Richard there's a big difference between MK IIs and MK II's, one means there was a Mark II stroke (the 427 race motor), the other means there was more than one Mark II, as in different versions. Curiously your statement that NASCAR put the cubic inch limit at 427 in November 1962, when did NHRA put THEIR limit at 427?. When did they first build a Mystery motor?, do YOUR sources provide that date?. And. curiously, both Ford and Mopar had 426's to race in February 1963, a short 2 omths later than your date (and the Pontiac 421). Could it be the 427 (7 liter) limit was a done deal BEFORE November 1962 but only made official on that date?. And an "artists rendering" of a 1962 Ford with a fastback roof is even MORE disputeable than my letter from Vinve Piggins second in command stating the progression of big block engines. That photo was obviously doctored on a computer well after 1962. No matter, Ford developed a fastback roofline for the 1963 Ford in time for it to be used at Daytona.
There is no dispute that there were two versions of the "Z-11" engine, the Mark I which was the 409 version released for use in the summer of 1962 at the NHRA Summernationals and the Mark IIs which was the engine used in the Z-11 package. And that engine is listed in Chevrolet documents variously as "MK IIS, MK IIs and MK II (s). I never read a document from back then nor ever saw an article about there being a Mark IIs, or Mark IIS, or MARK II(s), only as a Mark II. But if it makes you happy go ahead and claim there was a Mark II and a Mark IIs, no skin off MY teeth. And at least I actually TALKED to Kieneth!. which of course to you is hearsay because I didn't tape record it.
The point is, and what you keep missing, is the Mark II was ALWAYS refered to as a Mark II back in the '60's, you'll never see it refered to as a Mark IIs. It was released for racing as the Mark II, not the Mark II stroke. If your trying to be historically ACCURATE use the terminology Chevrolet used back then, Mark II. I said throughout my missives that there was most ceratinly 409 versions of the Mark II engine, simply because the crank and rods were drop in and all they needed was a different piston than the 427 version. And actually they could use the SAME piston with a different piston pin location. And the difference in rod length between a Z-11 motor and a 409 was?. How much Richard?. Clue, the difference in stroke was .150 (3.500 vs 3.650), but the rods weren't exactly that much in diffrence. They could raise or lower the pin height by .125 with no big deal. If your going to call the Mystery motor a Mark IIs, then don't call it anything BUT a Mark IIs, after all it would HAVE to be if there WAS a Mark II which was based on a 409 (which no one back then ever heard of).
By the way, any document YOU'LL ever see, EVER!, will be a copy of the original. And anything you've ever read, EVER, was based on someone's "memory", or "recollection". And every book you've ever read (with the exception of Paul Van Valkenburgs) was written by someone who doesn't/didn't know squat about the way things were, and/or were engineers. Fast Chevy's is a pewrfect example of what I'm talking about. No one EVER put all these guys from "the day" together in one room and picked their collective brains, and now THAT can never be done.
Did they build a 409 version of the Mark II mystery motor?. Yes they did. Did they call it the Mark II and the 427 version a Mark IIs, no. But be mule headed, I'm not going to argue with you about it any more.
I broke my replies down into segments to try and explain the progression of the Mark IV. Go to :
corvetterepair@yahoo.com, the guy who runs it was very interested in a 1964 version of a 427 version of the L-88. But your right Richard, in my simplified explaination of the growth of the Mark II into the Mark IV I could have/should have left it out, all of it really.
This ends my replies to this discussion/topic.