Looking for advice on 1963 Impala SS
- Thread starter JohnS
- Start date
Photos posted
Carl 1962
Well Known Member
Thanks JohnS, the cowl tag decodes as an azure aqua SS Impala sport coupe built 2nd week Feb 63 at St Louis with aqua bucket seat interior, white vinyl top, tinted glass, padded dash, long centre console (which means it was built with either a powerglide or 4-speed) and rear seat speaker.
The engine stamp pad has the suffix code T1013QB (October 13th) and looks to be original. It also looks like it has the partial VIN F 167087, and when I compare this VIN sequence # to other VINs from Flint-built cars, it means that this engine went into a car built at Flint MI in about mid December 1962. It's obviously not the original engine to this car.
The engine stamp pad has the suffix code T1013QB (October 13th) and looks to be original. It also looks like it has the partial VIN F 167087, and when I compare this VIN sequence # to other VINs from Flint-built cars, it means that this engine went into a car built at Flint MI in about mid December 1962. It's obviously not the original engine to this car.
Wow… thanks so much!! A nice bit of detective work. Some in the forum were suspicious that the car wasn’t an original matching numbers 409 Impala, but you certainly confirmed it! Thanks again.
Include the engine stamp pictures, not sure I know how to post them for Carl
Carl saw them and has determined that the engine is not original to the car
It was pretty amazing how he was able to find out that the engine wasn’t original to the car. There were enough red flags up to that point where I decided not to go through with the trade but he certainly confirmed my decision
I think the VIN tag isn’t original to the car
Unfortunately I’m not in that position. But even if I was, I’d want the original drivetrain that came in the car.
I emailed the salesperson to tell him I was no longer interested and how the car wasn’t as advertised. We’ll see if they’re reputable enough to change the listing.
Carl 1962
Well Known Member
Thanks for posting the VIN tag because this required a bit more detective work. The VIN 31847S197087 is correct for a St Louis car built in the 2nd week of February 1963, but the fact that the engine stamp pad has the same sequence number required closer examination.
It would appear that the VIN sequence number has been hand stamped on the pad, but whomever did it, mistakenly stamped an F instead of an S at the start. This is possibly because Flint did hand stamp the VIN sequence and they copied a Flint engine stamp. However, a comparison of original stamp pads for cars built at St Louis, shows that St Louis used a very neat gang stamp for the sequence number and this car doesn't have that. This still means that the engine is not original, not only because it was built four months before the car, but the VIN sequence has not been done by the factory. Here's some examples of St Louis 409's which show the neat gang stamp of the VIN sequence.
Last edited:
I'm totally amazed at the collective knowledge and experience, that you guys have with these 409 engines. Very, very impressed by what you all share with everyone. A learning experience for me all the time.
I took a look at that car and I think it's nice, but not worth the almost $60,000.00 asking price. It's just my opinion, but when you buy something advertised as original, that is what you expect. No one wants to be deceived. The problem as I see it, is that some of these cars are portrayed as being original (drivetrain) and they aren't. I'm not sure deception is deliberate or not, but it does occur.
My '62 Impala came from the factory gold in color with a 283 automatic. The owner before me, changed the color to maroon, cloned it to a SS model and dropped in a 327 engine 4 speed. But, I knew all that before I bought it. Those changes didn't bother me because the transition was done correctly. I found a '63 409/340, had it rebuilt and dropped it in. When done, I was very happy with this car. Would I have liked to have had an original one, sure, but I didn't. Went to several shows with this car and was almost constantly asked about it being an original 409. Told them the history. I would have never promoted it as being something it wasn't, Carmine.
I took a look at that car and I think it's nice, but not worth the almost $60,000.00 asking price. It's just my opinion, but when you buy something advertised as original, that is what you expect. No one wants to be deceived. The problem as I see it, is that some of these cars are portrayed as being original (drivetrain) and they aren't. I'm not sure deception is deliberate or not, but it does occur.
My '62 Impala came from the factory gold in color with a 283 automatic. The owner before me, changed the color to maroon, cloned it to a SS model and dropped in a 327 engine 4 speed. But, I knew all that before I bought it. Those changes didn't bother me because the transition was done correctly. I found a '63 409/340, had it rebuilt and dropped it in. When done, I was very happy with this car. Would I have liked to have had an original one, sure, but I didn't. Went to several shows with this car and was almost constantly asked about it being an original 409. Told them the history. I would have never promoted it as being something it wasn't, Carmine.
