1963 Ballast Resistor Configuration

[Chuck G.]

I've done an exhaustive search of the archives, and still don't know the answer.

I know that it should be 0.3 OHMS. I know that the Delco PN is "D1111". I know that the Delco Remy logo should be stamped on the band. I know that the "later" D1111's had a rounded mounting ear, without any break-away tab, and would not be 100% correct for judging. I know that it should be identified with a black dot. I know that some of the 0.3 BR's have a separate porcelain piece on the back, covering the windings (not really visible when installed).

What I don't know..................

I have 2 questions about the physical configuration of the 1963 ballast resistor.

1. The so called "break-away" tab on the band...should it be the long version, about 7/16" in length, or the short version, about 1/4" in length? Refer to the picture.

2. The porcelain itself....should it have the "trough" all the way through, or should there be no trough visible at each end? Refer to the picture.

Thanks in advance for any advice.

Chuck

[Mike M.]

Re: 1963 Ballast Resistor Configuration

chuck: i prefer no trough on 63 vets. the 55 thru at least 57 vets ought to have the trough. mike

[Chuck G.]

Re: 1963 Ballast Resistor Configuration

chuck: i prefer no trough on 63 vets. the 55 thru at least 57 vets ought to have the trough. mike

Thanks, Mike.

How about the break-away tab? Any thoughts, "long" vs. "short" ?

Chuck

[Jack H.]

Re: 1963 Ballast Resistor Configuration

I disagree with Mike. My observations from 100's of ballasts taken from scrap yard cars is the tooling change for the ceramic that took the center 'trough' all the way through terminal area and on to the outside ends of the ceramic occurred sometime in the '58-59 era.

The same high performance ignition system (0.3 ohm ballast & '091 coil) used on your '63 Corvette was also employed by 409 Chevy & turbo charged Corvair. Parts taken from those cars confirm my belief & what I said above.

As to the shape of the mounting tab (whether it's gently rounded or more squared; your LH vs. RH picture), the general consensus is existing tooling from the era produced BOTH versions. It's the presence/absense of the tear-away tab on the end/center of the rounded portion of the tab that is looked for.

To resolve the issue about exactly when the ceramic tooling was changed/improved, we'd need to pull drawings from AC/Delco and review the history block. Are there any volunteers with GM drawing access out there?

[Chuck G.]

Re: 1963 Ballast Resistor Configuration

Let me toss out another curve ball.

Look at the second picture. BOTH are reproductions.

On the left, is one given to me by a buddy with a 409 Chevy. It has the trough all the way through. It is "etched" or deeply ink stamped, 0.2 OHMS on the side. It OHM's out at 0.2 on my analog meter. It doesn't have the "C" cutout in the side of the bracket. It has a semi-lunar "slit" that is pushed in somewhat to retain the ceramic.

On the right is a repro sold by a major Corvette vendor for 63-64 SHP (solid lifter) cars. It does NOT have the trough all the way through the ceramic. It is not "etched" or deeply ink stamped with any OHM designation on the side. It OHM's out at 0.3 on my analog meter. It also has the semi-lunar slit that is pushed in somewhat to retain the ceramic.

SO, the brackets are identical. One resistor is .2 OHM, the other is .3 OHM. One ceramic has the trough all the way through, the other does not.

NEITHER bracket has the correct "C" cutout to retain the ceramic.



Chuck

[Wayne M.]

Re: 1963 Ballast Resistor Configuration

FWIW, here's a backside and front shot of a resistor I took off a junkyard '65-67 Chev product (can't recall exactly). Firewall was sprayed in black, which explains the remaining color in the pores of the ceramic on the top and edges. Any color coding (blue stripe or black dot) would have gone with the lacquer thinner I used. My 40-year old ohmeter is too insensitive to check rating with any accuracy. This is a 7/16" break tab with squarish corners on the bracket. Straight thru channel at connectors.

[John S.]

Re: 1963 Ballast Resistor Configuration

chuck: i prefer no trough on 63 vets. the 55 thru at least 57 vets ought to have the trough. mike

55 thru 57 do not have the trough and have bands that are solid or have a half moon indentation. later years go to the trough with the c cut-out and are found with several different tabs.

[John S.]

Re: 1963 Ballast Resistor Configuration

wayne, your ammeter might not be the problem! you will never get a true reading unless both sides of the resistor are screwed all the way down and tight. i can see in your pictures this is not the case.

[Chuck G.]

Re: 1963 Ballast Resistor Configuration

FWIW, here's a backside and front shot of a resistor I took off a junkyard '65-67 Chev product (can't recall exactly). Firewall was sprayed in black, which explains the remaining color in the pores of the ceramic on the top and edges. Any color coding (blue stripe or black dot) would have gone with the lacquer thinner I used. My 40-year old ohmeter is too insensitive to check rating with any accuracy. This is a 7/16" break tab with squarish corners on the bracket. Straight thru channel at connectors.

Wayne:

The view of the bracket shown in the upper picture also has the small extra tab oriented 90*away from the main "ear". That extra tab is on the backside.

That extra tab is/was supposedly used on passenger cars to keep the ballast resistor from rotating when it was installed on the firewall.

I've also seen some that do not have that extra tab, but have the markings of a star washer on the backside of the ear, I assume also to keep it from rotating when installed.

Chuck

[Mike M.]

Re: 1963 Ballast Resistor Configuration

jack and joe are correct.i meant to type that the 55-at least 57 ballast resistors ought NOT have the notch. perhaps i should proof read my posts--maybe in my next life. sorry for the confusion .mike

[John S.]

Re: 1963 Ballast Resistor Configuration

chuck, you mention passenger cars having the tab on the back. do you know the year and model? i seen the tab used on boats(mercury engines) and tractors, but have never been able to verify them on a car.

[Chuck G.]

Re: 1963 Ballast Resistor Configuration

chuck, you mention passenger cars having the tab on the back. do you know the year and model? i seen the tab used on boats(mercury engines) and tractors, but have never been able to verify them on a car.

John, I'm strictly going by what a few 55-57 Chevy guys have told me.

Chuck

[Chuck G.]

Re: 1963 Ballast Resistor Configuration

PS:

The consensus so far seems to be that for my 1963 solid lifter motor......

I should have the trough in the porcelain.

Still unclear on part 2 of my question, and that is the so called "break away tab".

Should it be the long, 7/16" version or the short, 1/4" version?

OR, were both styles used?

If so, is one preferred over the other for 1963?

Chuck

[David A.]

Re: 1963 Ballast Resistor Configuration

here is the ballast resistor
off my '56 vette.
i believe it to be original.
BTW, what is the best way
to clean the porcelain?
iowa

[Jack H.]

Re: 1963 Ballast Resistor Configuration

I think you'll find the ballast with the deeply etched "0.2 OHMS" legend on the ceramic is the current reproduction part. Factory (and service) original ballasts were NOT labeled in this fashion...