New to forum and looking to sell 442
September 28th, 2014, 06:30 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 6
New to forum and looking to sell 442
Hey guys I have a 68 442 that I am looking to sell. I pulled the car out of a barn in 2008 and sat since 73!! The car is a convertible has 68 date code 455 with 4 speed and factory 4 speed car. I painted the car back to its original Saffron yellow with white top. The car was in amazing shape when I found it with no rust! The car is all original sheet metal this car has never been cut up. I will post more about the car in the for sale section of the forum!
September 28th, 2014, 08:54 PM
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: southeastern Michigan
Posts: 14,206
The engine may be "date correct" in the sense that it's a '68 455, but it is actually "numbers matching?" Is there a VIN derivative on the engine that matches the last six digits of the car's VIN? I believe that's the only way to prove that the engine is original to the car.
Below are first the specs page out of the '68 Olds Sports Brochure and second the 442 page out of the '68 Dealer Specs Book. While several versions of the 400 were available, neither mentions availability of the 455 engine.
September 29th, 2014, 02:20 AM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Seneca Falls, NY
Posts: 5,261
Jaunty, unless he's gone back and edited the original post (I'm looking on my phone so it doesn't always show all the post information), it doesn't say "numbers matching". But you're correct, only a 400G was available on a 68 442.
September 29th, 2014, 05:11 AM
#6
Old(s) Fart
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 47,388
He never said it was numbers-matching. The "date correct" language walks a fine line but is not lying. The reality is that many of the G-block 400 motors were replaced with 455s after the original was blown up. It's not even a stretch to think that the motor was replaced prior to the start of the car's storage in 1973.
September 29th, 2014, 05:17 AM
#7
azure blue 442
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Mount Forest,Ontario, Canada
Posts: 103
time capsule
#s matching or not, that is still an awesome find in this day and age.
The facts say it was born with a 400, but My facts have been proved wrong before.
Of course there is always the gm rule pre 70 that says 400 ci max in an intermediate. Or was that 10 lbs per hp.
Someone validate that please.
The facts say it was born with a 400, but My facts have been proved wrong before.
Of course there is always the gm rule pre 70 that says 400 ci max in an intermediate. Or was that 10 lbs per hp.
Someone validate that please.
September 29th, 2014, 05:36 AM
#8
Old(s) Fart
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 47,388
#s matching or not, that is still an awesome find in this day and age.
The facts say it was born with a 400, but My facts have been proved wrong before.
Of course there is always the gm rule pre 70 that says 400 ci max in an intermediate. Or was that 10 lbs per hp.
Someone validate that please.
The facts say it was born with a 400, but My facts have been proved wrong before.
Of course there is always the gm rule pre 70 that says 400 ci max in an intermediate. Or was that 10 lbs per hp.
Someone validate that please.
September 29th, 2014, 06:09 AM
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: southeastern Michigan
Posts: 14,206
This is exactly my point. The language can be taken several ways. People use phrases like "date correct" or "date matching" or "numbers matching" all the time, with the obvious implication being originality. Presumably this car is being advertised to everyone, not just those who are 442-savvy. Not everyone who might see the ad for this car would know that a 455 could not be original.
With so much concern about fraud in the 442 world these days with people trying to pass off clones as originals or the common joke that there are more 442's on the road now than originally left the factory, why not speak in plain English whenever dealing with the sale of a 442?
"The car's original engine was replaced with a same-year 455."
No ambiguity. No possibility of misunderstanding. The fact that this was a common swap back in the day or that the engine was swapped in 1972 is beside the point.
With so much concern about fraud in the 442 world these days with people trying to pass off clones as originals or the common joke that there are more 442's on the road now than originally left the factory, why not speak in plain English whenever dealing with the sale of a 442?
"The car's original engine was replaced with a same-year 455."
No ambiguity. No possibility of misunderstanding. The fact that this was a common swap back in the day or that the engine was swapped in 1972 is beside the point.
Last edited by jaunty75; September 29th, 2014 at 06:11 AM.
September 29th, 2014, 09:43 AM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,286
This is exactly my point. The language can be taken several ways. People use phrases like "date correct" or "date matching" or "numbers matching" all the time, with the obvious implication being originality. Presumably this car is being advertised to everyone, not just those who are 442-savvy. Not everyone who might see the ad for this car would know that a 455 could not be original.
With so much concern about fraud in the 442 world these days with people trying to pass off clones as originals or the common joke that there are more 442's on the road now than originally left the factory, why not speak in plain English whenever dealing with the sale of a 442?
"The car's original engine was replaced with a same-year 455."
No ambiguity. No possibility of misunderstanding. The fact that this was a common swap back in the day or that the engine was swapped in 1972 is beside the point.
With so much concern about fraud in the 442 world these days with people trying to pass off clones as originals or the common joke that there are more 442's on the road now than originally left the factory, why not speak in plain English whenever dealing with the sale of a 442?
"The car's original engine was replaced with a same-year 455."
No ambiguity. No possibility of misunderstanding. The fact that this was a common swap back in the day or that the engine was swapped in 1972 is beside the point.
In the interest of honesty and proper representation, the wording must make clear that the 455 is and cannot have been the original engine. Better? Maybe. Different- for sure. Original- nope. Might as well cite all the interesting numbers like
block VIN stamp
block date and "mold" number
oil fill tube engine unit number
carb number and date
distributor number and date
Intake casting #
Water pump casting #
xst mans casting #'s unless headers are in place
Radiator ID letters
Trans ID if any- should have VIN stamp in any event.
Rear end codes or at least the ratio
In the FOR SALE section ad, of course.
October 1st, 2014, 07:09 PM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,286
In the ad.
And all them other number mentioned above. I know, it might take HOURS to find all that info. Almost like work, right?
And, clarify what is meant exactly by "date code '68 455" - What parts and how is it proven? Any 455 with C heads? "Mold" number 2 or 3 block? VIN stamp 38_######? Engine unit number? Carb date and number? specific details beat vagueness any day.
Worst case, your phrase "date code 68 455" might technically apply to a low compression 1976 455 with small valve '69 C heads, a smogger EGR "W" casting intake, an SOB [Some other Brand] carb, some sort of smog era unmodified HEI distributor, whatever cam was on sale that week, un-dialed upon install... Chinese water pump, small block #1-4 [or worse] exhaust manifolds, smog era oil fill tube with no number, small block oil pan, smog era blue rocker covers w/o the proper notches... and AC type 3 groove pulleys in a no-ac car. Stuff like that happens.
Last edited by Octania; October 1st, 2014 at 07:13 PM.
October 3rd, 2014, 10:05 AM
#16
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,286
Not to bust yer cajones, just sayin'
if it doesn't matter, don't mention it.
Just point out that it is a non original [and perhaps better] 455.
October 3rd, 2014, 05:40 PM
#18
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 361
Looking forward to some pics...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Christine72cutlass
The Newbie Forum
7
June 10th, 2015 06:08 AM
wayne3791
The Newbie Forum
3
October 6th, 2014 01:07 AM
