Have a question regarding the correct back plate for a Nov 65 dated water pump casting # 3856284. It appears that the design of the back plate was changed sometime after the 65 396 sytle back plate. My Nov 65 water pump has the same style back plate as the 65 396, the flate style. Could this be correct for a Nov 65 pump? Pump has been rebuilt.
I also have a rebuilt sept 66 dated 284 casting and the back plate style is different; but I don't know if this is correct for either as I don't know what the back cover is suppose to look like. It is basicaly flat; but has a large diameter ring stamp into the plate and 5 of the side have a little bend one way and the 6th side is bent just the opposite, so the plate can only go on in one of two positions. Could someone send me a photo of the change in design? Or post one here? Or based on my discription tell me if they think it's possible correct and for what years?
Regarding the shaft, what was the design change from the 65 396 to the 66 427? Why the change? Did this change the mounting height of the pulley flange?
Thanks, Jim
I also have a rebuilt sept 66 dated 284 casting and the back plate style is different; but I don't know if this is correct for either as I don't know what the back cover is suppose to look like. It is basicaly flat; but has a large diameter ring stamp into the plate and 5 of the side have a little bend one way and the 6th side is bent just the opposite, so the plate can only go on in one of two positions. Could someone send me a photo of the change in design? Or post one here? Or based on my discription tell me if they think it's possible correct and for what years?
Regarding the shaft, what was the design change from the 65 396 to the 66 427? Why the change? Did this change the mounting height of the pulley flange?
Thanks, Jim
Comment