66 Transmission without stamping

[Bryan W.]

[Patrick B.]

Re: 66 Transmission without stamping

Bare transmission cases sold by the parts dept would not have had any stamping. Unless there is reason to believe your car started out as a 3 speed or an automatic, stamping a bare 4 speed case could not be construed as an attempt to deceive anyone. I would call it restoration.

[Wayne L.]

Re: 66 Transmission without stamping

It is more likely that the main case only was sold across the counter, therefore, no assembly date stamped into the case.

[Larry M.]

Re: 66 Transmission without stamping

All mid-year (1963-67) manual transmissions installed in St Louis were stamped with a VIN derivative for the car being built.

Larry

[Tom D.]

Re: 66 Transmission without stamping

See NCRS Judging REFERENCE Manual. The 8th ed. has some guidelines and examples of counterfeit changes on page 22. Changing the trim tag, making a big block car out of a small block (original) car, replacing a carb. with FI (fuel injection) are considered.

Also, page 221 of the most recent 1965 judging manual (6th ed., 1965 NCRS TIM&JG, page 221) states "Do not judge transmission manufacturing dates and VIN derivatives." This statement is followed by a "for reference only" segment.

It's my opinion that a dealer replacing a Muncie case (using a service part) could, or should have, stamped a VIN derivative on the replacement part as part of the service repair. The purpose of that would be for theft recovery, I believe.

[Bryan W.]

Re: 66 Transmission without stamping

See NCRS Judging REFERENCE Manual. The 8th ed. has some guidelines and examples of counterfeit changes on page 22. Changing the trim tag, making a big block car out of a small block (original) car, replacing a carb. with FI (fuel injection) are considered.

Also, page 221 of the most recent 1965 judging manual (6th ed., 1965 NCRS TIM&JG, page 221) states "Do not judge transmission manufacturing dates and VIN derivatives." This statement is followed by a "for reference only" segment.

It's my opinion that a dealer replacing a Muncie case (using a service part) could, or should have, stamped a VIN derivative on the replacement part as part of the service repair. The purpose of that would be for theft recovery, I believe.

Thanks to all. Tom can you confirm that the Vin was stamped on the drivers side rear flange e.g. 6S118603 and the date stamped on the passenger side rear flange e.g. P0308 ? Also do you know the size (height) of the stamps used? My engine pad stamping for the vin appears to have numbers 3/16" high would the gearbox stamping be the same?

[Tom D.]

Re: 66 Transmission without stamping

1965 Muncies did not have a "5" in front of the "S" in VIN, so not so sure about that "6S" above. I am looking at the 1965 Judging Guide I mentioned, where you will see a photo and some helpful words. Get the newest 1966 JG before you proceed. I am away from my storage unit today; I will send some photos later in the week.

[Jim D.]

Re: 66 Transmission without stamping

1965 Muncies did not have a "5" in front of the "S" in VIN, so not so sure about that "6S" above. I am looking at the 1965 Judging Guide I mentioned, where you will see a photo and some helpful words. Get the newest 1966 JG before you proceed. I am away from my storage unit today; I will send some photos later in the week.

The 1965 JG is incorrect.

[Patrick B.]

Re: 66 Transmission without stamping

Thanks to all. Tom can you confirm that the Vin was stamped on the drivers side rear flange e.g. 6S118603 and the date stamped on the passenger side rear flange e.g. P0308 ? Also do you know the size (height) of the stamps used? My engine pad stamping for the vin appears to have numbers 3/16" high would the gearbox stamping be the same?

A 66 transmission VIN would use the 6S1xxxxx format with 5/32" high characters. The P0308 date example would use 3/16" high characters. Both sets of characters have a 50% aspect ratio which is narrower than the the standard 60% used in common machine shop stamps.

[Gene M.]

Re: 66 Transmission without stamping

1965 Muncies did not have a "5" in front of the "S" in VIN, so not so sure about that "6S" above. I am looking at the 1965 Judging Guide I mentioned, where you will see a photo and some helpful words. Get the newest 1966 JG before you proceed. I am away from my storage unit today; I will send some photos later in the week.

[Jim D.]

Re: 66 Transmission without stamping

Tom, that is not entirely true. The early ’65 built in 64 up to some time in possibly November used the same engine pad stamp. There are examples with both stamps in this time frame. The S replaced the 5. This possibly is the cross over time.

Some of the iron case 3 speeds exhibit no vin deritive stamping on the tranny only a build code. Starting is ‘66 model the 3 speeds were all synchro aluminum case which should follow the norm.

MY April 65 car trans. has the same stamp as the engine but a "S" was stamped on top of the "5". My May 65 car trans. has the same stamp as the engine with no "S". I've posted pics. of both on this site before. I read somewhere, possibly posted by John Hinckley, that at some point in the 65 model year there was a directive to replace the "5" with a "S" in the gang holder after stamping the engine prior to stamping the trans. Considering what a PIA that would be, some probably over stamped the "5" and others said to heck with it and did nothing. Similar to the directive for dealers to stamp the delivery date of the vehicle on the VIN tag which VERY few ever did..

[Bryan W.]

Re: 66 Transmission without stamping

A 66 transmission VIN would use the 6S1xxxxx format with 5/32" high characters. The P0308 date example would use 3/16" high characters. Both sets of characters have a 50% aspect ratio which is narrower than the the standard 60% used in common machine shop stamps.

Perfect, exactly what I need to know to progress the transmission rebuild project. Thanks Patrick and all for your contribution.

[Ronald L.]

Re: 66 Transmission without stamping

I see this is a year old, however it is not enough to just get the right case.

Why?
The cases have a casting date - you will find on this site discussion ten years back about a 1966 Nov P1101 dated trans main case - that was cast in December of that year. Yes time over material, until someone catches the forgery.

[Bryan W.]

[Ronald L.]

Re: 66 Transmission without stamping

My data shows main cases 1-3 weeks ahead, and many in 1966 are less than two weeks.