Mike here is an example:
surface looks okay but close up in person you can see where it was milled
it was a good re-stamp w the exception of the last 5 which looks ???
but the give away in this case was the plant code UF Olds did not have this code in 68

 

Dean,


I'm not saying it isn't but I can't tell from the pic it was milled. I guess I'd have to see it.


Wasn't the 7028255 used on the H/O as well as the W-31? The letter codes will be different for each of them, correct?


Those are application codes, not plant codes, right? If a carb number had more than one application then the letter codes differentiated them so they could be pulled correctly for installation.


I'm no expert on these, this is just from a little research I've done this evening.

 

no you cant from the pic
8255 used on 31's and non a/c Hurst Olds
same code for both
I know nor am I

It really helps when the carb is in eye's view as opposed to pics unless there are blatant flaws

 

One question that must be asked of those who got burned is:
Did you specifically ask if the part you were buying was an original or a re-stamp?

While I don't like re-stamps, and I think that anyone who re-stamps without disclosing it is being sneaky at best, it's not really fraud. If someone asks for a 7040258 carburetor and the seller ships them a carburetor which functions like a 7040258 and has 7040258 stamped on it, the seller has fulfilled the order. Only if the buyer specifically asks for an original part which has not been re-stamped and the seller ships a re-stamp has fraud occured. Good luck convincing a law enforcement officer otherwise.

As always, buyer beware.
__________________
-- Brian

I disagree. Restamping without disclosing it is fraud. Fraud by defintion is to misrepresent. A 7040251 will never be a 7040258, NEVER! On some of these parts there is a lot of time and effort put into making these parts look like something they are not(to misrepresent). The people doing this are doing it for a reason. $$$$$. If a buyer asks for a specific carb number, that is what they want. Why ask for a specific part number otherwise? That is what the buyer paid for and expects.

Buyer beware. Agree.

Don W

 

X2 what Don said. In my case I was told it was original numbers but had the incorrect back.

 

Eric,

You get a refund?

Cheers,

 

Fraud = Intent to decieve.

This similar scenario played out years ago on another Web-Forum. There were some fraudulent eBay transactions also included in the mix......but the crook did do Jail time for the fraud he committed.

"Fraud is generally defined in the law as an intentional misrepresentation of material existing fact made by one person to another with knowledge of its falsity and for the purpose of inducing the other person to act, and upon which the other person relies with resulting injury or damage. Fraud may also be made by an omission or purposeful failure to state material facts, which nondisclosure makes other statements misleading."


BTW......what are the thoughts on these two distributors?

 

Distributor

 

I'm really trying to stay out of this, but there are 3 things I think need to be said:

1. This whole thing is nothing new. As soon as the car prices went up in the '80s, the fakes (cars, parts, and all) took off and have been alive and well ever since. So there are plenty in circulation without any fresh ones created.

2. *Reputable* carb rebuilders (as an example, pretty much the same for any part that gets rebuilt) have often rebuilt core carbs for specific use, then re-stamped them to identify what they are rebuilt to. No fraud there. Quite logical and in-keeping with what the purpose of the part number is to begin with. The only problem is now when someone wants one with an untouched original part number. And that "original untouched part number" only applies to the carb main body anyway.

3. If people were not willing to spend stupid money for "an untouched original part number on the carb body", then we wouldn't have this problem. (See #1)

 

No. I made my post and that is it. I have no doubt he read it so if he wants to make it right he can. I know others are out more money than me and have no problem with them getting their money first. Also most of the people that got screwed don't sell parts to help pay for their projects. I pay for my build by selling to these same people that got screwed. I would not feel right getting my money ahead of anyone. If I never see it then so be it. That is up to him.

 

Stefano from the pics the original castings on both dist's appear to have their original integrity. But from what's shown I didn't see any signs of fraud.

as you know or may not first dist was mine
cant speak on the second one far as previous ownership

 

Kurt, you are correct, crime is nothing new, but that doesn't make it OK. It's the apathy towards these types of crimes, which allows the criminals to thrive.

 

Thank you for your honest descriptions.

 

I see normal aging and the application ID number stamped into the as-cast unmachined portion of the housing. That would only be possible to fake if you started with an unstamped housing, roll-stamped it with the correct stamp machine, then aged it under real[istic] conditions. In which case [assuming the correct internal parts were used], the ONLY way it would differ from a "more real" one is who did the stamping and at what time.

Good to go.

 

W machine, I believe you are in-correct when you say re-builder's will re-stamp parts for various applications. They know as a business that is a questionable practise. I have shipping containers full of original parts. and the few that were rebuilt, such as on Alternators the original manufacture part number is obliterated out with "XXXXXX". On some they will put a sticker or if it was done long ago use a plate and rivet it over the original part number. I recently bought a 1970 cutlass Carb thru a company called AUTOLINE and the part number they quoted was a "9201" They made no reference to the original part number. It just so happens when it arrived the part number on the body of the Carb is a 7040255. The point is I paid for a 70 cutlass carb that is what the company refer to it as, they did not care or refer to the OEM part number nor did they charge what a 7040255 Carb would normally sell for. I also did not pay what a 255 carb would normally go for. So there is no issue, but when you specifically seek out a rare part number and it is represented as such you should be getting the real deal, if not you are being taken. There is no fault in people wanting the correct part and if the seller wants that much, no fault there also. There will always be people take advantage of the situation and try to make a buck fraudulently, but to criticize people for wanting and paying the money nesscesary to have the correct parts is wrong. The Restoration of a car is to make it as close to original as it left the Factory floor, which means having correct original parts.

 

This is why I hesitated to even mention this. Because of responses like this.
I said re-builders "have" done this, and they have. I'm not speculating here. I didn't say or imply that all did.
I didn't criticize anyone for "wanting and paying the money...to have the correct part", or "wanting to have correct original parts".
First of all, it is not original unless it came on that car. Also, I'm not talking about the part, I'm talking about a number. I know what a restoration is, and having a correct part and a correct number can be vastly different things.

 

BINGO - well said Devo!

 

I have to agree w Kurt on a couple of things he mentioned.
First these parts particularly 70 W parts are getting ridiculous in price. Sorry carbs and dist because they are "date coded" are so overpriced imo.
Furthermore this idea hey I found it my car is correct now , but its not original to the car to begin w and never will be. Yes I understand its better than having the wrong part number to many. However look at the frenzy this has created in the 70 world ........... un-affordable to most, yet numbers wise the most hardtops made in that year. This also has over flowed into the restoration world , oh there getting how much at auctions now okay well that will........... to restore.

From this experience I've learned I will not pay crazy money for a correct part number for a car if the original is not there. I will take a same year part for instance a 68 251 and have the internals reflect a 8255. Hey the original is gone and its a lot cheaper. My two cents

 

FYI, another member on the board has received a refund!!!

 

There is no way to know if a correct date coded, original, is original to the car, but u know a restamp will never be original to the car. I beleive this to be true.
ray

 

I know I mentioned this before. There is a LOT more to the right carb than just the number. Jets, hangers, rods, pulloffs...are just a few few parts of the carb that were VERY specific to get max performance from your car. Same with a hi-po dist. That's the real killer, you pay crazy $ for a restamp and end up with a Chevy truck carb on your W car. But the ripoffs still suck.

 

 

Hi Brian lol
nice addition lol

 

 

what I got is a re-stamped carb
a 255 so remember that

 

 

Opinions needed on these parts as to originality.

 

Mike the 1111989 looks fine as well as the 69 251

2 pics after the 251 pics a little blurry so cant say for sure but the original cast looks original

1111151 looks good

interesting the 68 254 had a replacement date in 74 as well
those not sure seeing differences in the 4's
going to message Sam on this

Mike are those your carbs and dist?

 

Mike,
I agree with Dean on this - can you please mail me detailed pics of the 2 blurry ones and also a detailed shot of the 254?

The 254 is the one I'd really like to have a better look at - if these are yours please let me know as I'd like the testing facility to look into it for us.

Cheers,

Sam

 

The carb is actually a 9254 unit,not a 8254. They do not belong to me,they belong to a friend. What I was after was,it shows the different fonts that were used by the vendors. I'm just trying to show that the possibility exists that a re stamp may or may not be determined by fonts. I'm not trying to shoot the messenger but I think it's important that correct decisions are made when determining the validity of any part. You can plainly see that there were 3 different '1' fonts used.

 

The parts do not belong to me. I told my buddy that I needed better pics of the 254 carb. He said he was scared to clean them but I told him it wouldn't hurt it. I'll see if he will clean it and take better pictures of the complete #.

 

the 254 carb looks good to me, lots of stamps have variations in the shape of the numbers. The pad looks original without any grinding down.

 

For those who asked, the shop I bought one of my 258 carbs from I specifically had said I did not want a re-stamp nor a different number. What I got was a re-stamp that I could have done better with a spoon and my eyes closed.

 

okay that makes sense because my 2954 is also a replacement w same date

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/7041257-Olds...item233db15918

 

tough one. the 7's and 0's look off but cant say for sure. Sometimes have to be in eye's view to see if the integrity of the original casting is off . Going to have Sam view pic he might be able to give a better opinion

 

he has another carb that is a 69 253 which looks legit little high priced but looks real

 

Well call me late to the party!

Take a look at the first 989 dist. Do you notice the flashing that exists too the far right after the number? Any number tampering (except one process I can think of) would eliminate this flashing, therefore it is good, unless an "F" was turned into an "E".

Please don't get too wraped up in FONT until you have looked at hundreds of known originals and have created a database with known fonts used for a piticular year or even month. Vendors when they lost or broke a number just grabbed another that may have originated from another supplier. So a large database is required before elimination on font type.

Next thing is number aleignment, you must know how the part was originally stamped. Was a gang stamper used, if so how many letters/numbers where in the gang? So were the rest free hand or a second gang? Remember the guy with the hammer was NOT trying to be perfect, in fact too perfect maybe grounds for disqualification.

You need a database and I think this is a great start, but remember as the public becomes more aware, the counterfieters become more clever.
Think how a counterfieter would perform his job and look for those telltail signs.

Distributors - look for the flashing, casting marks can be re-created to some extent. I have even seen forgers try to re-creat the flashing marks by using a hammer and chisle to cut up the michine work trying to creat an illusion of 3D in pictures on ebay, when in reality it is 2D.

Carbs - I couldn't see michine marks on the pictures posted here, but I would have to believe they were present under close inspection.
Alternators - similiar to Distributors above.

Remember, pictures don't show any depth (3D) so beware of ebay.

In searching for a friend on ebay for a 1962 Corvette 327 300/340 carb I determined that less than 10% were unmolested, so buyer beware. I often email the vendors that their products are restamps. Well lets say they were not very thankful and the biggest vendor of Classic Corvettes feigned eggnorance! Yep!

As it turns out, users on another forum I belong too users use it to determine who these vendors are by requesting info from the members.

Good jobs guys keep it up.

 

This is the beauty of common number parts. Since this all has come to light I have looked at 200 or more original non rare number parts. There is NOBODY restamping common number parts for obvious reasons so they are a great source for correct stampings. When you look at hundreds of common number parts and study them you can see MUCH easier when a rare number part is a fake.


Many have posted the question of consistency with the factory stampings. I can tell you from the hundreds of common numbers parts I have laying around, There is an amazingly high constancy to them and also through multiple years. I plan to keep my mouth shut on this subject as much as possible but I see some people trying to justify some fake stuff in the name of inconsistencies.

 

Eric, you took the words right out of my mouth.