'72 LT-1 Emissions Label Part#

[Billy Olson]

The emissions label on my car has part# 6271008 but the Judging Manual states that this part# is for a 1971. My car is a very early 1972. Any thoughts?

Thanks.
Billy

[Harmon C.]

Re: '72 LT-1 Emissions Label Part#

On the bottom line of your emissions label is that 1972 model year? I can't tell from the picture.

[Billy Olson]

Re: '72 LT-1 Emissions Label Part#

yes it is 1972..I had to re-size the picture to get it to view so unfortunately it is a little blurred.

[Harmon C.]

Re: '72 LT-1 Emissions Label Part#

I would not change it and hope the LT-1 people check it out and give you some feedback. In the picture it appears as an old original label to me.

Lyle

[Tom R.]

Re: '72 LT-1 Emissions Label Part#

I've come across some information that conflicted with the emission information published in the tech manual but I don't recall off hand the source. I keep a list of emission certification labels and the LK broadcast code is a 72 label assigned to base motors with CDH and CDJ (350/200) engine suffix codes with a note referencing NB2 which I believe was used for California emissions.

Here' what I would be curious to learn:
1. What's your engine suffix?
2. Does it have a smog pump?
3. What's the carb part number and date code?

With the information we can "triangulate" the information and offer further insights into the emission certification on your 72.

Also note that the LT1 emission certification label LP listed tune-up specs for only a manual transmission and I don't believe M40 was available with LT1 in 72. In contrast, the LK label lists specs for automatic transmission so we see some inconsistency here but perhaps the LT1 guys can make sense of this.

[Billy Olson]

Re: '72 LT-1 Emissions Label Part#

Thanks Tom.

engine suffix is CRT
smog pump is there
carb info:
-part # 3999263
-LIST 6239-1
-date 1354 (1971, march, 5th week? not sure why there is and extra "4")

This car is #00085. I've asked the members here about the CRT suffix in the past and it may be unique to this car assuming that the engine is original. It is also a true LT-1 (L in VIN). I appreciate all the help!

Billy

[Terry M.]

1970-72 TIM&JG

Billy,
Please re-read the TIM&JG.

It (at least my copy) says this label is for a 1972. Note well the space between the AZ (which IS 1971) label and the LJ label which IS 1972.

Note also that each year listing begins with a base motor and continues through the large block listings.

The year on the left side is centers within the total number of available labels for that year. I allowed extra lines between each year grouping to signal the change.

[Billy Olson]

Re: 1970-72 TIM&JG

Thanks Terry.

I see my mistake in reading the manual...This may actually provide some clarification for the CRT engine.

First of all this car came out of California to Arizona probably 15 years ago, but I have no proof that California was its original destination. The LK label with the specific mention of "...conforms to federal and California regulations..." is consistent with it being a CA delivery car. Is it possible that the LK label is unique to the CRT engine and that it was some sort of early attempt at a different "emissions friendly" package (possibly prototype or GM test)for California? What doesn't make any sense, however, is that per the TIM&JG this should be for a base car.

Thanks again,
Billy

[Terry M.]

Re: 1970-72 TIM&JG

Yes, the base designation doesn't fit with the installed engine -- but I have seen that type of error before. I know of one 1972 with a base label over an LT1 label. It appears they corrected the initial mistake by simply placing the base label over the LT1 label. Time, of course, has allowed the top label to deteriorate, partially exposing the lower LT1 label.

Inspectors were supposed to check for these kinds of errors, but they were not as thorough as we are. On the other hand we have had a lot more time to work at it than they had.

Owning an early or late production car will always yield some interesting challenges. Judging one of those also is a challenge. That is just one part of what makes this hobby fun.

[Billy Olson]

Re: 1970-72 TIM&JG

Terry,

WHEN my restoration starts..someday... is it better to leave the old tag or replace it with what it should have?
Thanks
Billy

[Terry M.]

Re: 1970-72 TIM&JG

On the one hand everything else will look new, and the label will not. Convincing the judges that it really is a factory mistake will be much more of a challenge with a restored car than one where every part appears to be of the same vintage.

The other side is that replacement labels (currently) are obviously just that. Unless the available replacement labels take a quantum leap in quality (one can always hope) over the next years -- leave the original on there would be my vote. When in doubt using the original piece is usually the best course. This is, however, a situation where the points deduction may wash. Originality in one case and condition in the other.