I've just run across an all-aluminum T-10 that was assembled in Dec of 1963 - WM1333 - which I assumed would have been for Service. Upon cleaning however, the top of the main case is stamped "834S29483" - If assume "S" equals St Louis, what would they have been building at SWt Louis that still used T10s six months after Munci was born?
-
-
Re: T-10
The '63 model year for Corvette began with Borg T10 4-speeds, went through a running change to an 'improved' design (around Nov '62 if memory serves) and didn't see the Muncie 4-speed phase in to replace it until well into mid-production (Feb '63 time frame).
But, the stamp on the case says this probably isn't a Corvette tranny as Corvette was 837/867 (coupe/convertible) for body code and the running S/N 29483 is beyond the 21513 Corvettes built that year. St. Louis also built trucks.... -
Re: T-10
They also built full-size passenger cars - probably out of an Impala SS or similar; in those days, only passenger cars over 300hp got VIN derivative stamps.Comment
-
Re: T-10
john: i'm told the pass car 396's and 427's got a vin # as well as the 409's installed(obviously) in the pass cars. just when did chevy vin the small blocks and big blocks in their pass cars? thanks, mikeComment
-
Re: T-10
Loren,
That is rather odd to find a "factory" T-10 (obviously installed in a '64 model, considering the Dec. '63 assembly date). I can't tell you what it's from, but I can tell you it's not from a full size passenger car. The "834" prefix (I assume) relates to a model number, but I don't know what it means. A passenger car 4-spd would have only had the "S" followed by the 6 digit derivitive. Also, the light truck 4-speeds were not the same as car models.
Maybe John H, might know whether St. Louis was producing BOP cars in '64. Perhaps some of those cars continued using the T-10 into '64.
Verne.Comment
-
Re: T-10
Verne -
St. Louis (the "big" plant) was srictly a Chevrolet-producing plant; although it became a GMAD plant along with all the other Fisher/Chevrolet assembly plants, it never produced any B-O-P products - just Chevy passenger cars and trucks (and it was the sole source for the Corvair-based light trucks and vans, which were built up on the old 8th floor - Corvan, Rampside, etc.).
Mike -
Dunno for a concrete fact that that era passenger cars with SB's of 300hp or more got VIN stamps; got it from folks who are more familiar with the early pass. car info than I am - could be bogus info.Comment
-
The truth
Gentlemen,
It is difficult to determine the tone behind printed words on a page, but be assured, the tone expresed here is a calm, polite, albeit serious one.
The information I have provided regarding VIN derivitives on 300hp small block passenger car engines is not bogus. Firstly, there is absolutely no reason why I would make this stuff up, and secondly, it has been my driven obsession to seek the historical truth within my particular area of interest in this hobby of ours. I always seek empirical evidence from field work with original cars to either verify or disprove original printed literature, or more importantly, to gain knowledge which has never surfaced in any printed resource.
I have never uncovered any original Chevy literature which states these VIN derivitives should be, or have been, put on SB engines in the '62-'64 passenger models, but I have, as I have stated before, examples of such. They were taken from original, unmolested cars - cars that tell no lies. I can't explain the reason behind their existence; I only know that they exist.
Sitting in my shop for the last 15 years or more is a complete 300hp 327 which I pulled from a one-owner '64 Impala Sport Sedan (4dr hardtop) parts car. The car was built at Wilmington, DE. It's engine's original deck pad is stamped Y152190 F1230SB. It is an 870 block, cast L243. I have also documented other 300hp VIN-stamped examples from the Baltimore, Tarrytown, Flint and St. Loius plants through the '62-'64 models. They all had suffix codes of SB or RB. These cars are probably not accessible to me anymore, but their information is recorded on my field forms and in the dbase in my little Mac, which I set up in '84.
Again, my hobby mission is finding the truth - not proving myself right. I have made mistakes and come to some wrong conclusions along the way, but when I find I was wrong and learn the truth, I am very happy for it and welcome it with open arms. Along with all the hard work and dedication I've put into my "little" segment of the hobby, I take some pride in the positive reputation I have gained in that area - and my own personal integrity is very important to me. The truth is the most important thing - regardless of where it comes from, or where it leads.
On this forum, I have tried to help people find the truth when their questions led into the passenger car area. Perhaps my efforts are in vain if it is deemed my info is possibly bogus. I feel my integrity and/or my data is being questioned. I have asked questions on this forum about Corvettes when I did not know the answer for a "concrete fact" from my own experiences. I didn't assume the answers I received were possibly bogus just because I didn't already know the answer, nor was I too skeptical to accept new knowledge because it came from someone on the other side of a well established hobby property line.
Oh well...................
Best wishes toward your future enjoyment of the hobby.
Verne Frantz
PS: Loren's T-10 is still a mystery. I can find no record of an 834 Chevy model, and the vin is one digit too short for a passenger car.Comment
-
Re: The truth
Verne -
Poor choice of words on my part - didn't mean to impugn your information or research; what I meant to say was that I have no personal knowledge or experience with the issue that would allow me to make a definitive statement one way or the other, and that others are more qualified to discuss it than I am. Keep up the good work - if people didn't take the time and trouble to research all this stuff, we wouldn't learn anythingComment
-
Verle, is it possible that not ALL of the
plants did so? I have a 66 El Camino in the back yard that was built at the Fremont (CA) plant and there is no VIN - just the T1230EM - Yes, of course it's missing the Emissions stuff.....Comment
-
Re: Verle, is it possible that not ALL of the
Loren,
I don't know much about Chevelles (ElCaminos), or the '66 model year, (other than some dabbling I've done into my own '69 El Camino) so I just went to the Team Chevelle site. They indicate your 396/325hp engine "should" have the VIN stamped on the pad.
As for what I am used to seeing through '64, I have seen several small blocks and big blocks without the VIN on the pad. In a few cases, I was in contact with the original owners, who indicated that the engines were the originals, and from my inspection of the car, I believed them. So, from my experience, the practice was not upheld 100% of the time.
That doesn't surprise me. Imagine a few of the variables:
a.Was the directive to do so made clear?
b. Was it made at each assembly plant?
c. Was it on the inspector's list to check?
I wish I knew the answers to those questions.
Verne.Comment
Comment