[Greg P]

I have a '68 El Camino SS that was built the second week of January 1968 at Fremont. The rear axle was built December 21, 1967. The TH400 transmission was built December 28, 1967. The 396 was built August 17, 1967 (T0817ET) at Tonawanda. The sequence # on the VIN plate and stamped on the engine pad, transmission metal tag and the frame (twice) all match. Careful inspection indicates that the sequence # stamped on the engine pad is the original stamping. My question is, does it make sense that the engine could have had that early of a build date?

Thanks,
Greg

 

[espos1111]

From what I have read around here it wasn't always a first in first out system. While unusual it isn't unheard of. New stock got put in front of old stock yours got pulled when stock got down that low. I could be completely wrong (ask my wife she'll verify that, lol) as I don't know a lot about BB engines that year. Someone will come along soon with better more detailed information.

 

[Bill Pritchard]

As Mike says, unusual but not unheard of. If the engine didn't pass the initial fire-up test at Tonawanda, and was sent for repair, who knows how long it may have sat around there? As long as your block stamping looks legit, I wouldn't worry about it.

 

[Greg P]

Thanks Mike and Bill. I appreciate the feedback.

Greg

 

[jeffschevelle]

I've seen numerous 67's with that scenario, with a VERY early (August) engine going into a much later car. And Fremont seems to have that situation in more cases than the other plants. I have seen a legit original stamp August 1966 396/325 engine in a May 67 built Fremont Chevelle SS.

In addition to the comments above, bear in mind that yours is the "standard" 325 horse 396. At the very beginning of the production year they would have pushed out a LOT of the standard engines to the plants for the initial run up of cars for dealer inventories. That large initial volume (together with the fact that new engine shipments would consist of more standard engines than optional HP engines), would also increase the odds that some of the early shipped standard engines would get trapped in the "back of the bin" by new engine shipments coming in.

 

[Greg P]

Jeff, your insight is much appreciated. Allows me to rest easy.

Greg

 

[guitargeak99]

I've seen numerous 67's with that scenario, with a VERY early (August) engine going into a much later car. And Fremont seems to have that situation in more cases than the other plants. I have seen a legit original stamp August 1966 396/325 engine in a May 67 built Fremont Chevelle SS.

Jeff,
That's very interesting. In your scenario I would assume that particular engine pad would have been stamped
"6Z******", which would match the partial VIN on the car. Correct?

I have a thread in the "Lost & Found" section.
I too have a May built Fremont 67 SS Chevelle, with a 66 360 HP engine.
The car is unrestored, but the engine numbers on the pad do not match my VIN.

http://http://www.chevelles.com/forums/265-lost-found/963873-original-engines.html

 

[Bill Pritchard]

Jeff,
That's very interesting. In your scenario I would assume that particular engine pad would have been stamped
"6Z******", which would match the partial VIN on the car. Correct?

Not so. The CON VIN is stamped at the vehicle assembly plant (in this case Fremont CA) and would be coded for a 67 model year car, so it would read "7Z******" Does not matter what the calendar year was at the time of stamping. And I'm not certain, but there may have been a number "1" before the "7", to denote the Chevrolet product line.

 

[guitargeak99]

Ok. I must have misunderstood Jeff's post.
"A 66 year stamped, on a 67".

These numbers can get confusing.
Regards

 

[Cam]

As an example of a large gap between engine production vs. installation in a car; in the Canadian GM plant in Oshawa for 1965 they continued to trickle 409s off the line almost to the build-out date which was at least a good 4 to 6 months or so after the 409 went out of production (we didn't get any 396s in Canada for 1965 so there was no mid-year changeover). Of course the fact that Oshawa probably built so few of the 409 cars might also have something to do with it.

It kinda reminds me of the 1979 Firebirds with the 400 Pontiac engines; all the 400s were made in the previous (1978) model year and of the remaining 2200 engines, they earmarked 1800 for the 10th Anniversary Trans Ams.

 

[jeffschevelle]

Ok. I must have misunderstood Jeff's post.
"A 66 year stamped, on a 67".

These numbers can get confusing.
Regards

To clarify, it was a 67 production year engine with an August of 1966 assembly stamp, which got installed in a May 1967 built Fremont 1967 Chevelle SS. Bear in mind the model/production year generally rolled over in August each year back then (there are some exceptions but not for 66 to 67).

In your lost and found thread you said the block is a 961 block, with May assembly stamp, which means it was assembled in May of 1966, which was during the 66 production year, so (along with the 1966 vin stam) it is unquestionably not original to your car. Your 67 should have a block with cast number ending in 406. Good luck with the search! :thumbsup:

 

[jeffschevelle]

Not so. The CON VIN is stamped at the vehicle assembly plant (in this case Fremont CA) and would be coded for a 67 model year car, so it would read "7Z******" Does not matter what the calendar year was at the time of stamping. And I'm not certain, but there may have been a number "1" before the "7", to denote the Chevrolet product line.

They weren't doing the leading 1 yet in 67 production, although I have seen ONE extremely late built Atlanta 67 (like one of the last couple hundred built) that had the leading 1 and everything else about it looked 100% legit including broach marks. So maybe they started it (in that plant at least) just before the model year rollover. But I only saw pictures and didn't see it in person, so ...