63 tail pipe identification

[Gary P.]

Do all 63 tail pipes have to have stamped part # and seams? The old manual states part # and seams should be there. The new manual states NO part # and has seams. Does anyone know which is correct? Does anyone know why it was changed? Thanks Gary

[Harry S.]

Re: 63 tail pipe identification

There should be NO part number on the tail pipe extension. There IS a seam. I believe this to be true for 64 to 67 also. The metal on original extensions is stainless steel and very thin. If you pick up an original and an after marker service replacement there is a noticeable difference in weight.

Anyway, the way the car left the assembly line there was NO number and there WERE seams.

As I recall the part number was added for parts that were being sold over the counter at chevy dealerships. I'm not sure if the repro's have numbers.

Harry

[John D.]

Re: 63 tail pipe identification

Gary, This has been an issue on our midyears from NCRS day one. More discussion on the extension. You see a lot of the ones in the fleas with the part number on them. Like Harry said they are SR's. I am glad the new manual cleared that up. Course I don't know what the old manual said as so far I have not read either one except for accelerator return springs. John D.

[Dan H.]

Re: 63 tail pipe identification

Gary, another way to test the original tail pipe is the originals were magnetic due to being made from a cheaper grade of stainless. The 'seam' is also offset slightly on the bottom. Some of the repro pipes are seamed but have a part number, probably copied off service replacement pipes. Also, they arn't magnetic etc.
Dan

[Kevin M.]

Re: 63 tail pipe identification

The 67 manual says "welded seem along the bottom, most have visible stamped part numbers".
The previous section on mufflers also stated all mufflers had GM and part number, I claim this is the same case as the extensions, with service replacements having part numbers and factory only having, in my case A for Arvin, at least on some cars.

Kevin

[William C.]

Re: 63 tail pipe identification

Unfortuantely it isn't easy to check the archives from the old board, but there was a lively discussion a couple of years back regarding the exhaust tips, and those of us who were replacing originals with GM replacements "Back in the Day" went into the bins to check the originals, result on all known originals was seam on the bottom, thin, slightly magnetic and NO PART NUMBER!

[Kevin M.]

Re: 63 tail pipe identification

Unfortuantely it isn't easy to check the archives from the old board, but there was a lively discussion a couple of years back regarding the exhaust tips, and those of us who were replacing originals with GM replacements "Back in the Day" went into the bins to check the originals, result on all known originals was seam on the bottom, thin, slightly magnetic and NO PART NUMBER!

William,

Yes it was discussed here on the DB but in the publications being sold it still has OLD information and that's why it gets asked so often. Mitted is still in the books! We are repeatedly told what a minority this board is as far as overall participation but time and time again this board and it's threads is what finally brings change.
And that is why a living JG should evolve in this setting so people that in good faith are restoring there cars have a option for updated data when restoring there cars.

If you only go buy the 67 JG and not what we've learned from discussion you'd feel mislead I think it was discussed by a restorer earlier this week.

Even a FAQ to things that are WRONG across the board might help, need I say Mitting again.

Kevin

[William C.]

Re: 63 tail pipe identification

It should be noted that the new '63-64 manual has been corrected in this area, and I would expect that as others are updated, they will be corrected also.

[Rob M.]

Re: 63 tail pipe identification

This one might be interresting: https://www.forums.ncrs.org/showthre...44328&uid=9337

greetings,
Rob.

[Kent K.]

Re: 63 tail pipe identification

The 67 manual says "welded seem along the bottom, most have visible stamped part numbers".
The previous section on mufflers also stated all mufflers had GM and part number, I claim this is the same case as the extensions, with service replacements having part numbers and factory only having, in my case A for Arvin, at least on some cars.

Kevin

FWIW, my '67 known original exhaust extensions have the welded seam along the bottom and, as I recall, no 'A'. Also, originals do not have part numbers. I wish I could say the same for '63s, but I just don't know.

[Philip C.]

Re: 63 tail pipe identification

HI Does anyone have or seen an orig 63-67 ex tips. The ones that have no part number and are magnetic. I have some that are magnetic with the part number but Ive never seen one without the part number on it. Thanks Phil 8063

[Kent K.]

Re: 63 tail pipe identification

Yup, there on my '67 in the shop/garage. They have the welded seam near or at the bottom and have no part number.
Kent

[Harry S.]

Re: 63 tail pipe identification

Have a set on my 63.

[Kevin M.]

Re: 63 tail pipe identification

All these replies and not one picture. My 67 has no seam or number and are thin, not kidding myself these are replacements, just don't know what era. I now have another part to keep an eye out for.

Kevin

[Timothy B.]

Re: 63 tail pipe identification

I have a set of exhaust extensions that were on my friends 66 and they are thin with no seam or part #. I always thought these are original but I have no way of knowing for sure. I will post a picture and welcome opinons.