Early '69 Alternator Clarification

[Joe L.]

Re: Early '69 Alternator Clarification

Not sure if this is helpful or not. Photos from my Dec ‘68 L71.

Chris-------

Very helpful. However, do you know if this alternator has ever been rebuilt?

[Chris H.]

Re: Early '69 Alternator Clarification

Joe Im not the original owner but, it’s an extremely original car with only 14k miles when I bought it. It sat for 30 years. I’m 99% confident the alternator is original to the car and never been apart.

[Joe L.]

Re: Early '69 Alternator Clarification

Joe Im not the original owner but, it’s an extremely original car with only 14k miles when I bought it. It sat for 30 years. I’m 99% confident the alternator is original to the car and never been apart.

Chris------

I'm confident it's original, as-is, too.

This morning I made a special trip over to a friend's house to inspect the alternator on his early 1969 L-46. He's the original owner of his car and we know the alternator has never been rebuilt or apart. His car has been "in-op" for well over 35 years.

His alternator is also a GM #1100882 and, curiously enough, has a date code 5 days prior to yours (8 K 25). The rectifier appears identical to yours. I'm sure this rectifier is a GM #1971987. My original late 1969 with alternator GM #1100859 also has the same rectifier. I'll be posting more info on the rectifier later.

Attached are photos of the 1100882 in my friend's early 1969:

DSCN4194.jpgDSCN4195.jpgDSCN4196.jpgDSCN4198.jpgDSCN4199.jpgDSCN4200.jpgDSCN4201.jpgDSCN4202.jpgDSCN4203.jpg

[Gary C.]

Re: Early '69 Alternator Clarification

Diode bridge/rectifier and voltage regulator pictures attached.

Date code: 9D 5
882 Alt Bridge Rectifier Side 1.jpg882 Alt Bridge Rectifier Side 2.jpg882 Alt Voltage Regulator 1.jpg882 Alt Voltage Regulator PN.jpg

[Joe L.]

Re: Early '69 Alternator Clarification

Jue. The most obvious difference I remember is that the projections of the diode trio were wire rather than the flat stamping on the later design. Yes, these early parts are functionally the same as the later parts and this owner has replaced those early parts with the later parts with no problem. He saved the early parts as a matter of curiosity and to show them to fellow enthusiasts.

Terry------

The rectifier used for 1969 was GM #1971987 and the earliest Delcotron 10SI rectifier that was ever available in SERVICE.This same rectifier was also used for 1970-71. It has an aluminum heat sink with no plastic insulator on the side installed against the rear case. This rectifier was discontinued in January, 1978 and replaced by GM #1867581 which is similar to the aforementioned except that it has a plastic insulator on the side which installs against the case. The difference between the 1971987 and the 1867581 can thus be easily discerned through the vents in the rear case. Both the early 1100882 I pictured as well as my late build 1100859 clearly have the 1971987 rectifier. If there was another rectifier used such as you described I can find no record of it and it was never available in SERVICE. If it existed, I would expect that it would have been used for VERY early 1969. The last available rectifier for 1969-71, the GM #1867531 I previously mentioned, was discontinued without supersession in July, 1998. I picture both of these rectifiers below.

1972-80 10SI alternators used a different rectifier. This was GM #1852209. It was very similar to the aforementioned 1867531. Just how it functionally differs I do not know. It was discontinued in November, 1981 and replaced by GM #1875627. The latter was discontinued in September, 1995 and replaced by GM #1984638. The latter was discontinued without supersession several years ago. I will picture NOS examples of the 1852209 and 1984638 in a following post.


DSCN4186.jpgDSCN4187.jpgDSCN4188.jpgDSCN4189.jpgDSCN4190.jpgDSCN4191.jpgDSCN4192.jpg

[Joe L.]

Re: Early '69 Alternator Clarification

...and here are the photos of the 1972-80 rectifiers:


DSCN4205.jpgDSCN4206.jpgDSCN4207.jpgDSCN4208.jpgDSCN4209.jpgDSCN4210.jpg

[Joe L.]

Re: Early '69 Alternator Clarification

Hi Jeff,
Thanks for the clarification regarding no internal voltage regulator on the 1968 alternators. That helps narrow my search to 1969 only.


If I have this right, I could try to source any of the following 1969 alternators: 1100825, 1100884, or 1100882 based on the single asterisk note listed with all three of these alternators stating, "these may have been used on any car requiring a 61-amp alternator (with air conditioning or TI)". Since the AIM indicates 1100825, as you mentioned, I guess that would be my best case scenario if I can find one of those with the right date.

Not sure about the 1100884? My 5th edition book states the 1100884 would work in terms of the single asterisk and being a 61-amp alternator but there is also a triple asterisk connected to "w/o PS*** and my car has power steering so I'm not sure what to make of that info. The triple asterisk states, "we believe this is correct, but more research needs to be done on these alternators and pulleys." I have the 5th edition book so perhaps there is better information today indicating whether 884's are okay with PS or 884's are still associated w/o PS?

Jeff, thank you. Your input has helped.

Kevin

Kevin------


The GM #1100884 replaced the GM #1100825 for SERVICE in January, 1970. Just when the change occurred for PRODUCTION I do not know but I would expect prior to January, 1970.

So, the two alternators are functionally equivalent and, therefore, clocked the same.

I would say that any 1100884 dated prior to a particular car's build date could have been installed on that car regardless of whether an 1100825 is otherwise considered correct.

So, what's the difference between an 1100825 and a 1100884? I wish I knew. But, the difference in part numbers tells me that there was a difference.

[Joseph W.]

Re: Early '69 Alternator Clarification

Kevin------


The GM #1100884 replaced the GM #1100825 for SERVICE in January, 1970. Just when the change occurred for PRODUCTION I do not know but I would expect prior to January, 1970.

So, the two alternators are functionally equivalent and, therefore, clocked the same.

I would say that any 1100884 dated prior to a particular car's build date could have been installed on that car regardless of whether an 1100825 is otherwise considered correct.

So, what's the difference between an 1100825 and a 1100884? I wish I knew. But, the difference in part numbers tells me that there was a difference.

Im reviving this thread because I want to reply to Joe L. Above.
As usual, I believe you are absolutely correct in that a 1100884 could and was used in place of an 1100882.
My October 1969 build date L89 had, what I believe to be the, the original 61 amp alternator and it was a 884 alternator with the correct pulley for power steering. Which the car has(PS)
The alternator was rebuilt by Ken Bruno (did a great job).

I then found another 884 alternator with a messed up stamp job but still a 61 amp, 1969 alternator.
They are 2 days apart.
Ken Bruno also rebuilt this alternator.
Both of these 1969 alternators have the raised rectangular boss under the Delco Remy ensignia.
Ken Bruno sent me a picture of 2 alternators in reference to the rectangular boss; one a 1969 and the other a 1970.
He told me it was a way to distinguish between a 1970 and a 1969 alternator.
I texted him back that both my 1969 alternators had the raised boss. He said that late 69 alternators had some of the 1970 features but more research needs to be done. But it appears that these raised rectangular boss can also be on late 1969 cars.
Those pictures of the rear of the alternator are my 2 different alternators.

[Edward C.]

Re: Early '69 Alternator Clarification

Im reviving this thread because I want to reply to Joe L. Above.
As usual, I believe you are absolutely correct in that a 1100884 could and was used in place of an 1100882.
My October 1969 build date L89 had, what I believe to be the, the original 61 amp alternator and it was a 884 alternator with the correct pulley for power steering. Which the car has(PS)
The alternator was rebuilt by Ken Bruno (did a great job).

I then found another 884 alternator with a messed up stamp job but still a 61 amp, 1969 alternator.
They are 2 days apart.
Ken Bruno also rebuilt this alternator.
Both of these 1969 alternators have the raised rectangular boss under the Delco Remy ensignia.
Ken Bruno sent me a picture of 2 alternators in reference to the rectangular boss; one a 1969 and the other a 1970.
He told me it was a way to distinguish between a 1970 and a 1969 alternator.
I texted him back that both my 1969 alternators had the raised boss. He said that late 69 alternators had some of the 1970 features but more research needs to be done. But it appears that these raised rectangular boss can also be on late 1969 cars.
Those pictures of the rear of the alternator are my 2 different alternators.

[Joseph W.]

[Joe L.]

Re: Early '69 Alternator Clarification

Im reviving this thread because I want to reply to Joe L. Above.
As usual, I believe you are absolutely correct in that a 1100884 could and was used in place of an 1100882.
My October 1969 build date L89 had, what I believe to be the, the original 61 amp alternator and it was a 884 alternator with the correct pulley for power steering. Which the car has(PS)
The alternator was rebuilt by Ken Bruno (did a great job).

I then found another 884 alternator with a messed up stamp job but still a 61 amp, 1969 alternator.
They are 2 days apart.
Ken Bruno also rebuilt this alternator.
Both of these 1969 alternators have the raised rectangular boss under the Delco Remy ensignia.
Ken Bruno sent me a picture of 2 alternators in reference to the rectangular boss; one a 1969 and the other a 1970.
He told me it was a way to distinguish between a 1970 and a 1969 alternator.
I texted him back that both my 1969 alternators had the raised boss. He said that late 69 alternators had some of the 1970 features but more research needs to be done. But it appears that these raised rectangular boss can also be on late 1969 cars.
Those pictures of the rear of the alternator are my 2 different alternators.

Joseph------

Just to be clear, I did not say that the 1100884 was used in place of the 1100882. I said the 1100884 replaced the 1100825. I do not know, for sure, what the difference was between the 1100882 and 1100884. However, I strongly suspect that the difference was simply one of "clocking" of the case halves.

[Joseph W.]

Re: Early '69 Alternator Clarification

Joseph------

Just to be clear, I did not say that the 1100884 was used in place of the 1100882. I said the 1100884 replaced the 1100825. I do not know, for sure, what the difference was between the 1100882 and 1100884. However, I strongly suspect that the difference was simply one of "clocking" of the case halves.

[Joe L.]

Re: Early '69 Alternator Clarification

Sorry for misquoting you. I got my numbers mixed up.
I guess I’ll have to break out my 884 that I feel is original to my car and see if the clocking is different than my other 884.
Till I look at my other alternator, I am a bit confused about the clocking issue.
If the clocking is incorrect on my thought to be correct 884 L89 alternator can I simply take the face apart and clock in the correct orientation?

Joseph------


Yes, you can "re-clock". Also, you cannot ascertain the original clocking of any alternator regardless of part number unless you know, FOR CERTAIN, that the alternator has not been re-clocked previously. When an alternator goes through a commercial rebuilding operation, the embossed part number means absolutely nothing and clocking may not represent how that part number was originally clocked.

Unbeknownst to folks today, MANY alternators have been through commercial (not custom) rebuilding operations.

[Edward C.]

Re: Early '69 Alternator Clarification

[Terry M.]

Re: Early '69 Alternator Clarification

My hunch, after a few years of judging 1969 & 1970, is the 884 began to appear in August/September 1969 when the rest of the Chevrolet models (except Camaro) went to 1970 Production. i have found nothing to support this hunch except some years of looking at 1969 and 1970 Corvettes.

Original AC Delco internal regulators are dated. I have some ACD replacements that are also dated. Of course, once the alternator is rebuilt this evidence is gone. Early 884s have uniquely constructed diode trios. None of this is discernable during routine flight or Bow Tie Judging.