My First Post-3877459 Transmission Tag

[Keith W.]

Re: My First Post-3877459 Transmission Tag

George - From what I've seen I would hesitate in handing over 85k unless I had a couple of 400 level plus judges, go over that Vette.

IMHO - for me the below link is a better combination with traceable history and 3 x top flight - inc judging sheets

would bargain around the 95k - what ever you choose be carefull, double check on double check again - best of luck Keith

http://www.webeautos.com/detail-1965...-12946308.html

I've purchased before through webeauto About 2 years ago brought a coupe 66 427/390 - that was my first and last BB Vette - great car / side pipes = noise

kjswillcox@btinternet.com

[George O.]

Re: My First Post-3877459 Transmission Tag

George - From what I've seen I would hesitate in handing over 85k unless I had a couple of 400 level plus judges, go over that Vette.

IMHO - for me the below link is a better combination with traceable history and 3 x top flight - inc judging sheets

would bargain around the 95k - what ever you choose be carefull, double check on double check again - best of luck Keith

http://www.webeautos.com/detail-1965...-12946308.html

I've purchased before through webeauto About 2 years ago brought a coupe 66 427/390 - that was my first and last BB Vette - great car / side pipes = noise

kjswillcox@btinternet.com

Thank you Keith. I don't disagree with your assessment, but I'm pretty firm on the the color combination of Rally Red and Red interior, as well as, 66 or 67. That being said, I'm certainly not married to this specific car. My spidey sense is quite elevated and although I have a classic auto appraiser/NRSA Corvette owner joining me to inspect the car, he is not a 400 judge as you've suggested. The now-deceased previous owner reached his 300 level?

[Greg W.]

Re: My First Post-3877459 Transmission Tag

George, Not every 400 level judge will know every part of the car. Altoona showed me that. But the car looks to good in the pics for the price, if you do not want an original car and you think it is what you want then get it. BUT BE SURE. !!! If you care to share the past 300 level judge many may know him.
Greg

[George O.]

Re: My First Post-3877459 Transmission Tag

George, Not every 400 level judge will know every part of the car. Altoona showed me that. But the car looks to good in the pics for the price, if you do not want an original car and you think it is what you want then get it. BUT BE SURE. !!! If you care to share the past 300 level judge many may know him.
Greg

His name was Ron Hendrickson from the Mineapolis area; the former owner of the car

[Joe L.]

Re: My First Post-3877459 Transmission Tag

I am about to purchase my very first Corvette, a 1966 427/425 HP Convertible. I am not an expert and have spent hours trying to research the car. The engine and transmission are supposedly original (yeah, I know). I assume that it's an M20 or M21 based on the 3885010, 3857584, 3884685 casting numbers. My problem is the 3877459 transmission tag. After 2 1/2 hours of research, it appears that tag number is for a '66 Chevelle. Can someone here offer some guidance? And yes, I am meeting with an appraiser at the car prior to purchase; I just want to be as knowledgeable as possible prior to inspecting the car. Also, how much would this hurt the value of the car if it isn't original?

George------

GM #3877459 was, apparently, a PRODUCTION-only part number as I can find no record that it was ever available in SERVICE. However, the number looks like a late 1965- early 1966 released part number. The fact that it, apparently, has some known 1966 Chevelle history pretty much confirms this. Keep in mind that Muncie 4 speeds for Chevelles (or other GM models for that matter) were identical to those used in Corvettes. For example, a 1966 M-21 Muncie installed in a Chevelle with any certain axle ratio and tires with certain revs per mile would be the same as a Corvette with an M-21 Muncie and the same axle ratio tires with the same revs per mile. So, if some 1966 Chevelles used the 3877459, then some Corvettes could have used it, too. The only differences, and consequently different GM part numbers, between all 1966 Muncie transmissions was M-20, M-21, or M-22 and the installed speedometer drive and driven gears.

[George O.]

Re: My First Post-3877459 Transmission Tag

George------

GM #3877459 was, apparently, a PRODUCTION-only part number as I can find no record that it was ever available in SERVICE. However, the number looks like a late 1965- early 1966 released part number. The fact that it, apparently, has some known 1966 Chevelle history pretty much confirms this. Keep in mind that Muncie 4 speeds for Chevelles (or other GM models for that matter) were identical to those used in Corvettes. For example, a 1966 M-21 Muncie installed in a Chevelle with any certain axle ratio and tires with certain revs per mile would be the same as a Corvette with an M-21 Muncie and the same axle ratio tires with the same revs per mile. So, if some 1966 Chevelles used the 3877459, then some Corvettes could have used it, too. The only differences, and consequently different GM part numbers, between all 1966 Muncie transmissions was M-20, M-21, or M-22 and the installed speedometer drive and driven gears.

Thanks Joe, that's promising. I'll keep this in mind as I finalize the process.

[Greg H.]

Re: My First Post-3877459 Transmission Tag

Hi George,
The M22 will have a drain plug sticking out from the lower trans casting . No plug is visible in the sales photos.

Good Luck with your new car.

Greg

[George O.]

Re: My First Post-3877459 Transmission Tag

Thanks everyone for all of the advice. After several dozen hours of research and a hands-on inspection with a classic car inspector, I am now the proud owner of a 1966 427/425HP Convertible. It has some minor issues that I will be bugging the board about, but at the end of the day, I think I have a fabulous Stingray.

[David B.]

Re: My First Post-3877459 Transmission Tag

George------

GM #3877459 was, apparently, a PRODUCTION-only part number as I can find no record that it was ever available in SERVICE. However, the number looks like a late 1965- early 1966 released part number. The fact that it, apparently, has some known 1966 Chevelle history pretty much confirms this. Keep in mind that Muncie 4 speeds for Chevelles (or other GM models for that matter) were identical to those used in Corvettes. For example, a 1966 M-21 Muncie installed in a Chevelle with any certain axle ratio and tires with certain revs per mile would be the same as a Corvette with an M-21 Muncie and the same axle ratio tires with the same revs per mile. So, if some 1966 Chevelles used the 3877459, then some Corvettes could have used it, too. The only differences, and consequently different GM part numbers, between all 1966 Muncie transmissions was M-20, M-21, or M-22 and the installed speedometer drive and driven gears.

3877459 is a Production Assy. part No. ND.
It is listed on frame 2 of Transmission & Extension assembly chart #3869918 for 4 spd Muncie with a date of 1-26-67
3877459 is listed as 1st 2.20, 2nd 1.64, 3rd 1.64 4th 1 reverse 2.27 all other part # this particular built trans has internally is also listed but too numerous to list. Super important to still have this tag if one needs to know internal parts.

[George O.]

Re: My First Post-3877459 Transmission Tag

3877459 is a Production Assy. part No. ND.
It is listed on frame 2 of Transmission & Extension assembly chart #3869918 for 4 spd Muncie with a date of 1-26-67
3877459 is listed as 1st 2.20, 2nd 1.64, 3rd 1.64 4th 1 reverse 2.27 all other part # this particular built trans has internally is also listed but too numerous to list. Super important to still have this tag if one needs to know internal parts.

David, is the 1-26-67 date referencing the chart or the transmission? My transmission is P0112 which I read to be Muncie, January 12th which appears to be a 1966 transmission based on the following:

1963-1966 production codes will start with the letter P and have four numbers, for example: P0421.
1. P represents the manufacturing plant, Muncie.
2. 04 represents the month code when the unit was assembled, April.
3. 21 represents the day of the month the unit was assembled, the 21st day of April.

1967-1974 production codes will start with the letter P and have five numbers, for example: P9D09.
1. P represents the manufacturing plant, Muncie.
2. 9 represents the model year.
3. D represents the month code when the unit was assembled, April.
4. 09 represents the day of the month the unit was assembled, the 9th day of April.

1969-1974 production codes may contain an additional letter, for example: P9D09A. This was done to aid in identifying the transmission ratios. Some early 1969 transmissions did not have this additional letter.

[Patrick B.]

Re: My First Post-3877459 Transmission Tag

George----- You are correct that the castings and stamping on this transmission are all consistent with a 1966 Corvette. If the metal tag is really a 1967 tag, probably someone put it on to make the car look more "factory new" without worrying about what trans it came off of.

[Joe L.]

Re: My First Post-3877459 Transmission Tag

GM #3877459 is a late 1965 to early 1966 released part number. It may have continued to have been used for 1967 but the part number was released well before 1967.

[Donald A.]

Re: My First Post-3877459 Transmission Tag

Thanks everyone for all of the advice. After several dozen hours of research and a hands-on inspection with a classic car inspector, I am now the proud owner of a 1966 427/425HP Convertible. It has some minor issues that I will be bugging the board about, but at the end of the day, I think I have a fabulous Stingray.

Beautiful car George, glad it all worked out for you. Just an FYI as you get to know your car and start fixing the little this-and-that stuff consider correcting your windshield wipers! Everytime I see one of the C2 photos with the driver's side wiper above the pass side I cringe, if they catch they can ruin the wiper motor parts. Proper fitment is pass side wiper ABOVE the driver side wiper.

[Jeff B.]

Re: My First Post-3877459 Transmission Tag

Beautiful car George, glad it all worked out for you. Just an FYI as you get to know your car and start fixing the little this-and-that stuff consider correcting your windshield wipers! Everytime I see one of the C2 photos with the driver's side wiper above the pass side I cringe, if they catch they can ruin the wiper motor parts. Proper fitment is pass side wiper ABOVE the driver side wiper.

Don - is this windshield wiper placement (passenger side on top) also proper for 1967s?

[Donald A.]

Re: My First Post-3877459 Transmission Tag

Don - is this windshield wiper placement (passenger side on top) also proper for 1967s?

Yes. 66 Judging guide states "Wipers are installed right over left and do not hit each other or the windshield trim." Same thing for 67s