64 Clutch Cross Shaft

[Jim W.]

The 63-64 TIM (as well as the AIM) states that 63 shaft has a grease fitting and 64 has a plug. My Nov 14, 1963 car has a grease fitting. Is it possible there was some carry over in the early production cars; or more likely someone replaced the plug with it. In which case I will need to find a plug.

Jim

[Stephen L.]

Re: 64 Clutch Cross Shaft

Just install a plug. Plug available from CORVETTE CENTRAL for a couple of bucks.

[Jim W.]

Re: 64 Clutch Cross Shaft

That's what I was thinking; buy the plug to swap out if ever judged. I was more curious if some early ones got through before the change over.

[Duke W.]

Re: 64 Clutch Cross Shaft

The 63-64 TIM (as well as the AIM) states that 63 shaft has a grease fitting and 64 has a plug. My Nov 14, 1963 car has a grease fitting. Is it possible there was some carry over in the early production cars; or more likely someone replaced the plug with it. In which case I will need to find a plug.

Jim

IMO the answer to your question is yes, and it appears the JG finally acknowledges that '63s have a zerk on the clutch cross shaft. As to whether you should install the plug, I don't know.

I can tell you that as a Pontiac production engineer early in my career there were often short term parts substitutions usually due to a shortage of a specified part or request for disposition of a superseded part either due to a running change or model year change. The plant would twix Production Engineering and a production engineer (likely me if it was a request from Lordstown or Van Vuys regarding Firebird) would be assigned to research the request that usually required pulling applicable drawings and contacting the responsible design engineer for approval. A response was usually twixed back to the plant within 24 hours.

Most of these requests involved small parts like fasteners, which were fairly easy to research. Also superseded parts would generate a request for disposition. As long as there were no fit, form, or function or safety issues the usual disposition was "use until supply is exhausted."

GM hated to scrap good parts, although sometimes it happened because scrapped parts were usually a tax deduction. The most striking example I know of is Cosworth Vega engines. The original production plan was to build 5000 Cosworth Vegas, but production was halted at the end of the '76 model year at 3508 jobs. However, engine production had gotten ahead and nearly 5000 engines had been built. The disposition was 500 were disassembled for parts and the remaining approximately 1000 were scrapped!

If I were judging your early '64 I would not deduct for the clutch cross shaft zerk fitting. The benefit of the doubt should always go to the owner.

Duke

[Jim W.]

Re: 64 Clutch Cross Shaft

Duke, thank you for that insight of how things were in yesteryear. If we only knew the history of what previous owners did to these cars and why; or the anomalies coming out of the plant.

[Duke W.]

Re: 64 Clutch Cross Shaft

I doubt if things have changed much, especially when during the Covid pandemic "supply chain issues" caused a lot of disruption and some parts shortages were so severe that production of some models had to be temporarily shut down.

The biggest difference is that there are so many more parts that effect safety or emissions that there are probably a lot more "bad parts" that are scrapped, and that may even lead to a recall of previously built jobs that have the non-conforming parts.

Duke