"Matching Numbers"

[victorialynn2]

I am having an ongoing discussion with someone about 1950's cars and "matching numbers". I know with Corvettes you certainly can match the engine and other numbers with the frame and prove originality. What about a 1957 Skyliner? I believe I heard there are not that many cars that you can match numbers with.  I decoded the VIN and it came with a 312, and that is what it has, but beyond that is there any way to match the engine to the frame or any other parts for that matter? (tranny, etc.)

 

Thank you in advance. 

[trimacar]

I'm not conversant on your very nice Skyliner, but can tell you that this whole "matching numbers" thing is out of hand.  Yes, on a Corvette (and some other cars) there are date codes for every darn piece, I found that out with the 63 split window we owned for a while. 

 

I will say, that for the majority of early cars, let's say pre-1960 for the sake of argument, the only "matching numbers" will be data plate codes for color, trim, engine, and so forth, but not "matching" a body to an engine and so forth, and nowhere like how every component of a Corvette is date coded, to the day manufactured.....

[Guest]

I think the closest you'll get to matching numbers with a Ford from that era is the date code on the block. '50's T birds are the same.  All the info will tell you is that they came with a 292 or a 312 but not which exact one. No serial number to match to the body like later GM models.

[victorialynn2]

Thank you both. This friend is telling me "experts" he knows say that you can find a code on the engine that will match to the frame, etc. I think he's wrong. I haven't been able to find any proof either way online.

 

[95Cardinal]

Your friends are correct, at least in some cases. Buick was stamping the VIN on the engine block in the 50s. Not sure about Ford.

 

 

[Bleach]

Ford did not stamp VIN#s on the engines on the Y-blocks but the the blocks and heads had date codes cast on them.

[cahartley]

First it was "barn find" which now seems will NEVER go away........  ........and then came the "matching numbers" craze which will probably never go away either....... 

 

[Bloo]

"Matching numbers" used to mean exactly that. I believe it was around 1968 or so, in the interest of preventing car theft the (American) manufacturers began stamping the VIN, or part of it, in the engine block, and maybe the core support, and possibly the frame (if it had one) and maybe in a hidden place or two. There was also a tag that was readable through the windshield. As time went on I believe they started stamping other things like transmissions and rear axles.

 

There are books that list all the locations the partial VIN (or whole VIN) are located. Your local highway patrol probably has one. An unintended consequence of this is that  you can now tell if a part has been replaced. Got a new engine on warranty? The number doesn't match all the others anymore. The numbers literally all match... or they don't. How much you can tell varies with year and manufacturer.  A Mazda Miata for instance has the VIN on every body panel.

 

Since "matching numbers" implies a nice original car that has never been wrecked, had the engine changed, etc. people started applying this term to all sorts of cars it makes absolutely no sense on. I would guess on a 57 ford that "matching numbers" means that it has the correct type engine as called out in the serial number (if they were even doing that yet), and that the casting dates on everything are believable, in other words there are no castings from march of 1957 on a car that was assembled in December of 1956, assuming you can even verify the production date. There were no matching serial or VIN numbers that far back on Fords as far as I know.. There is no way to tell if the parts are original, only that someone chose the correct ones when restoring the car.

 

 

[victorialynn2]

I guess it shouldn't bother me, but I'd love to find a respectable, written source to show him that it can't be matched beyond the correct type engine for the period. At least I have never found any way to match it beyond that. 

 

If anyone comes across one, please let me know. Thanks!

Edited September 1, 2017 by victorialynn2 (see edit history)

[Guest]

51 minutes ago, cahartley said:

First it was "barn find" which now seems will NEVER go away........  ........and then came the "matching numbers" craze which will probably never go away either....... 

 

 

.....and "business coupe".

[C Carl]

Now Vic , you are not meaning to imply your brother writers here assembled are LESS than respectable ? Show your friend all THIS ! Doesn't get any better !  ?  !    - Carl  ?

[victorialynn2]

Oh no, of course not, but he's stubborn and won't listen unless it's crystal clear evidence. I really should not let it bother me. Lol

[C Carl]

Let's put it like this : If it doesn't bother the world class experts here to have someone call into question their knowledge , then tell your friend  "One monkey don't stop no show". And with Texas in your blood and sadly in the news , tell your friend that , and if he needs to hear it from the Texan who put into song the perspective of such things , that'll be the Late Great Soul Singer , Joe Tex. I think it would take one very tough wet Texan to call this flood "One Monkey" , though.  ?  - CC

[victorialynn2]

I agree. This poor guy is learning to judge car shows and has no idea the difference between the expertise here and the local "experts". 

 

Very tough what is going on in Tx. I have friends who are heavily affected. I still don't know if the '50 I sold them got soaked. They have so much going on, I don't want to ask. They finally made it to a store yesterday after being stranded for days. I was so very happy about that!

Edited September 1, 2017 by victorialynn2 (see edit history)

[C Carl]

Glad we don't have to worry much about weather events in P.N.W. I have to admit though , that I am not prepared for the GIGANTIC EARTHQUAKE that might just happen in our area during the rest of my lifetime. Much more likely for you , even more so for today's children. And so on. One day , one tragic day , and the tsunami on the coast ? It is 100% certain to happen SOME day. Please let us know how your friends come out of this. It is so easy to take for granted all of the comforts and convenience of modern civilization. I get upset by a mere infrequent short duration power outage. Lightweight , I guess.   - CC

[nzcarnerd]

My 1965 Pontiac Bonneville has an engine number which is three numbers away from the serial number. The car is from very early in the production run.  Date code is 09A - first week of September 1964. Block and heads have casting dates from late July.

[Spinneyhill]

My 1939 Studebaker Coupe Express is chassis number 014, cab number 18. There is another in this country with chassis 017, cab 17! That is fairly close. The front springs were clad in tin plate covers made in sections so they could bend with the spring. Every one had "8 38" stamped in it, as well as the part number. As far as I am aware, the engine number is not stamped anywhere other than on the engine.

[Ben Bruce aka First Born]

4 hours ago, victorialynn2 said:

I guess it shouldn't bother me, but I'd love to find a respectable, written source to show him that it can't be matched beyond the correct type engine for the period. At least I have never found any way to match it beyond that. 

 

If anyone comes across one, please let me know. Thanks!

 

 Perhaps HE should present written proof. 

 

  Ben

[Ben Bruce aka First Born]

7 hours ago, 95Cardinal said:

Your friends are correct, at least in some cases. Buick was stamping the VIN on the engine block in the 50s. Not sure about Ford.

 

 

 

 I believe you are misinformed, 95.  Maybe the late '60s.

 

  Ben

[joe_padavano]

7 hours ago, Bloo said:

"Matching numbers" used to mean exactly that. I believe it was around 1968 or so, in the interest of preventing car theft the (American) manufacturers began stamping the VIN, or part of it, in the engine block, and maybe the core support, and possibly the frame (if it had one) and maybe in a hidden place or two. There was also a tag that was readable through the windshield. As time went on I believe they started stamping other things like transmissions and rear axles.

 

 

Matching numbers STILL means exactly that, and you are correct - the Feds mandated a VIN derivative stamp on the block and trans case starting with the 1968 model year.  GM at least also stamped the VIN derivative on the frame prior to that.  Some GM divisions started doing this prior to 1968, but I'm most familiar with Oldsmobile, who did not. 

 

As noted, the term matching numbers has been so misused today as to be worthless.  I've seen ads for a "matching numbers" engine that wasn't installed in a car.  What numbers "matched", exactly? Even worse, there was an ad for a set of four "numbers matching" steel wheels for a Falcon.

[auburnseeker]

In a recent effort to come up with a valid vin on the 40 Ford i bought,  I did a bunch of research as the paperwork I got with the car was messed up so  I decided to start from square one.   According to a few on line sources and even pictures 1940 era Fords had a vin number stamped in three places on the frame.  There was a matching number stamped in the top of the transmission on a pad and the engine/tranny unit was shipped as one from one plant and put in the car that had the number that matched.  Though the engine itself never had a number stamped anywhere on it.  Whether Ford continued this practice after the 1940's I do not know.   So there is actually no way to ever know if a 40 or thereabouts Ford has it's original engine regardless of what people may tell you.   Original tranny , yes that's a different story.  Of which my car has neither.  It's actually a V8 60 car by the number I found so it's completely wrong.  Do I care, will the next guy really care?  Probably not.  I think he will care more that it has the correct paperwork with a number that's actually clearly visible on the chassis.  

They went crazy on my VEtte but then again that was a 60 Fuelie.  On Vettes as well,  the matching numbers didn't start until 1960.  Before that they can only be date coded correct unless the owner has early paperwork with the engine number recorded.   You can also tell if the engine is the correct type as GM used different types of material such as High nickel blocks which carried a different engine code. 

THen again any day of the week all this information could be proven false with every old memo found in some old manufactures paperwork.

[victorialynn2]

Just to clarify, I'm not saying that this forum isn't a "respectable source". There is obviously a ton of knowledge here and y'all have never steered me wrong. 

 

My point was a source that, for example,  definitively explained why Ford didn't put Vin's on the engines. I was thinking most of you were just saying you didn't think Ford did, but we're not 100% sure. (Maybe a Ford article or Hemming's or whatever to cooberate.

 

I'm over it now. He would probably continue to believe what he's being told anyhow. 

[padgett]

Most major parts have a date code that you can match to the car (may be a range before but not after), some you can even match to the assembly plant but you will need a Ford SME to really know.

 

One thing any good lawyer can tell you is that it is almost impossible to prove a negative. As a platinum judge for a marque club I learned to "never say never" but had a lot of documentation to show "if it existed, here is how the factory would have done it" and which options were not available with certain other options. Then there were mid-year changes and assembly plant differences as well as certain options only being available at some assembly plants. There was a lot besides just numbers (.e.g. restamping a different engine code in a block is easy. Changing the cast in date code is hard.)

[John_S_in_Penna]

7 hours ago, victorialynn2 said:

Oh no, of course not, but he's stubborn and won't listen unless it's crystal clear evidence. I really should not let it bother me. Lol

 

I'm glad to hear you say you got over his concerns.

 

Your friend sounds as if he's not a true car expert,

but one who heard the term "matching numbers"

and thinks everything now must be justified that way.

While he's searching for matching numbers on a '57 Ford,

others are simply driving the car and enjoying it.

 

There's so much more than possession, prestige, and profit in

what we do!

[60FlatTop]

9 hours ago, victorialynn2 said:

I guess it shouldn't bother me, but I'd love to find a respectable, written source to show him that it can't be matched beyond the correct type engine for the period.

 

There have been a few times when I got a little satisfaction of sitting back and letting an "expert" bask in their ignorance. Maybe this is an opportunity for you to give it a try.

 

It is really good with bosses and appointed figures of authority. I am remembering a couple of instances right now.

Bernie

[joe_padavano]

1 hour ago, padgett said:

Most major parts have a date code that you can match to the car (may be a range before but not after), some you can even match to the assembly plant but you will need a Ford SME to really know.

 

 

Date codes and casting numbers are not "matching numbers".  Assuming the vehicle in question did have VIN derivative stamps, for any given vehicle there is exactly ONE block with a matching number VIN derivative stamp - the one it was born with.  There are hundreds if not thousands of blocks with "correct" date codes and casting numbers. The matching VIN derivative stamp proves the block is original to the car.  "Correct" date codes only prove that the owner spent a lot of time and money chasing castings.  Of course VIN derivative stamps can be re-stamped.  Such is the problem when a hobby turns into a profit stream.

[tripwire]

VictoriaLynn2,

 

Several people have already stated here the correct information about Ford not stamping serial numbers, or a portion thereof on major components of their vehicles in the era in question. If you need additional documentation from other sources have a look at these links where the question has come up as well.

 

http://www.portholeauthority.com/thunderbirdETC/tech/engine.html

http://www.vintagethunderbirdclub.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=8095

 

I wouldn't be surprised if someone on one of these forums could point you to, or provide a scan of a page or two from a restoration or authenticity manual.

 

Good Luck,

WParo in VT

 

[victorialynn2]

35 minutes ago, tripwire said:

VictoriaLynn2,

 

Several people have already stated here the correct information about Ford not stamping serial numbers, or a portion thereof on major components of their vehicles in the era in question. If you need additional documentation from other sources have a look at these links where the question has come up as well.

 

http://www.portholeauthority.com/thunderbirdETC/tech/engine.html

http://www.vintagethunderbirdclub.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=8095

 

I wouldn't be surprised if someone on one of these forums could point you to, or provide a scan of a page or two from a restoration or authenticity manual.

 

Good Luck,

WParo in VT

 

Thanks. I may check that out, however, as many have mentioned... it really isn't that big of a deal. I guess I get a little defensive when someone thinks I don't know what I'm talking about. (And I usually don't when it comes to cars, which I admit freely.) LOL

[Willie Wurke]

16 hours ago, GregLaR said:

 

.....and "business coupe".

Please explain your quote.    Thanks

[95Cardinal]

16 hours ago, Ben Bruce aka First Born said:

 

 I believe you are misinformed, 95.  Maybe the late '60s.

 

  Ben

 

I stand by my post.

 

My 58 Caballero engine has the VIN stamped on the block, in addition to the engine number.

 

According to this entry on the Buick Heritage Alliance site, Buick engines were stamped with the vehicle number beginning in 1957.

http://www.buickheritagealliance.org/index.php/restoration/identify/locate_numbers

 

Edited September 2, 2017 by 95Cardinal
Added link (see edit history)

[victorialynn2]

11 hours ago, tripwire said:

VictoriaLynn2,

 

Several people have already stated here the correct information about Ford not stamping serial numbers, or a portion thereof on major components of their vehicles in the era in question. If you need additional documentation from other sources have a look at these links where the question has come up as well.

 

http://www.portholeauthority.com/thunderbirdETC/tech/engine.html

http://www.vintagethunderbirdclub.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=8095

 

I wouldn't be surprised if someone on one of these forums could point you to, or provide a scan of a page or two from a restoration or authenticity manual.

 

Good Luck,

WParo in VT

 

I finally had a chance to check out those links. Exactly what I was looking for. Thank you for taking the time to send them. 

[Ben Bruce aka First Born]

9 hours ago, 95Cardinal said:

 

I stand by my post.

 

My 58 Caballero engine has the VIN stamped on the block, in addition to the engine number.

 

According to this entry on the Buick Heritage Alliance site, Buick engines were stamped with the vehicle number beginning in 1957.

http://www.buickheritagealliance.org/index.php/restoration/identify/locate_numbers

 

 

 I stand corrected!  

 

  Ben

[padgett]

GM also got into computers for billing early, why option codes were limited to what would fit on a single 80 column Hollerith card. Is also one way to show that some options could not be ordered together - they used the same column.

[joe_padavano]

1 hour ago, padgett said:

GM also got into computers for billing early, why option codes were limited to what would fit on a single 80 column Hollerith card. Is also one way to show that some options could not be ordered together - they used the same column.

 

Not true.  The Hollerith cards have 80 columns, each with ten digits.  That means that up to 800 possible RPO codes could be indicated on one card.  The Inspector's Guides list the column and digit to punch for each RPO code.  Yes, in most cases, there was a single punch in each column, but not always.  These are selected pages from the 1972 Oldsmobile Inspector's Guide.  The first one has drivetrain, wheel, and tire options and yes, only one digit would be punched in each column for these.

 

 

This page has other options, and in most of these cases, multiple digits could be punched in each column.  For example, in Column 62, G80 anti-spin rear axle, was definitely available with JL2 power disc brakes. In column 67, you could have ordered all of those options together, and, in fact, U80 rear speaker was mandatory with U57 stereo tape player.

 

[trimacar]

Mathematically, you'd have a lot more options than that.  Just on page 17 shown, you'd have 8x4x6x7x10x10x5 possible combinations,  672,000 different ways the card could be punched.  This is why, when someone says "my car is rare because it's the only one with x and y and z options" it's meaningless, unless those particular options are highly desirable......

[joe_padavano]

1 hour ago, trimacar said:

Mathematically, you'd have a lot more options than that.  Just on page 17 shown, you'd have 8x4x6x7x10x10x5 possible combinations,  672,000 different ways the card could be punched.  This is why, when someone says "my car is rare because it's the only one with x and y and z options" it's meaningless, unless those particular options are highly desirable......

 

Read my post again.  I didn't say there were 800 possible combinations. I said that there were 800 possible RPO codes (technically, 800 positions of ones or zeros) coded on the card.  Given 80 columns with ten digits each, there are 10! (10 factorial) x 80 possible combinations that can be coded from these 800 bits.  Do the math and you get 290,304,000 theoretically possible combinations coded on one Hollerith card.

 

I do agree with your point about the meaningless "one of one" claims that people make ("It's the only car with three on the tree in puke green with bucket seats and a vinyl top...").

[trimacar]

Ah, thanks for the clarification, I understand your "800" meaning now.  When I bought my first car, a 1969 Cutlass, I ordered three on the tree, radio delete, and high speed rear end (something like a 2.73, to get better gas mileage).  The factory called the dealer and asked "are you sure you have a buyer for this car?",  as it was an oddball.....and possibly "one of a kind".....but would hurt collector car value, not help it.

 

I still would like to find a six cylinder 1969 Cutlass, though, they put Chevy engines in them from the factory....

[60FlatTop]

A one time there was an online VIN decoding service. I ran my '94 Impala SS (a Caprice option) and got this summary at the end of the report.

 

Rarity...

There are 4 1994 CAPRICE CLASSIC 4 DR vehicles (0.004%) matching your exact options list. There are 27 (0.028%) with at least as many options.

 

Luckily, it is black and not puke green. And other than the CD player nothing looks like an option. It dosen't mean much to me and probably won't to the next owner, but I sure like driving it.

Bernie

 

[padgett]

That was Compnine.

 

BTW you are assuming that each hole in a card meant something and that is sometimes incorrect. Each column as used by IBM which were the GM computers in the '60s was a single character (and one of my most popular throwaways at the time was to sort information in ASCII and not EBCDIC order). Whether that single character was one or several options depended on the programming. Some could not be combined.

 

Also errors crept in if two adjacent rows were punched & if you punched too many holes the card was weakened and would come apart in the sorter (optical sorters which came later were much more gentle.so they didn't. Here is how an IBM card of the time was punched showing all allowed combinations. It was not Binary & as you can see an alpha required two holes to be punched. BTW the two upper rows were 11 and 12. Some special characters (like an ampersand) just used 0, 11, or 12 so could be used in conjunction with a number (1-9 but not 0) but was not recommended.

 

One you understand the columns you can see that  in the examples above you could have an ampersand and a number but not two numbers and you could not have an ampersand and an alpha.

 

OK have looked at some billing cards and GM was using binary by 67 to put multiple options in a single numeric "sometimes" so a "7" could either be option code "7" or it could be options 1, 2, & 4 but not both (computer had to be programmed for which).

 

So "in general" if the option listing showed only 1 ,2, 4, or 8, options could be combined. 3, 5, 7, 9 and they could not. Ampersand could be used with either.

 

Make more sense now ?

 

ps lotsa edits as I triggered the proper synapses, it has been a while.

 

 

Edited September 3, 2017 by padgett (see edit history)

[joe_padavano]

3 hours ago, trimacar said:

I still would like to find a six cylinder 1969 Cutlass, though, they put Chevy engines in them from the factory....

 

A friend of mine just bought one - actually a 1969 F-85 Sport Coupe (post coupe) with the Chevy six.  Manual steering, manual drum brakes.  Unfortunately it has the Jetaway.  Three on the tree would have been cooler.

 

Edited September 3, 2017 by joe_padavano (see edit history)