August 63 Built 64 Models????
I recently looked at a 64 Coupe that was for sale and found something I thought to be very interesting and thought I would share with the group. This car is 1964 Coupe #25. The date on the trim tag is A3 (September 3, 1963), nothing unusual about this so far as all of the information I have states that September was the start of production for the 64 model. What I found to be a little strange was the sequence number written in grease pencil or crayon underneath on the back of the rear bulkhead (body is off the frame) was 022. When talking this over with the owner (he had no idea what any of that meant) I expalned to him that those numbers were in house build sequence numbers for the month that either went from 1-500, or 1-999 (I've heard both) and that this would mean his car was the 22nd built that month. Doing a little math Car #25 being the 22nd car of the month would indicate that there were 3 August built cars. After getting home and checking things a little more in depth I see that all of my books show that September was the beginning of 64 production with 1741 cars built that month. I also found that September the 3rd was a Tuesday, and the day before would have been Monday the 2nd (First Monday of Sept.-Labor Day), and a holiday, and the 1st was a Sunday. If indeed the build sequence started over on the 3rd, and this was car number 022 that would indicate that three were 3 cars built in August. So, all that said I was wondering if anyone out there has ever run across any of the first 3 cars and what the build date on them would have been, since all my research information shows that there were no August cars. Just thought I would throw this out there to see what everyone else thought!!
-
-
Re: August 63 Built 64 Models????
When you say #25, are you meaning the 25th car of the VIN sequence? I'm a bit confused by where you're going.
If you think there was some nice/orderly correlation between job numbers and VIN numbers, that's a 'disconnect'... They don't always bear a 1:1 relationship.
Why? John Hinckley gave a nice tutorial on this in a long prior DB thread. Essentially, the job number was assigned when the car started its build sequence. The VIN number was assigned later in the production process.
There were some operations along the way (like a body going into the paint booth and actually exiting as a QA/QC approved job) that were of indeterminate duration.
So, variable delay(s) like that could/did 'jumble' the correlation between job number and VIN number... -
Re: August 63 Built 64 Models????
1964 Convt. serial number 134 had body build #128Comment
-
Re: August 63 Built 64 Models????
Not sure but I don't think the 001 to 999 had anything to do with the month.
GM started at 001 when they finished the 999 car. So if they did say 1200 cars per month they would be two cars with the 001 number that month.
Absolutely nothing to do with SN. No correlation at all.
JRComment
-
Re: August 63 Built 64 Models????
Actually Joe, the numbering was 001-500 which would make it more than that, but in this case the AOS production had not begun and it was in the first few hundred serial numbers which would make the correlation pretty good, but not necessarily exact.Comment
-
Re: August 63 Built 64 Models????
To answer the first question YES it is the VIN sequence number that is #25. And I do understand that there is no direct correlation between the in house numbers and the VIN itself. The number 022 is not a number on the trim tag, it is what I have read to be the in house assembly line numbers marked in grease pencil underneath. I have many resource books (NCRS and others) that say different things about this in house numbering system, such as it was 1-500, or 1-999 (although I do not recall seeing one that was over 500 myself), or that they started over at the beginning of every month, so I take most of what I read in most of non NCRS resource material with a grain of salt (I have about 300 Corvette books of which most I find to be nice picture books, as most have some type of erroneous information in them). In no way am I suggesting any of this is any type of proof that there were August built cars, I just found this rather interesting with a first day build car, and thought I would share what I found. I would be very curious as to the information contained on one of the first three cars if one of those is still around and someone had access to them just to see. What about pilot cars, is it possibly a couple of cars were put together before the first full day of production?Comment
-
Re: August 63 Built 64 Models????
To answer the first question YES it is the VIN sequence number that is #25. And I do understand that there is no direct correlation between the in house numbers and the VIN itself.
OK, so why does it 'appear' that you believe there are three 'missing' cars?
I have many resource books (NCRS and others) that say different things about this in house numbering system, such as it was 1-500, or 1-999
I believe the 499/999 limit was a function of the particular assy plant and its specific production volume profile. Corvette was a low production vehicle and job number sequences of 499 max suited the environment.
they started over at the beginning of every month
I don't think they started over at the beginning of the month...the job sequence simply 'rolled' when the max job number was reached independent of time...
What about pilot cars, is it possibly a couple of cars were put together before the first full day of production?
YES! The '63 Corvette that GM initially sent to the London Motor Show is alive and well in JOE (Jolley Olde England). It was NOT built on the pilot line because the car was needed for the show long before there was a pilot line or a physical assy line for mid-year Corvettes.
This car was hand built under a Shop Order (SO) in Detroit but wears a #22 VIN tag (borrowed from those reserved for pilot line production?). There's almost NOTHING on this car that resembles known factory production components (experimental radiator, experimental engine, ALL hand laid fiberglass body panels, stainless steel covers for the door jamb area, Etc.).
But, cases like this are indeed RARE...Comment
-
Re: August 63 Built 64 Models????
WOW!! I went back and re read what I wrote and I do not believe I found the word "missing" anywhere in there. I think what I asked was if anyone knew the whereabouts of vin #1, #2, or #3, as I personnally would be curious as to some of the information that they would contain, as I thought this was interesting personally and thought some others maybe would also. Apparently, I was way wrong about that. I guess you KNOW more than the rest of us, and that there is no longer anything NEW that can be learned or discovered about these cars. Not that I think I learned or discovered anything new("just found it to be of interest"). If I EVER have any questions in the future I will make sure to have them directed to you personally since you know it all. Since you seem to want to put words in my mouth so that you can be "the smart guy", maybe you should go back and edit your own comments leaving out "what you think" may be the case and stick with "what you know". Maybe if you personally did NOT find it of interest you should have left the commenting to someone who did. I did not and do not claim to KNOW anything, just threw something out there I thought was intersting for "discussion". I thought that was what this forum was for. Clearly I was mistaken, and if it is about what you want to "think", my opinion is fastly becoming that I "think" it seems to be for a few individuals (like yourself) to want to be the "know it all" and make everyone else look like an idiot. I really don't "know" what exactly your intentions are, but it sure seems to me they are NOT to encourage members (other than maybe your personal friends) of this organization to participate in this forum, unless it is about something that "only you" would find of interest. Maybe you can post a list of those subjects out for the rest of us, so we can only "discuss" something that is of interest to you. Seems it would have been better to NOT comment if you did not find it of interest yourself. No wonder that so many people talk about this organization (which I joined,paid my dues and been a part of for almost 10 years) with the disdain that they do. I have actually gone to bat for this group whenever I have heard nast comments about the NCRS. Nothing like a good old fashioned insult to get a good "discussion" going. Technical Discussion Board my A**, more like Technical Debate Board!!! I will make sure to mention this in the future to the people like I have encourged in the past to get involved with our organization. I will refrain from getting involved in or starting and further discussion on this board (unless maybe you want to throw a couple more insults my way). MAYBE THIS WAS YOUR OBJECTIVE IN THE FIRST PLACE. It is no wonder it is so hard to get more people involved with the HOBBY. As a matter of fact I just renewed my membership a few days ago, and you certainly have me second guessing how I spend my money.Comment
-
Re: August 63 Built 64 Models????
Interesting post!
Jack, is the 1963 Pilot Line London show car serial #22...or is it #23?
I have #23 recorded in my '63 file as being a PRIMER/Black coupe that was a SO car for the London show.
Were there perhaps 2 SO cars built for this occasion?
SydComment
-
Re: August 63 Built 64 Models????
I am curious about a couple of things the more I read this. What does a 63 pilot car have to do with anything in this thread?? And I was also wondering if maybe Jack worked in the media (TV, newspaper) the way he took my "quotes" out of context and left out some key words out certainly reminds me of the way I see the people in the media attempt to make people look like morons or say something they did not say in an attempt to make them look "BAD". If not maybe he has a future in TV news!!Comment
-
Re: August 63 Built 64 Models????
I thought it was an interesting question about early build 64s. Just my 2 cents.Comment
-
Re: August 63 Built 64 Models????
I'm with you John, good question and topic.
I think the '63 pilot line car is a good example of how factory job numbers can fall out of sequence with the cars serial number, or total production sequence.
It seems to make sense to me. Especially with such an early car.
Further, the Body number from the trim tag can add to the confusion.
Did you have the chance to check it out?
Again, just as an example, I have the '63 SO car #23 on my file as being Body number (Coupe) 13.
I also have '63 car #21 on my file and it's also a Coupe.
However, I have it as being Body #14. Explain that.
I don't have any info on '63 #22 though, and wonder what the Body number or even perhaps the job number comparison is.
SydComment
-
Re: August 63 Built 64 Models????
Gil..stay cool..no harm no foul! I have been wondering about these types of questions for 35 years and they still are very interesting to me...but not necessarily to everyone. This is the place to ask these types questions and sometimes it takes a minute for those interested to reply.
I am probably mistaken..but this car sounds familiar. Was it part of the muscle car parts and car collection purchased by Larry Frisette in Green Bay about 5 years ago or so.
I went to see that collection and remember taking pictures of an early 63 coupe..but not 100% sure it was this car.
Your premise that the first few cars could have been built in August is a good question and should not be that hard to find out. It sounds likely to me.
I can tell you that the first 63 pilot line cars were on display at the St.Louis plant for Bunky Knudsen to review. The rocker moldings on these cars were plain. Bunky advised he wanted the recesses painted black and they were. Makes you wonder what they did with the first supply of rocker moldings that were already received.
JoeComment
-
Re: August 63 Built 64 Models????
Thanks Guys!!! I have recieved a couple of private messages and these last few links in the thread and it certianly makes me feel a little better. I know from my past experience with this organazation, that eveyone is not intersted in all of the same years cars or topics. Also, I want to apologize to everyone (including Jack), if they found my remarks to be offensive. I can be a bit smart a** at times. I know I have not posted much in the past, and I certainly do not claim to be an expert on anything. I did just make the website my home page early last week, and have chimed in a couple of times since, and wold like to do more. I see many interested and what appear to be fun discussion a such a variety of topics, and I love learning from the real experts as much or more than the next guy.
Anyway, back to the car. I ran into a fellow at the swap meet at Auburn, In over labor day weekend who was looking for Firebird parts. I did not have what he was looking for and I mentioned I was mostly a Corvette guy. He told me "Oh yea, I got a Corvette at home I would like to sell", and I took his name and number and told him I would get back with him after I returned home. This gentleman was from the Grand Rapids, MI area. He has a small at home shop where it appeared he dabbled in all sorts of restorations and really was not a Corvette guy, he had purchased the car from a long time friend or somthing like that. He truly did not seem to know or care too much about Corvette originallity and was very appreciative of me helping him figure out a little of what he had. What I found was (remember I'm no expert, and no Holiday Inn the night before) a early 64 coupe(vin #25) that was off the frame. First look was of the passenger side which looked very good (drivers side had encounter with a guardrail so I was told and was wiped out). Motor and trans were mounted on a buck across the room. Loft of barn had a big pile of parts. Correct frame was powdercoated ready to go (vin very clear) on the wrong wheels (2-67 Corvette Rally wheels and 2 FW code Monte carlo wheels). Car was painted silver but should be red. Original black Interior still in the car with a couple of the goofiest Corvette seats I ever seen (they were the correct 64 seats but they had been modified in some way and they had a head rest kind of thing going). Hard to say what was going on under those seat covers. Motor was correct 4 speed for the car, but was attached to what I believe was a 67 L79 block, a set of aftermarket summit heads, and a cast intake and carb that were correct for a 65 Corvette base motor. The block numbers and casting date were correct for the 67 L79, but stamp pad had been machined and had nothing on it. The reason I believe it was really a correct Corvette L79, was that he came walking across the room with an aluminum manifold that he said came with the car and parts, and could I help identify that. I took my handy little spec guide and showed him that yes, this is a Corvette manifold that seems to be correct for that block (it also had the correct oil pan for the L79). We discussed the car a little more including the numbers thing that started this thread. I really did not think too much more about until I was home when I the more I thought about it, maybe I would post something just because I thought it was somewhat interesting after checking the calender dates for 63. Anyway, we couldn't agree on a price so I passed on the car. He did offer me that L79 Intake for $100 before I left (said he didn't need it). I couldn't say No!!!!Comment
Comment