68-69 Judging Guide-manifold #'s ??

[Dick W.]

Re: Addendum

Joe, I believe that these numbers carried over from the 1st Ed. of the manual. Written in 1984.

[Dick W.]

Re: Addendum

Joe, I believe that these numbers carried over from the 1st Ed. of the manual. Written in 1984.

[Dick W.]

Re: Addendum

There is a poster on here that could answer this question if he sees it. He works/worked for Saginaw Gray Iron. He has furnished me info, right out of the SGI archives, on C-2 manifolds. Maybe he will shed more light on the subject

[Dick W.]

Re: Addendum

There is a poster on here that could answer this question if he sees it. He works/worked for Saginaw Gray Iron. He has furnished me info, right out of the SGI archives, on C-2 manifolds. Maybe he will shed more light on the subject

[Jim B.]

Re: 68-69 Judging Guide-manifold #'s ??

So to paraphrase... we have found a glitch in the Spec Guide and Judging Manual?? Which call for the 3872778. I have to tell you that us 68 owners are finding new things all the time. I think they changed parts at the start of each manufacturing day on the 68 line. I would also say that most of the discoveries are on the small block side since everyone knows that most corvettes are big blocks anyway.

So If I can find a 3932461, how do I get it past the judges??

Dick????

Jim B

[Jim B.]

Re: 68-69 Judging Guide-manifold #'s ??

So to paraphrase... we have found a glitch in the Spec Guide and Judging Manual?? Which call for the 3872778. I have to tell you that us 68 owners are finding new things all the time. I think they changed parts at the start of each manufacturing day on the 68 line. I would also say that most of the discoveries are on the small block side since everyone knows that most corvettes are big blocks anyway.

So If I can find a 3932461, how do I get it past the judges??

Dick????

Jim B

[Joe L.]

Re: 68-69 Judging Guide-manifold #'s ??

Jim------

It would be nice to hear what others with known-original 68 small blocks have for the right side manifold. I think we even have one or two folks on this board that have original owner 68 small blocks.

[Joe L.]

Re: 68-69 Judging Guide-manifold #'s ??

Jim------

It would be nice to hear what others with known-original 68 small blocks have for the right side manifold. I think we even have one or two folks on this board that have original owner 68 small blocks.

[Joe L.]

Addendum

Jim----

Also, keep in mind that I could very well be "all wet" on this 1968 right side manifold thing. It is very possible that the 3872778 was used for all or most of 1968. As I mentioned previously, there really is no functional difference between the 3872778 and the 3932461. Either one could have been used or they could even have been used interchangeably. Certainly, the 3872778 was "around at the time" and, it appears to me, the 3932461 would have "been around", too.

The thing that makes me wonder is why they ever changed from the 3872778 to the 3932461, at all. There must have been a reason for it, though. Now, to me, that's where things get real interesting. Much more interesting than whether 1968 used the 3872778 or the 3932461.

[Joe L.]

Addendum

Jim----

Also, keep in mind that I could very well be "all wet" on this 1968 right side manifold thing. It is very possible that the 3872778 was used for all or most of 1968. As I mentioned previously, there really is no functional difference between the 3872778 and the 3932461. Either one could have been used or they could even have been used interchangeably. Certainly, the 3872778 was "around at the time" and, it appears to me, the 3932461 would have "been around", too.

The thing that makes me wonder is why they ever changed from the 3872778 to the 3932461, at all. There must have been a reason for it, though. Now, to me, that's where things get real interesting. Much more interesting than whether 1968 used the 3872778 or the 3932461.

[Anthony S.]

Re: 68-69 Judging Guide-manifold #'s ??

Joe,

I just had my original '68 327/300 rebuilt. I had exhaust manifold 3872765 (casting date L-11) on the left & the 3872778 (casting date K-29) on the right.

The engine build date was 12-27-67. The manifolds had the A.I.R. holse plugged.

There were no gaskets between the manifold & the block, so I'm assuming they've been there since January 24, 1968 (VIN #9736).

Anthony

[Anthony S.]

Re: 68-69 Judging Guide-manifold #'s ??

Joe,

I just had my original '68 327/300 rebuilt. I had exhaust manifold 3872765 (casting date L-11) on the left & the 3872778 (casting date K-29) on the right.

The engine build date was 12-27-67. The manifolds had the A.I.R. holse plugged.

There were no gaskets between the manifold & the block, so I'm assuming they've been there since January 24, 1968 (VIN #9736).

Anthony

[Steve G.]

Re: Addendum

OK, is it fair to say that we have established that: #765 is correct for LH 1968 and 1969; #778 is correct for 1968 RH; #461 or #481 is correct for 1969 RH, as long as there are AIR provisions. Some people are saying there isnt a 481, some are, and I see some say there are 461s without AIR provisions as seen in 1970. It is unclear if the #461 is correct for 1968. Other numbers are incorrect for 1868-69, yes?

[Steve G.]

Re: Addendum

OK, is it fair to say that we have established that: #765 is correct for LH 1968 and 1969; #778 is correct for 1968 RH; #461 or #481 is correct for 1969 RH, as long as there are AIR provisions. Some people are saying there isnt a 481, some are, and I see some say there are 461s without AIR provisions as seen in 1970. It is unclear if the #461 is correct for 1968. Other numbers are incorrect for 1868-69, yes?

[Steve G.]

Re: Addendum

Last line s/b "1968-69." Duh. Where's the edit function?