1100884

[D S.]

When was the earliest known dated 1100884? There is one on eBay that has a date of 9A30, January 30, 1969. I thought 1100884s were unique to 1970 Corvettes.

Thanks,
Scott Sims
Texas Chapter

[Edward C.]

Re: 1100884

They were definitely used in 69 with AC or TI cars. Not sure if it was used from day one on 69s but fairly early on. The earlier versions will have a slightly different back half than the later 69/70 units. I have seen them on the 390/400hp cars. I think they were used on small blocks also.

[D S.]

Re: 1100884

It was noted that the back plate is 1970. I believe 881s and 882s were in use in 1969.

[Edward C.]

Re: 1100884

825's were used for 61 amp applications also. I don't know about 881. The 882 seems to be the L88/435/L89 alternator but I guess it's possible they could have used it for other cars. I am no expert on all alternators. I've just beleived the 884 was used in 69 as I've seen one on what I believed to be an original car.

[Joe L.]

Re: 1100884

It was noted that the back plate is 1970. I believe 881s and 882s were in use in 1969.

Scott-------


I don't think that any SI alternator manufactured in January, 1969 would have been equipped with the slip ring end case shown on the eBay alternator. That is the 1970 style case half. It's possible it was used in VERY late 1969 but I highly doubt it was used on ANY alternator as early as January, 1969.

As a matter of fact, that eBay alternator looks suspicious to me. In fact, highly suspicious.

[Mark E.]

Re: 1100884

What do you guys think of the other 1100884 alternator on ebay with a starting bid of $550? eBay item number 261955568391

I need one for my 1970 AC car assembled 6/22.

It's stamped "0D 24". Is this close enough for my car? And did the factory stamp the date with that spacing (a space after the D)?

It doesn't have the proper pulley for my LS5/C60 car... did the 884 have different pulleys depending on the application? Or does this one just have the wrong pulley altogether?

[Edward C.]

Re: 1100884

There is a 884 on ebay dated 8M11 for $895. Seller says it has the correct rear case. The seller is incorrect, it has the late style case.

The front of the 9A30 alt does look suspicious. Original castings are usually somewhat rough with flash around the area the numbers are stamped. The repros fronts are clean, like this one. And it has the wrong back case.

The one up there for $550 has a real front case dated 0D24. Look at the rough edges. As Mark noted the spacing is odd. I haven't seen enough to know for sure. The date would be good for a June car. I don't know anything about the correct pulleys