C2:67 Numbers, can you believe this!

[Gerard Fuccillo (42179)]

Painting the top of the engine and thought I'd check all the numbers and date codes, Here they are:

Car is a 67 convertible 327, 300 HP base engine VIN 194677S122049 (by the last 5 digits and birthday calculator, assembly date is June 29,1967)

Block casting number 3892657, date code F227 (June 22, 1967) Block casting within one week of assembly date. Is this normal?

Engine Stamp pad 7122049 V0626HE (June 26 1967)

And here's the killer! Intake manifold 3872783, GM3T under, date code G26 (July 2, 1966) Would you believe that they used an intake manifold dated almost one year before the block was cast. They must have been scraping the bottom of the barrel for this one of the last 900 C2's.

Have owned this car since 68, and have had no major engine work. Do you think the numbers are correct or have I misread them?

Jerry Fuccillo
#42179

[Patrick Hulst (16386)]

Re: C2:67 Numbers, can you believe this!

Gerald,

The numbers and dates are correct. John Hinckley did some investigating, and it turns out ALL 67 300hp intakes were cast in mid 1966. For specifics, search the Archives, or look at a copy of the Restorer with his article.

Patrick

[Gary #41345]

Re: C2:67 Numbers, can you believe this!

That's correct and documented.

[William Clupper (618)]

Re: C2:67 Numbers, can you believe this!

Not at all unusual, none of the '67 passenger cars used the 300hp intake used on Corvette, while several did in '66, so a normal run at Saginaw late in the '66 model year would have saved them from making short-run setups during the '67 model year. As to the block dates, this is more likely than not as blocks were trucked from Saginaw to Flint several times a day, and the "last in first out" inventory management was used. Longer times between casting and engine build can occur, but they usually are a result of a disturbance in the normal flow. Anything from a traffic accident on I-75 to a production disruption in the casting plant would cause Flint to go "deeper into the pile" and use a block that was older than the "norm". Yours is very normal.

[Barbara Stein (4600)]

No, not all were cast in '66

Hi Patrick. I own a survivor '67 coupe that I am in midst of a body off restoration. The second owner bought it from the original owner in '70 and owned it until earlier this year. It sat in his garage in East Texas for about 25 years. It is an original car. Here are some of the particulars:

Last 5 digits of Serial no.: 20,649 (second week in June, '67)
Stamping code: V060IHO (stamped June 1, '67--327/300 hp pg car)
Engine casting date: E 8 7 (May 8, '67)
Cast Intake manifold: E 22 7 (May 22, 1967).
Cylinder heads: E 22 7; E 23 7 (May 22, '67; May 23, '67)
Tranny date: T7E15D (May 15, '67).
A/C compressor: 060271 (June 2, '67--1st shift).

I have read John Hinckley's article, and I think he concluded that most were cast in '66 but not all.

It's Labor Day, so I need to go "labor" on my resto this morning.

Have a great holiday!
Tony

[Eugene Bliley (13136)]

Re: C2:67 Numbers, can you believe this!

Gerald,
A couple of observations and questions from your post.

First: I wondering about the V in the engine stamp. What does this mean? My '65 is stamped F for Flint.

Second: The engine stamp date is June 26 which was a Monday in 1967. The birthday date of you car is June 29 (a Thursday in '67). How could the engine get from Flint, MI to St. Louis, MO and get installed in a completed car in just three days?

Don't you just love a good mystery?

Regards,
Gene

[Barbara Stein (4600)]

Re: C2:67 Numbers, can you believe this!

Gene. In '67, the s/b cars carried the prefix V rather than F on the engine stamping pad.

Tony

[Gerard Fuccillo (42179)]

Re: C2:67 Numbers, can you believe this!

Here's some other numbers from my Protect-o-Plate:

VIN (last five) 22049
Engine V0626HEH (June 26)
Rear Axle AL0614W (June 14)
Assemlbly Month T (June)
Transmission P7H22 (June 22)

Date under Owners Name 7/18/1967 on plate tape

Delivery date (hand written on last page of warrantee book) 7/15/67
Roy Stauffer Chevrolet Sales, Inc. Scranton, PA. (rubber stamped)

With a block casting date of June 22, and except for the rear axle, looks like everything was cast and assembled within one week from 6/22 to 6/29, ain't that amazing.

Jerry Fuccillo
#42179

[Craig Schultz (29385)]

Re: C2:67 Numbers, can you believe this!

Jerry - I think this my be fairly typical of the base engine cars......due to the high production...Craig

[John Hinckley (29964)]

Re: No, not all were cast in '66

Tony -

In the article I noted a one-day "make-up" run of 783 intakes on February 9th, 1967, which was the only "1967" date noted on any intakes in the survey. Since the article was published, I've received more data, all of which confirms the conclusions from our research, plus two intakes cast on May 22nd, which apparently was a second "make-up" run, very close to the end of the model year. These two runs were apparently made in the separate Service foundry, as the mold lines in the main foundry which would accept the single-mold tooling for the 783 intake had long-since been removed (Fall of '66).

[Barbara Stein (4600)]

Re: No, not all were cast in '66

John. Put me down for one of the May 22, '67 intakes. Does that make me no. 2 or 3? I can send you a photo of the casting date on my intake if you wish.
Tony

[Kevin Muldoon (35046)]

Re: C2:67 Numbers, can you believe this!

Jerry,

It blows me away that you've owned this car all this time and this is the first time you've checked numbers. You really did get the bug at Berkley. All your numbers are perfect, I though we talked about the intake production for 67, I have the 66 intake in my car. From the sounds of it looks like you'll be Top Flighting in no time. And remember you'll make up all the pesky modification deducts with your driving miles in the comfort of AC. Wish I could make it up to see your car.

Kevin

[Terry McManmon (3966)]

Re: No, not all were cast in '66

John,
I would be pleased to print an update to your Restorer article -- whenever you are willing.

[John Hinckley (29964)]

Re: No, not all were cast in '66

Thanks, Terry, but I don't think it's necessary; the primary reason for the survey, Saginaw research, and the article was to support a change to the '67 TMI&JG making an exception to the "6-month rule" for the 783 intake, and Keith included that exception in the new 4th Edition. The supplementary data received since the article was published confirmed our initial conclusions, and only added the May 22nd one-day "make-up" run, and cars with those intakes fall within the six-month rule anyway. '67 was the last year of 3872783 intake usage (Corvette-only part in '67), although they were also used as Service replacements for some years afterwards.

It also provides a template for how to get something changed or added to ANY year TMI&JG; do the research, get all the data you can, analyze it, draw conclusions fully supported by the data, and submit the package to the applicable National Team Leader with a recommendation to revise the TMI&JG. Just yakking about something that should be changed here on the Tech Board won't get it done - it takes some work

[Donald Milone (8060)]

Re: C2:67 Numbers, can you believe this!

Bill Clupper, So, many 300 HP blocks were cast in late 1966? What a surprise! My block was cast on Aug 25,1966 on a March '67 car and it was adjudged to have a non-original block based on the 6-month rule by one of our more "knowledgeable" judges. Vindication feels so good!
Don