Judging A.O.Smith body time lag

[Wayne M.]

There have been a few posts recently concerning the trim tag body build code on A-body cars, and how it sometimes lags dates on other St.Louis components.

The 1965 Judging Manual, 3rd edition, is quite clear on checking VIN and trim tags BEFORE judging commences, by comparing a table of month-end VIN #'s with trim date code for that month. The manual goes on to state: IF THERE ARE INCONSISTENCIES IN THE TRIM PLATE AND THE VIN PLATE, JUDGING WILL TERMINATE.

Mention is made, in the TAGS section of Operations Check, of the A-body build in Ionia Michigan, starting in Jan '64 (to end of '67 model year), but no guideline is given as to the acceptable lag due to A-bodies transit to St.Louis and subsequent holding while awaiting position on the vehicle assembly line. You can see what happens; at roughly 40 bodies/day production at each location, and (say) 10 days transit to St.Louis, the first 400 or so A-body cars off the final assembly line at the beginning of the month will bear a body build month code that doesn't correspond with the Judging Guide VIN table for that month. Example: used to own '65 # 16524 (off line 1st production day of May), yet the trim tag (A-body, coded I22 [April 22nd]). In fact, the first few days of a new month's production will also show 60 to 80 S-bodies produced the previous month, due to the one or two days lag from the time the trim tag is installed.

Perhaps not describing this lag in the guide is just an oversight. But, if the answer is that the judges do take this into account, then it would be nice to know what parameters they use to ensure consistency. Opinions welcome.

[Roy S.]

Re: Judging A.O.Smith body time lag

Wayne,

The trim tag verification is handled at regional and national meets by the National Team Leaders, each of them is familiar enough with the norm or standard if you will for production lag on the A.O.Smith bodies and it varies according to time of year, year, etc. As an example in 66 a D dated Smith body indicates a November body build but a D dated St. Louis body indicates a December build. So a final assembly VIN number which is attached at St. Louis for a November 30 car of 1965, actual 1966 production might typicaly have a early to mid November D Smith body or a mid to late November C St. Louis body. Of more significant importance in this scenario is the actual body number and its relationship to the production month of the plant in which it was built.

In short, yes there is a potential lag on the Smith body, that is why the judges relate everything to final production serial number of the month. What is quite common in 65, 66 & 67 Smith bodies is a engine machined after the body was built, in every case however with original cars the engine machine date is prior to the St. Louis final assembly date.

Ther has been no attempt to camoflage this information, it simply varies from year to year and month to month, the best we can hope is that we recognize it exists and give proper consideration to each individual case.

It has long been speculated and holds true in most cases that the sith bodies were basic low option with very few frills. If you or I were running a production facility and had to receive bodies from two sources we would probably both want the source we had little control over and were stockpiling bodies from to be base low otion bodies we could use as fill in the production, I believe this is exactly what GM did. As a result it is very hard to say what the normal lag for a Smith body is, we just have to recognize it exists.

Hope this helps.

Roy

[Wayne W.]

Re: Judging A.O.Smith body time lag

I don`t necessarily agree that AO Smith cars were low option units. I have seen too many high optioned Smith cars. Maybe some things like power windows that would have been installed at AO Smith but not most other options that had no relationship to the body.

[Loren L.]

Re: Judging A.O.Smith body time lag

It's always interesting to hear about quasi-official NCRS "speculation" and wonder what it is based upon. As a prior response notes about AO Smith bodies and their high options, I'd like to offer AO Smith body #7282, built JULY 9, 1965 and assembled on car #23561 with L79, C60, N40, G81 & K66. I do NOT think that this could be viewed as a "low-optioned" car. The fact that it was built in this manner COULD explain the delay between body build and assembly, but that is more of a factor of DEMAND - perhaps of color? - than any presupposed origin of "options" - the bodies built in Ionia would have been made on "PROJECTIONS", not on orders.

[Wayne W.]

Re: Judging A.O.Smith body time lag

I have seen Smith bodies that were not intended to be airconditioned, but were converted at StLouis to AC. I have a 67 coupe 13*** ser. # that has a rear window dated months too soon and has a AC decal on it which it isn`t supposed to have. Goes to show anything goes on these especially later 67s.

[Roy S.]

Re: Judging A.O.Smith body time lag

Loren,

Not being a well-educated attorney leads me to say things that others like to pick at. If you will notice my very first sentence of the paragraph you disliked said, "It has long been speculated and holds true in most cases that the smith bodies were basic low option with very few thrills." It does not say they were all low option. It does not say quasi-official NCRS "speculation". However if you would like to volunteer to conduct a survey on original unrestored A.O.Smith bodied cars I think you will find that the norm is low option. I am sure they were not all low option and I did not say they were. There are many options that did not affect body build, several did. I agree that if a high optioned Smith body was available it might have set longer than a low optioned body. That is the exact reason you cannot put a standard lead-time on the Smith bodies it varied.

Roy

[Brandon K.]

Re: Judging A.O.Smith body time lag

So, is it possible then, to have a '67 AO Smith body car with power windows? I was under the impression (from information given me by judges at the FL NCRS meet) that only St louis cars could have power windows, and that the dimple on the hinge pillar on SL cars is for positioning of the conduit opening.

How about big block cars? St Louis only? What's the concensus?

Brandon

[Loren L.]

Re: Judging A.O.Smith body time lag

The cover of The Corvette Restorer, Volume 6, # 3 shows a big block 1966 convertible just exiting the paint booth at AO Smith.

[Wayne M.]

Re: Judging A.O.Smith body time lag

Brandon --- The 1967 model year is a strange bird for A.O.Smith bodies. First, this facility was on strike from early September '66 to mid-January '67 (per Noland's Vol 2), so all vehicle production had St.Louis bodies in this interim. By then, it was already known that Ionia would not continue producting Corvette bodies for the new '68 Corvette.

According to Vol.2, some early '67 big blocks (up to approx VIN# 1000) could have come from Ionia, but they couldn't produce the quality of the St. Louis hood stripes. The decision was then made to produce big blocks only at St.Louis

As Loren has pointed out, there are photos of '66 big block production at Ionia, and the same issue of the RESTORER, as well as Noland's Vol.2, shows many photos of big block '65s on the body line at A.O.Smith. As for power windows in 1967, all I can say is that they were installed on A-bodies in '65.

Also (at least in '65), A-bodied cars were produced with radios, power brakes, power windows, air conditioning, tint, telescopic, leather, automatic trans (consoles), hardtops, C & C group, and probably K66; the jury is out on side exhaust, and big tanks are doubtful. The other options are only added at St.Louis.

So I haven't answered your question re. A31 cars for '67, but I see no reason why they should not have been produced at Ionia. Here is an excellent opportunity for all members with these A-bodied '67s to jump right in and tell us, especially those with tank stickers. Thanks to A. Grenning's lectures, I learned that the "Y" option coding on the lower (comfort and convenience) group of options signifies A-bodied versions of the normal coding.

This discussion board provides the tool to prove whether no A31 in A-bodies '67s is fact or urban legend.