Gap between 1961 Transmission and Car Build Date?

[Mike B.]

I am seeking opinions on the tightest reasonable gap in days between the car assembly date (based on serial number) and that of a BW four-speed transmission assembly date. In particular, a late build 1961 with an aluminum T-10C main case.

I have read previous threads that reported production constraints at Warner gear, causing several auto manufacturers to clamor for transmissions, which lead to a minimal lag from assembly to insertion into waiting cars.

Related to the above, how long did transit between the plants typically add?

Also, how many days might the different cast components such as case, tail and side cover preceed actual assembly? Could a part be cast and machined one day then be used the next?

Thanks in advance.

Mike

[Jack H.]

Re: Gap between 1961 Transmission and Car Build Date?

The NCRS general judging rule on dated parts is to accept an inteval of 0-6 months prior to the car's final assy date (some exceptions are noted in the Judging Guide book as well as the NCRS Judging Reference Manual).

The engine was shipped from the engine plant (Flint or Tonawanda) and the tranny came from its supplier source independently. They were pulled at random from inventory storage in St. Louis and mated on the power line feeder line.

It's quite possible for a transmission that arrived 'yesterday' to be matched up with an engine that'd been sitting in inventory for quite some time. There was no FIFO/LIFO inventory control, so the match-up is a matter of random chance...

[Mike E.]

Re: Gap between 1961 Transmission and Car Build Date?

6 months, by the way, is a catch-all guideline, and not to be assumed as advisable by someone buying parts to make their car right. Generally, 3-6 weeks is what I've seen on 61-62 trannies, sometimes less, seldom more.

[Mike B.]

Re: Gap between 1961 Transmission and Car Build Date?

Mike,
From what I have seen, I am inclined to agree with your position of shorter lag times, well inside of the six-month judging grace period. And except for explicit engine date ranges, the judging guides are generally silent on the other components.

My sense is that while there may not have been a formal inventory control system back then, major components weren't laying around in large quantities, especially near the end of a model year. The prime example of course is the reported running out of 519 blocks near the end of the '61 model run.

My interest is mostly out of curiosity, although I admit to sharing the obsession of making sure that my numbers all make sense. It is often difficult to distill the reality from the hyperbole - especially when a good number of years have elapsed and such things weren't considered important. Trying to imagine how manufacturing worked back then, including subsequent machining, packaging and transport interests me. Thus I especially appreciate responses from persons like yourself and Jack who have, "been there and done that"!

Regards,
Mike

[John H.]

Re: Gap between 1961 Transmission and Car Build Date?

Trying to imagine how manufacturing worked back then, including subsequent machining, packaging and transport interests me.

Mike -

Rail was the prime method of shipment for large/heavy components like engines in those days, and I can still recall MANY instances of transportation failure with rail-shipped parts; Conrail was still "losing" rail cars for days or weeks at a time into the 80's, and GM had the largest (chartered) air force on the planet back then to expedite emergency shipments to keep the plants running. Most new assembly plants built since then have no rail access at all except for outbound tri-level shipment of finished product; all inbound freight is by truck - it takes about 700 semi's per day to keep an assembly plant running.