Blue Certification Label - Here's the data but what goes on it?

[Roger D.]

Folks:

Still continuing 1972 coupe restoration. Page 23 of the 4th edition of the 1970-1972 NCRS Technical Manual tells me that the VIN number and year of production goes on the label. My car was built September 9th, 1972 (B09) and my VIN # is 1Z37K2S502107. So from the example, I should have a 9-71 at the top right ? But it looks like only 8 digits of the VIN number are entered on the bottom of the label? Which 8 digits? the first 8, last 8 or what?

Thanks for your input.

Regards,
Roger

[Paul O.]

Re: Blue Certification Label - Here's the data but what goes on it?

Here is a photo

[Patrick H.]

Re: Blue Certification Label - Here's the data but what goes on it?

Which options?

I think (?) that big vs small block and AC, at least, might change the listed weights. Coupe vs convertible will also likely differ.

[Reba W.]

Re: Blue Certification Label - Here's the data but what goes on it?

Cars built before January 1972 do not have the GVW or "Passenger Car." Those labels contain only the month/year in top right and the complete VIN across the bottom. I tried to post a picture but was unsuccessful.

[Leonard M.]

Re: Blue Certification Label - Here's the data but what goes on it?

Looks like equipment and engine is important to the weights. Here is a base 350 convertible; no smog, no ps, no pb

[Paul O.]

Re: Blue Certification Label - Here's the data but what goes on it?

Here is one started before Christmas holiday finished after the new year. Notice the 2 dates on the top left corner and the 2 different VIN fonts. Also notice that on early cars the day and year a slash separates them then later cars a dash is used.

[Roger D.]

Re: Blue Certification Label - Here's the data but what goes on it?

Thanks folks. I think I got what I need. I mis-typed my original message. I meant to say the build date was September 9, 1971 (B09). So I'll have a 9-71 at the top right of the label and the entire VIN number at the bottom. Let me know if that is not correct.

Regards,
Roger