'63 Production Sequence vs. Engine Casting

[Michael H.]

Re: '63 Production Sequence vs. Engine Casting

Don't have info on the engine casting dates but the assembly date for my motor was November 6th and his was September 27th!! So they were definitely not cast close together.

Regards, Tom

That's somewhat common for non standard engines, especially a 340 HP. Because it was low volume, Corvette only, the Flint plant probably wouldn't build that engine as randomly as, say, a pass car 283 or 250/300 327.

The Flint engine plant was not locked in sequence with the St Louis plant so no engine was "job specific" until it was pulled from the storage rack at the St louis plant. As soon as it was hung from the engine dress line conveyor, it became "job specific".

[Jack H.]

Re: '63 Production Sequence vs. Engine Casting

WAY back when, I was curious about dated part consistency so I did a little statistical analyis using the survey data cited in Noland Adam's Vol 2 book. What I found was the mean or average lead time for a given dated part ran 6-8 weeks prior to the car's assy/VIN.

But, what was surprising was the standard deviation was about the same as the mean! That means there was a LOT of intrinsic variance in individual dated component selection(s) during the overall build cycle!

For a Gaussian distribution, roughly 95% of the spread will be contained within 2.5 standard deviations from the mean. That lead me to believe the NCRS 6-month rule had footing on solid ground!

It also told me something's 'up' when I judge a car with ALL of its dated parts falling nicely into the 6-8 week time window. And, in the same vein, it suggests that looking at other Corvettes with similar configuration and similar build dates is probably a waste of time when one tries to decide what's 'right' for their car...

[Stuart F.]

Re: '63 Production Sequence vs. Engine Casting

Very interesting thread to me, enough that I went out in the garage and re-checked mine. I have records of every common number, but realized I never had the block casting date. My engine pad is pristine and clear - never touched and it shows an engine assembly date of F0628RE. The car was assembled on 09 July 1963. When I checked the casting part number I find 3782870, as expected, but I don't see any sign of a casting date any where on the bell housing flange.

Can any one give me an idea as to where else I might look on the block? I saw reference to a place on later years - that of on the side near the engine mount bosses - but I mean like on a 1968 block.

If need be, I'll pull off my shielding and do a little extra cleaning of the area to be sure, but to me I don't see any embossed or debossed lettering besides the block P/No..

Stu Fox

[Tom H.]

Re: '63 Production Sequence vs. Engine Casting

Hey Stu !

I bet it is there. You'll see it from the passenger side and it can be spotted on mine with the shielding in place. Just peek between the shield and coil bracket and look straight down. If that makes any sense ! Let us know what you find.

[Michael H.]

Re: '63 Production Sequence vs. Engine Casting

But, what was surprising was the standard deviation was about the same as the mean! That means there was a LOT of intrinsic variance in individual dated component selection(s) during the overall build cycle!

For a Gaussian distribution, roughly 95% of the spread will be contained within 2.5 standard deviations from the mean. That lead me ...

Had to read this two times to make sure I understood what you were talking about.

Most components run at least a month prior to the car build but engines are typically closer. Flint engine didn't want 99 box cars full of engines standing around waiting to be shipped to the assembly plants.
Small components, such as a coolant supply tank, could be built/dated and easily stored in great quantity but engine assy's would be a different story.
A LOT of 327 engine cast/build dates are typically within a week or two of the car build.
I know someone will have a car with a 300 HP cast/assembled 9 months ahead of their car but I have serious doubts about that.

[Stuart F.]

Re: '63 Production Sequence vs. Engine Casting

Thanks Tom;

I just went out to check where you say, but no luck. Guess I'll save it for another day when I can pull the shielding. It's kinda dark in the garage even with all the lights on and using a white light. When I look down I see mainly my lower plug wire bracket and from there to the center I just can't get a light in position to see much. The flange is ever so much more restricted on the right bank compared to the left due to the left bank forward configuration.

It's up near 90 again today so at the first sign of sweat I close the hood, pull the cover and head for the A/C.

I'll check again probably this weekend when I have it out for my next defibulator ride. I'll post the date then if it is of any value for record keeping, assuming I can find it. Thanks again.

Stu Fox

[Sydney G.]

Re: '63 Production Sequence vs. Engine Casting

Thanks for all the reply's thus far!
Stu, take a close look from the passenger side of your coupe directly below the distributor. You may have to shine a light to catch the code at the right angle to see.

I never intended to bring my stamp pad authenticity into this thread but the assembly date turns out to be a major clue when comparing these 2 cars.
As for the window of 6-7 days between engine assembly and car build date with my car, I was told years ago at a meet that it was perfectly normal and directed to look at an original car parked next to mine with a window of a mere 2 days!

Since my assembly date is partially obscured, it always made me wonder why anyone would try to mess with the pad of a 300hp engine, especially prior 1990, so I've always felt that the engine might be correct. My car is unrestored, the engine which I rebuilt about 3 years ago showed it's age and more, and now that I see the other car with about the same time frame for the casting number and assembly date, it leads me to lean toward an original engine!

Michael, by the way I just replaced my radiator and original surge tank.
The surge tank was dated E63 (May) for a 2 week window prior to build date of May 15th.

Syd

[Michael H.]

Re: '63 Production Sequence vs. Engine Casting

As for the window of 6-7 days between engine assembly and car build date with my car, I was told years ago at a meet that it was perfectly normal and directed to look at an original car parked next to mine with a window of a mere 2 days!

Michael, by the way I just replaced my radiator and original surge tank.
The surge tank was dated E63 (May) for a 2 week window prior to build date of May 15th.

Syd

A two day span between engine pad stamp date and car assy date is definitely not unusual. Three or four days is VERY common.

Things like supply tanks seem to run in batches. Supposedly, there are some 63 and 64 tank and radiator dates of mfg that were never used? That would mean that enough were made in one month to cover the next two months of car production.

I would hate to think there were ever enough complete engine assy's to supply all of the Chevrolet assy plants for 6 months in storage at Flint. That would be a LOT of engines.
They were built and shipped as quickly as possible.

Hopefully, John Hinckley will add something to this because he was at the Flint engine plant for a while in the late 60's or early 70's.

[Stuart F.]

Re: '63 Production Sequence vs. Engine Casting

I don't believe we've mentioned yet, when counting days between engine assembly and car assembly dates, the consideration for week ends, and how about shifts? Now mine, by calendar, had the engine assembled on June 28th (a Friday - ouch), then the car was assembled on July 09th (a Tuesday - ya hey!). Therefore, there were only 6 working days between assembly dates, but 2 weekends or 4 more days for a total of 10 days.

(Of course I forgot to tell you my engine was pulled off the line and bored and stroked at the factory to 352 cu. in. which may account for the 6 day lag, Ha! Well!, I ordered it that way!)

Stu Fox

[John H.]

Re: '63 Production Sequence vs. Engine Casting

I would hate to think there were ever enough complete engine assy's to supply all of the Chevrolet assy plants for 6 months in storage at Flint. That would be a LOT of engines.
They were built and shipped as quickly as possible.

Hopefully, John Hinckley will add something to this because he was at the Flint engine plant for a while in the late 60's or early 70's.

There was virtually NO storage for complete engines at Flint V-8 (or at any other engine plant); the only storage was "live", in rail cars.

When the engines left the paint booth and headed for the shipping dock (at 300 per hour), they were unloaded on the dock from the delivery conveyor directly into the shipping racks, which were then loaded into rail cars. When that train (actually partial train) was loaded up, it was switched into the marshalling yard and the railroad made up the exit load and the train left for St. Louis (while others left for a dozen other plant locations).

When the train got to St. Louis, it was separated and switched in the St. Louis yard (most rail cars to the main passenger/truck plant, and the rest to the Corvette building).

About the only buffer storage in the complete system was raw castings at the Saginaw Foundry; they supplied 55,000 iron castings to Flint V-8 every single day, shipped in a captive fleet of semi's that ran 24/7.

[Rick S.]

Re: '63 Production Sequence vs. Engine Casting

Very interesting thread to me, enough that I went out in the garage and re-checked mine. I have records of every common number, but realized I never had the block casting date. My engine pad is pristine and clear - never touched and it shows an engine assembly date of F0628RE. The car was assembled on 09 July 1963. When I checked the casting part number I find 3782870, as expected, but I don't see any sign of a casting date any where on the bell housing flange.

Can any one give me an idea as to where else I might look on the block? I saw reference to a place on later years - that of on the side near the engine mount bosses - but I mean like on a 1968 block.

If need be, I'll pull off my shielding and do a little extra cleaning of the area to be sure, but to me I don't see any embossed or debossed lettering besides the block P/No..

Stu Fox

Stu,
Here is a photo of my 67 block casting date. At the bottom of the photo is the firewall and the right (passenger) valve cover is at the top right so you understand the orientation of the photo. Yes, you do have to pull the shielding in order to easily view the casting date.
Rick

[Stuart F.]

Re: '63 Production Sequence vs. Engine Casting

Rick;

Thanks for the picture. Now I know exactly where to look when I take the shield off this weekend. I'm all excited - the thought of having one more number date for my paper work, Wow! Next ones to look forward to are engine internal like seeing if the P/No. under my heads has a "- X" after the 461 last three digits. Some experts say it won't, others say it will. The proof will be in the lookin.

Stu Fox

[Michael H.]

Re: '63 Production Sequence vs. Engine Casting

Rick;

Now I know exactly where to look when I take the shield off this weekend.

Mornin Stu...

I think you may be able to see/read the casting date without removing the dist shield. It's a little difficult to see but not impossible.

[Stuart F.]

Re: '63 Production Sequence vs. Engine Casting

Thanks Michael;

I think once I get it out of the garage into the day light I might have a better chance, specially knowing now exactly where to look. The areas between the mounting bosses tend to get a little scrungy with use, no matter how often you clean it. I don't have a fresh coat of paint down there. I never look forward to pulling the shield as I tend to break a wing nut now and then (I'm so strong). Sometimes it goes back on real easy, other times it fights you every step of the way. You know what I mean. I use straight ends on my plug wires along with a number of wire separators to avoid crossfire, so the bundle can make for some physical resistance.

Stu Fox

[Steven B.]

Re: '63 Production Sequence vs. Engine Casting

[quote=John Hinckley (29964);422164]There was virtually NO storage for complete engines at Flint V-8 (or at any other engine plant); the only storage was "live", in rail cars.

When the engines left the paint booth and headed for the shipping dock (at 300 per hour), they were unloaded on the dock from the delivery conveyor directly into the shipping racks, which were then loaded into rail cars. When that train (actually partial train) was loaded up, it was switched into the marshalling yard and the railroad made up the exit load and the train left for St. Louis (while others left for a dozen other plant locations).

When the train got to St. Louis, it was separated and switched in the St. Louis yard (most rail cars to the main passenger/truck plant, and the rest to the Corvette building).

About the only buffer storage in the complete system was raw castings at the Saginaw Foundry; they supplied 55,000 iron castings to Flint V-8 every single day, shipped in a captive fleet of semi's that ran 24/7.[/quote]

Thanks for the info John! With 55,000 castings going to Flint daily I assume Flint machined, assembled, and shipped that many daily. Those are significant numbers for each plant.

How large were these facilities? I assume 3 shifts, did the foundry operate 7 days or the furnaces just stayed hot over the weekend? How many employees?

Thanks again for sharing your knowledge.

Steve