Numbers Match?

[Gary Rubalcava]

Hello Everyone,

I am going through the numbers on my 1965 327/365 and I have the first of what may be many questions regarding the numbers/castings on my car.

My first question is on the engine block. I have the following numbers:

Casting: I284 (I believe this stands for Sept 28, 1964?)
I cannot remember the date on the pad (I'm at work) but it equates to a 10/28/64 build date for the motor.
The date the car was built according to the plate under the dash is 11/6/64 and was the 1865th car built that year.

Do all these numbers jive with how a car was produced from the factory? Should the casting date and the date on the engine block pad match?

Thanks in advance for any help you can give me,
Gary

[William C.]

Re: Numbers Match?

Casting date and the date on the engine pad may or may not match, the only significant item is that the stamped number cannot predate the casting date. Looks like the car was built about the first day after the strike ended at St Louis.

[Joel Falk]

Re: Numbers Match?

Gary,

The blocks were cast at a foundry which was not co-located with the assembly plant at Flint. Having a gap between casting and assembly date is not only normal but expected. I have *heard* of blocks cast and assembled the same day, but that would not usually be the case. Typically the gap was a few days or a week.

Joel Falk

[Chuck S.]

Re: Numbers Match?

Do all these numbers jive with how a car was produced from the factory? Should the casting date and the date on the engine block pad match?"

Gary, your dates look pretty typical to me. You don't want the engine casting dates and the build date to "match"...such is documented, but pretty rare. As Bill said, you want the casting dates to precede the engine build date by anywhere from one day to two or three months (NCRS allows 6 months).

How much the casting date precedes will vary, but your numbers look very reasonable. Also check casting dates on your intake, heads (under the valve covers), and if you have them off, your exhaust manifolds; original components will probably be grouped fairly closely maybe within 12 weeks.

[Chuck S.]

Re: Numbers Match?

Gary, here are the dates from my 70 as an example:

Car build date: G30 (July 30)
Engine build stamp: V0708CTD (July 8 )
Block cast date: F290 (June 29)
Left Head cast date: G10 (July 1)
Right Head cast date: unreadable
Intake cast date: G20 (July 2)
LH exhaust cast date: D21 (April 21)
RH exhaust cast date: F22 (June 22)

Note that for my engine, the block, head, and intake casting dates are tightly grouped around the end of June and the first of July. The difference between the engine casting dates and engine build is just about a week, where yours is a month. As John Hinckley explained below, the time between block casting and assembly was potentially very short. Depending on how the block castings were drawn out of inventory, the time between cast date and engine build could also be longer. Maybe I'm just an ignorant Shark guy with limited midyear experience, but I wouldn't have a problem with 4 weeks unless there were some other clues that something was amiss.

The time between engine build and car build is more than three weeks for my engine and nine days for yours. Considering the shipping time from Flint to St. Louis, it seems like nine days was possible (this has been discussed), and not even the shortest time that has been discussed here recently

[mac peppers]

Re: Numbers Match?

how can a block be cast, cool down, removed from the mold, cleaned up, packaged, shipped, received, machined, assembled, and stamped the same day? i'm not saying it can't be done, but sounds a little far fetched to me.
mac

[Chuck S.]

I Don't Know...

I haven't seen it. Other people I trust say they have seen the evidence.

Which seems the most far fetched?...That GM could cost-effectively build an engine in twenty-four hours...or, the claim that human beings were transported to the moon thirty-five years ago, landed, walked around, and returned safely to earth using post-war technology?

Some of the rocket-science challenged that weren't there still maintain it was a great conspiracy by a government that couldn't be trusted. They believe all the TV transmissions and photos were direct from NASA studios in Clear Lake, Texas. I doubt that any of us will ever be able to stand in those moon tracks and see the evidence for ourselves.

[John H.]

Re: I Don't Know...

The blocks were cast and shaken-out at Saginaw, loaded on a dedicated fleet of GM trucks that ran 24 hours a day, and about an hour later they were at the Flint Engine receiving dock. Depending on the level of in-process float, they could be loaded into the block machining line less than an hour after arrival (machining ran three shifts, assembly ran two shifts). It was entirely possible for a block to be cast at Saginaw in the morning, be at Flint Engine by noon, and come off the assembly line as a complete engine on second shift. Blocks came into Flint Engine (and finished engines went out) at a rate of 280-300 per hour.

[Terry M.]

And that is how....

Flint Engine produced 56 million small blocks from 1956 to 1999.

[Harmon C.]

Re: I Don't Know...

John Did they have a 3rd shift that started around midnight that may have cast blocks at the foundry. This would allow 24 hours at a time when more blocks were needed, Lyle

[John H.]

Re: I Don't Know...

Lyle -

A foundry third shift was fairly rare, only under extraordinary circumstances; all the in-process float they needed to support 3-shift machining was on the road, in all those trucks. The foundry poured the castings on two shifts at a higher hourly production rate than the 3-shift Flint Engine machining department processed them. The machining lines ran about 225 per hour (on three shifts), and the Foundry poured castings on two shifts at about 350 per hour. You had to be there....