I am helping a friend with car 39 .I do not have 55 JM. He says it has the original motor and the car was 3 speed. What would be the engine code and cast number on the transmission .There was a oil filter bolted to the inner fender. Probably some one added it .
1955 car number 39
Collapse
X
-
Re: 1955 car number 39
Per the 53-55JG:
It is commonly believed that no manual three speed transmissions were included in the first 650 cars produced.....
and
....further commonly believed that 100% on the final 20-25 cars of the 1955 model year included manual three speed......
- Top
Comment
-
Re: 1955 car number 39
Dan, the engine code on a 55 with 3-speed is GR stamped on the engine pad. There was no engine mounted oil filter if it has one it may be the toilet paper roll type. According to the 6th addition 53-55 TIMJG 3-speed transmission were not installed until around car number 650. The factory 3-Spd is unpainted and does not have a vented tail shaft. The trans is a Saginaw and has an "S" stamped on the upper right hand corner of the rear face, also the stamping will indicate the month, day, and shift, N-night, D-for day. If this case is an early 55 3-Spd it would be helpful if the stamped date code was photographed and sent to the 53-55 team leader, Greg Piccconi. It might be another mystery uncovered in the early period of Corvette.- Top
Comment
-
Re: 1955 car number 39
Chevy offered an external oil filter as an option and over the counter accessory in 1955. The can was blue with an orange top and it was designed to mount on top of the engine bolting to the thermostat housing on V-8 cars and bolting to the intake manifold on 6 cyl cars. That would not work on a Corvette and no specific Corvette filter was made. But such filters were available from aftermarket suppliers.
Starting in 56 the oil filter, a canister type, came mounted on the engine block- Top
Comment
-
Re: 1955 car number 39
Anything can be added in a "mule" car. Production line did not start adding provisions for 3-speeds until the 500s when the washer plunger was replaced to make room for the clutch pedal.- Top
Comment
-
Re: 1955 car number 39
I added that to show that 399 was one of the first, if not the first, to have a 3 speed added. OP's VIN was way too early to have a factory three speed.Dick Whittington- Top
Comment
-
Re: 1955 car number 39
John apparently would not have been interested in 1968 in Los Gatos CA in the used car lot that had a '54 frame, notched for a V8 fuel pump and carrying an unused clutch mount, a late '55 body, a 210 HP '56 V8 & powerglide, '56 wheels & hubcaps and a VIN tag & title that reads EX 87.
Lack of sales, a new power plant, lots of new engineers and a guy named Ed Cole probably led to more than a normal # of '55s being held by GM for testing and ??? I think the Los Gatos price was $1500 - they still have it.- Top
Comment
-
Re: 1955 car number 39
Lets clean up this incorrect information re: 399 one more time. According to the original Vehicle Log book (partially still in my possession) car #5951 was assigned to Chevrolet Engineering October 28, 1954 it was given license plate #M-19-3 and according to the log book the car's serial # was EX-87. Service records show it had 4 miles on the speedometer on 11-1-54. Loren, you are correct, again! By my calculation 399 was not even built yet. Chevrolet Engineering issued WO #19061-2 to the Research & Development Shop on December 27, 1954 for the following work to be accomplished: "Rework car 5951 to incorporate 1955 V-8 with 1955 three-speed transmission. This will require providing boses on transmission extension as shown on L-43618. Also a new transmission output shaft per same layout. Use present production 1954 3:55 ratio rear axle in the car". The Engineering Log Book page Whittington refers to has VE55S001399 hand written in the upper right hand corner of this page. This was added by one of the 399 former car owners and has caused nothing but confusion ever since. IN SHORT: 399 is NOT the Engineering test Mule that ran at Phoenix as claimed by the current owner. The body with the 5951 tag currently on 399 is the only part of this car that ever saw sand dunes at Phoenix. A lot more to the history but not sure there are too many willing to listen.- Top
Comment
-
Re: 1955 car number 39
David, the 1st document I have defining #5951 is dated 5/13/54 and deals with the topic of using #5950 and 5951 to install front brake assemblies, brake pedals, master cylinders and brake pipes for 1955 Corvettes for Belgian Block tests, Development and Show Displays. Clearly, they were both 1954 Corvettes. The owner of EX 87 in Palm Springs. which is the original frame of #5951, which was rebuilt as a Special Proving Ground Demonstrator, has attempted to "chase" the frame stamping without success - it would appear that during its Engineering career it was extensively used in the winter months, and the owner is reluctant to "disturb" anything for even a partial body lift.- Top
Comment
-
Re: 1955 car number 39
Lets clean up this incorrect information re: 399 one more time. According to the original Vehicle Log book (partially still in my possession) car #5951 was assigned to Chevrolet Engineering October 28, 1954 it was given license plate #M-19-3 and according to the log book the car's serial # was EX-87. Service records show it had 4 miles on the speedometer on 11-1-54. Loren, you are correct, again! By my calculation 399 was not even built yet. Chevrolet Engineering issued WO #19061-2 to the Research & Development Shop on December 27, 1954 for the following work to be accomplished: "Rework car 5951 to incorporate 1955 V-8 with 1955 three-speed transmission. This will require providing boses on transmission extension as shown on L-43618. Also a new transmission output shaft per same layout. Use present production 1954 3:55 ratio rear axle in the car". The Engineering Log Book page Whittington refers to has VE55S001399 hand written in the upper right hand corner of this page. This was added by one of the 399 former car owners and has caused nothing but confusion ever since. IN SHORT: 399 is NOT the Engineering test Mule that ran at Phoenix as claimed by the current owner. The body with the 5951 tag currently on 399 is the only part of this car that ever saw sand dunes at Phoenix. A lot more to the history but not sure there are too many willing to listen.Dick Whittington- Top
Comment
-
Re: 1955 car number 39
#5951, a '54 with V8 and Chassis updates patrolled the DPG oval at 150+ mph in January '56 after 2 years of other Engineering duties. It returned to MI, donated its running gear to Eng. # 6901 ('55 chassis with prototype '56 body (minus fender scoops) that would become Daytona finned racer and Sebring #1.
'55 #1399 (immediate source in 1955 unclear) joined '53 #211 (see Pro Team booklet) in their return to Engineering where both cars received V8s, 3 spds, etc and were refurbished so that they could be DONATED to NASCAR at 1956 SPEEDWEEKS for future participation in their SCORAD
(sports cars on dirt track) racing series. The body on #1399 was deemed to be in such bad condition that the 1954 BODY FROM #5951 WAS REMOVED AND USED TO REPLACE #1399s body. MINUS THE FIN AND THE BELLY PAN.
Two more cars were needed for Daytona/Sebring. Late in the 1955 year 2 3spd cars were ordered, one being 654. When they arrived, the bodies were removed and the chassis changed ala #6901. Early in 1956 production, TWO BODIES were ordered, without frames, heaters, windows, windshields, etc and were shipped to Engineering for installation on the 1955 chassis, creating Eng. #s 6903 and 6905, Sebring #s 5 and 6.
#5951 is a rolling frame. A work order is issued to build 5951 as a Special Proving Ground Demonstrator. When built it also sees some time as a show car. It's history is unclear, but at some time it is sold. When it is sold, it was designated by GM as "EX 87" to call out that it was NOT a production vehicle, in the same manner as "EX 122". It is BELIEVED that 1 of the 2 1955 bodies was used on EX 87. Further SPECULATION would be that the other 1955 body was used on EX 122, ZAD's "1956 Assembled Corvette" or ____________.- Top
Comment
Comment