about that a month or so back for a C6AE-C I have.  Engineering area of the block is different also if you compare them side by side. Sorry slightly off thread

[spidernad]

We see C6AE-C blocks made back as far as Dec 65 and slightly before. Believe from the other foundry than the C5AE-E that were being made at the same time. Believe I posted something about that a month or so back for a C6AE-C I have.  Engineering area of the block is different also if you compare them side by side. Sorry slightly off thread

Great Info. I wonder if those early date C6AE-C blocks had the VIN stamp pad.

[J_Speegle]

Great Info. I wonder if those early date C6AE-C blocks had the VIN stamp pad.

Just looked and no they do not have the flat rear cast section behind where the intake would sit

[spidernad]

Thanks. So I guess they didn't create a different engineering casting number for the later type with the pad.