Originally a TI car?

[Gary S.]

Re: Originally a TI car?

If memory serves me on 67's and maybe 66's here was a raised dimple where the hole would be drilld for the clip under the hood catch.

I have not looked for one in quite some time. But remember seeing it on 67's

Rich.

Rich...attached is a picture of what you are talking about....see little red arrow. I found this "nub" on six 67 cars in my files. I did not find it on any 66's but the only good one I had was of small block 66 VIN 24012 I once owned. Maybe someones can check their 66's. Next question...was this a St.Louis and Smith nub? If that nub was to be the attaching point for that TI harness clip, it got missed more than hit from the many pictures I have. Seems like if it was to be the attaching point, it would have been a depression, not a nub for easier drilling. Picture attached is of a 67 435 bowtie car VIN 19XXX. I saw the nub on VIN's 76XX, 10XXX, 12XXX, 14XXX, 19XXX, 21XXX and all were 390 or 435 cars thus St. Louis made.

[Jack H.]

Re: Originally a TI car?

So, all of 1965 and 1966 model year BB were built at A.O.Smith and St. Louis, just no sidepipes were installed on the A.O.Smith cars. So, why the swithch to run all of the 1967 model year BB at St. Louis?

I'll give you my educated guess...

On N14 side exhuast cars, there were body differences that dictated tooling difference(s) from standard, through frame, exhaust cars. This was expected to be a low volume option. Why pay to duplicate the tooling at two body plants when one plant could handle the load?

For '67 BB cars, originally '66 was supposed to be the end of the mid-year body/car with the debut of the Shark planned for '67. There were design related issues that delayed the introduction of the Shark and the mid-year, StingRay continued in production for '67.

BUT, a new, one year only, hood was released for the BB. Again, why duplicate tooling when one plant could handle the load of production demand?

[Gary J.]

Re: Originally a TI car?

Michael,


Sorry about that....if you go back with TI finding the correct distributor is going cost an arm and leg if you don't have it, not counting the box, etc. Isn't this hobby fun?

Just one more question on the inner fenders. since this an early car, does the left hand inner fender have the cut out for the battery access tray as found on a '65 396 car?

[Ronald L.]

Re: Originally a TI car?

Jack - all too educated, it makes too much sense they'd have BB tooling only in one location

In 66 did they have two BB hood tools, one in St Louis and the other in Michigan or was their one supplier providing both plants?

[Michael G.]

Re: Originally a TI car?

Michael,


Sorry about that....if you go back with TI finding the correct distributor is going cost an arm and leg if you don't have it, not counting the box, etc. Isn't this hobby fun?

Just one more question on the inner fenders. since this an early car, does the left hand inner fender have the cut out for the battery access tray as found on a '65 396 car?

Although not incorporated in the ignition system original amp and TI distributor came with car. Somehow they had by passed the TI harness and was using a standard type distributor......with no ballast resistor! Can believe they didn't burn the car down...

No inner fender cut on drivers side inner fender.

[John H.]

Re: Originally a TI car?

In 66 did they have two BB hood tools, one in St Louis and the other in Michigan or was their one supplier providing both plants?

Ron -

Hoods were made by an outside supplier, who shipped hoods to both plants.