1963 Fuel Injection serial numbers

[Jerry C.]

V/N 8873 and S/N 1950. Lost 22 points for S/N being to late. Nolans book is all over the place. Roughly what range should my number be? Thanks in advance.

[Dave S.]

Re: 1963 Fuel Injection serial numbers

V/N 8873 and S/N 1950. Lost 22 points for S/N being to late. Nolans book is all over the place. Roughly what range should my number be? Thanks in advance.

Jerry,
i cant help with the SN but if everything else was correct how did the judges come up with a 22 point deduct for the serial number. Something seems wrong with that. Not sure about 1964 but in 1965 the entire FI unit is 60 points on originality and 40 points on condition.

[Jerry C.]

Re: 1963 Fuel Injection serial numbers

My bad it was 12 points

[Edward J.]

Re: 1963 Fuel Injection serial numbers

Dave, it may have been a date and configuration issue which is 40%. early fuel units had some differences.

[Harry S.]

Re: 1963 Fuel Injection serial numbers

12 is the proper deduction for a date problem. I was not at the event but I do know most of the 63/64 mechanical team. Those are some pretty smart boys.

[Dave S.]

Re: 1963 Fuel Injection serial numbers

12 is the proper deduction for a date problem. I was not at the event but I do know most of the 63/64 mechanical team. Those are some pretty smart boys.

Harry,
Sorry but I respectfully disagree. 60 points is for the entire FI unit and all related parts. There are at least 10 different items involved. 12 points for a date on one of the parts is way to many in my opinion. What we are discussing is a number on a tag on the plenum that is subjective anyway. The plenum itself is likely 100% correct. I'm thinking no more than 2-3 points.

[Harry S.]

Re: 1963 Fuel Injection serial numbers

Dave, I don't recall what that line item looks like but if your spreading the 60 points over several component then I agree with you that 12 points is too much. It's 20% of whatever the point distribution is.

[Dave S.]

Re: 1963 Fuel Injection serial numbers

Dave, I don't recall what that line item looks like but if your spreading the 60 points over several component then I agree with you that 12 points is too much. It's 20% of whatever the point distribution is.

The line item is 60 originality points for the FI Unit (I assume that's the plenum of which the tag is part of that), drive cable, base plate, bolts and seals. As I look at the sheets more carefully there is 3 originality points and 2 condition points for the plenum tag itself. If the tag was missing that would be a 5 point deduct. If it were there and only the serial number was incorrect that would be a 1 point deduct at most. Would be helpful if Jerry gave us more particulars so we can accurately comment.,

[Jerry C.]

Re: 1963 Fuel Injection serial numbers

The 12 points was for the tag being to late for the V/N only and nothing more.

[Dave S.]

Re: 1963 Fuel Injection serial numbers

The 12 points was for the tag being to late for the V/N only and nothing more.

Jerry,
As you can see on the judging sheets the tag itself is 5 points total. It seems the tag is there and correct for the car except there may be a serial number question. 1 point at most. As you have described it there seems to have been a judging error.

[Michael G.]

Re: 1963 Fuel Injection serial numbers

V/N 8873 and S/N 1950. Lost 22 points for S/N being to late. Nolans book is all over the place. Roughly what range should my number be? Thanks in advance.

Jerry, ideally, your car should have fuel unit serial number 2,564. The formula is: Fuel Unit Number = (VIN x .179) + 976.

So, car VIN 8873 x .179 = 1588 + 9976 = fuel unit #2,564.

Th unit on your car now (#1950) should have been put on a car with a VIN closer to 5441.

It is, however, very possible that your current fuel unit (serial #1950) could have come from St Louis on your VIN 8873 car, as unit #1950 could have been put aside for repair, then repaired and later put on your car - out of sequence), but that's not 'typical' production.

I hope that helps

[Troy P.]

Re: 1963 Fuel Injection serial numbers

I don't think this is an issue of judging the tag itself. He probably got all 5 points for the tag. I suspect the points lost were because the tag told the judges the date of the unit was wrong.

In CDCIF (D being the date) the date tells the degree to which the component conforms to the logical sequence of manufacture and typically observed GM supply sourcing intervals. The date factor is worth 20% of the originality points.

[Loren L.]

Re: 1963 Fuel Injection serial numbers

I, for one, would appreciate hearing on just where this "magical formula" comes from? Is it from a comparison of the #s "reported" to NA in his surveys? Or? I would immediately suspect that FI units were, like engines, not necessarily used on a FIFO. Then you factor in the FACT that not all units worked as promised AND MAY HAVE BEEN REPLACED ON THE "HEAVY" LINE, etc. I'm sorry, but my first reaction to the deduct is that it is B______.

Jerry, ideally, your car should have fuel unit serial number 2,564. The formula is: Fuel Unit Number = (VIN x .179) + 976.

So, car VIN 8873 x .179 = 1588 + 9976 = fuel unit #2,564.

Th unit on your car now (#1950) should have been put on a car with a VIN closer to 5441.

It is, however, very possible that your current fuel unit (serial #1950) could have come from St Louis on your VIN 8873 car, as unit #1950 could have been put aside for repair, then repaired and later put on your car - out of sequence), but that's not 'typical' production.

I hope that helps

[Jerry C.]

Re: 1963 Fuel Injection serial numbers

If 2564 should be correct, why was 1950 judged to be to LATE?

[Alan D.]

Re: 1963 Fuel Injection serial numbers

Well Michael, that formula does not work on my car however it's a 64 and since nobody specified the numbers may only work for 63?
Remember in late 63 (for 64) saw a new unit where the left overs got a "375R" (first 6000 cars) before the 380's took over so assume formula is only for 63?