for JOE

[lyndon sharpton]

what is the part # for a new AC Delco battery for a 71 with a 454, is it a group number are is it a part number? thanks

[Joe L.]

Re: for JOE

lyndon------

Delco batteries have a GM part number, but the batteries are not generally available through the GM parts system. GM dealers can obtain them, but they do so through the Delco parts system. Consequently, the GM part number ("long number") for the batteries are irrelevent and the only number that matters as far as obtaining a battery is the Delco system part number

In any event, there are 2 current batteries which Delco catalogues for the 1971 Corevette with LS-5 application. The first is a dual terminal battery of Delco # 70DT6YR. This battery has BOTH side terminals and top terminals. It is a 465 cold cranking amp battery and has a 6 year warranty (pro-rated).

The second is Delco #74-6YR. This battery has side terminal only. It is also a 465 cold cranking amp battery and also has a 6 year warranty (pro-rated).

Other Delco batteries would actually fit your application and work just fine. However, the above 2 are the only ones which Delco catalogues for your application using their current nomenclature system.

The side terminal-only battery is more "correct" than the dual terminal in terms of configuration. So, if "correctness" is most important to you, it might be the one to go with. However, from a FUNCTIONAL perspective, the dual terminal is better. Side terminal batteries are difficult to charge with standard size charger clamps and are even more difficult to JUMP using jumper cables. This is especially true in a rear compartment battery application like 68-82 Corvette. With a dual terminal battery, you can easily jump the car, if necessary, or attach any size charger clamps to the battery without disturbing or "monkeying around with" the side terminal connections. To me, it's a huge asset to have the top terminal available.

[Patrick H.]

Re: for JOE

74-6YR according to the most obvious source, www.acdelco.com

[Joe L.]

Re: for JOE

Patrick-----

Well, what do you know? They agree with me. I knew I was doing something right. They don't know about the 70DT6YR option, though?

[Patrick H.]

Re: for JOE

Well, they do, but I didn't mention the dual terminal option. I usually prefer the side terminal option.

[lyndon sharpton]

Re: for JOE

where I live Delco stuff is hard to come by, the chevrolet dealerships doesn't even show that 74-6YR number in his system

[Joe L.]

Re: for JOE

Patrick-----

The reason that I asked is that the AC Delco on-line parts information, while very useful, is not always "complete", "unambiguous", or "accurate". They're getting better all the time, but they're not "there" just yet.

As far as side-terminal-only batteries go, I think that they're going to be a "dying breed". I expect that the "dual terminals" are going to be becoming the only option for many applications.

The side terminal battery is pretty much a GM "phenomenon". First used for the late 1969 model year (with Corvettes as the launch application), the side terminal battery rapidly became ubiquitous among GM vehicles. However, it never really "caught on" among other automakers. Ford and Chrysler pretty much stayed with top terminals. I don't know of any foreign manufacturer that went to side terminals.

Well, now GM has finally "abandoned" side terminal, too. Beginning with the 2004 model year, GM beagn RAPIDLY phasing back in the top terminal batteries. That does not bode well for the continued manufacture of side terminal-only batteries. I expect that the dual terminal will become the "standard" for the future as far as SERVICE batteries go. That's not all bad since, as I say, the dual terminal batteries have a certain utility value that, from a functional perspective, makes them a better choice, especially for C3 Corvettes.

There is a problem, though. It is difficult, if not impossible, to use a dual terminal battery with most C4 Corvettes; they just won't fit into the tight battery compartment due to top terminal interference with other components. So, it's going to be a problem for "C4 guys and gals" if the C4 battery size ever goes exclusively to dual terminal.

[John L.]

Re: for JOE/465 CCA?

Joe,
Is 465 Cold cranking Amps enough for a Big Block? I know you matched up the specs., but is that enough? When I replaced my battery in my 71BB I looked for the largest CCA I could find, Im sure it was a lot more than 465. The cranking amps was 950 I think, not sure what the CCA was, but I think it is a lot more than 465. Just asking.
Thanks

[John L.]

Re: for JOE/465 CCA?

Joe,
I just checked, my amps are stated @ 963 @ 32 degrees F., the CCA is 770 @ 0 degrees F. I just wanted a battery that wouldn't bog down when it's hot or when it's freezing. I don't have much trouble with this one. May be overkill but it will turn over the 454 without trouble. Thanks. John Liner

[Joe L.]

Re: for JOE/465 CCA?

John-----

465 cca sounds low to me, too. However, that's what GM says is the rating for the battery and that's the battery that they catalogue for the application.

[lyndon sharpton]

Re: for JOE/465 CCA?

anyone know what a repo has for the CCA? the R89W?