327/300 intake

[Anthony C.]

I have a pretty original early 64 327/300 4 sp convertible. My 349 intake manifold has a date of C 18 63 my engine assembly date is 08 28 63 the car build date is A 9. All of my other components such as starter alternator and carb are correctly dated parts. Do you think this intake was original to the car? It is within the 6 months time period perhaps it was on the back or top of the shelf and it was not used right away.

[Joe L.]

Re: 327/300 intake

I have a pretty original early 64 327/300 4 sp convertible. My 349 intake manifold has a date of C 18 63 my engine assembly date is 08 28 63 the car build date is A 9. All of my other components such as starter alternator and carb are correctly dated parts. Do you think this intake was original to the car? It is within the 6 months time period perhaps it was on the back or top of the shelf and it was not used right away.

Anthony------

Do you mean that the engine build date is 8/28/62
and the manifold date is C 18 2? With your car's body build date of September 9, 1962, the block and intake manifold would have to have 1962 dates, not 1963. Also, the intake manifold should have only a one digit reference to year, NOT a 2 digit reference to year.

[Anthony C.]

Re: 327/300 intake

No the dates i gave are correct for the car it is a 1964. The manifold is actually dated C-18-3 The engine was assembled Aug 28 1963 the car completed on Sept 9 1963. I hope this clears up any confusion.

[Joe L.]

Re: 327/300 intake

No the dates i gave are correct for the car it is a 1964. The manifold is actually dated C-18-3 The engine was assembled Aug 28 1963 the car completed on Sept 9 1963. I hope this clears up any confusion.

Anthony-----


There's no confusion; I just blew it. I don't know why I was thinking the car was a 1963; you clearly stated 1964 in your post.

I expect that the manifold is correct for your car. While the date "lapse" may be uncommon, it did occur. That's why NCRS (and NCCB) allow a 6 month window. In most cases, this much time elapse is by far the exception but it is allowed for and I think your situation is a perfect example of why the 6 month window is justified.

[Timothy B.]

Re: 327/300 intake

The part # changed on this manifold in 1964, I believe it's something like 439 but I am not 100% positive I got the # correct.

The 349 manifold is used on 61?, 62 ,63 and I think the change over was in late 63 so yours is probably correct. Does it have a tapping and plug for power brakes, the earlier manifolds don't..

[Anthony C.]

Re: 327/300 intake

It shows that it could either have a 349 or a 459. I have not seen any 459 manifolds dated before late Sept 63. Since i have a very early build car i think that they were just using up the old inventory.

[John G.]

Re: 327/300 intake

Anthony ..
My car is an early production 300hp '64, also (#332). It has the 459 intake manifold.

[Anthony C.]

Re: 327/300 intake

John
What is the cast date on your manifold?

[John G.]

Re: 327/300 intake

Anthony ..

The intake manifold appears to have been cast in July - G 26 3. Per the Corvette birthday calculator the car was built on Sept 6, 1963.

[Joe L.]

Re: 327/300 intake

Anthony------


Keep in mind that it's very possible, even likely, that both manifolds were being used for some period of time. That "period of time" would very likely be the late 1963 and early 1964 model year period. Since this is exactly when your car was built, it all "lines up". Just because John's car was built 3 days earlier and with a different manifold absolutely does not mean that yours should have the same manifold as his.

I would say that the chances that an otherwise apparently very original car like yours would have received the manifold with the casting number and date you have "by accident" during some post-factory replacement would be highly unlikely. Plus, both the date and casting number would be considered correct under NCRS and NCCB guidelines so, in this regard, it would not matter if it was not the original manifold. But, I think it is.

[Mark G.]

Re: 327/300 intake

Anthony & Joe -

This list may help with the time line. In those days, new tooling lead time for Saginaw castings was six months. Revisions to existing tooling and then a part number change required samples and approval from Flint. Approved castings were machined and assembled into engines, some went into Corvettes.

Mark

[Todd B.]

Re: 327/300 intake

My early '64 (#347, Build date A9) has the 459 intake, but with a date of F 28 3. My engine assembly date was August 21, 1963.

Todd

[Anthony C.]

Re: 327/300 intake

That is strange your car was built the same day as mine but your engine was built a week before mine and you have the 459 intake. My car engine was built a week later and it has a 349 intake. My vin is 362

[Todd B.]

Re: 327/300 intake

That is strange your car was built the same day as mine but your engine was built a week before mine and you have the 459 intake. My car engine was built a week later and it has a 349 intake. My vin is 362

The differences are very interesting given the fact that the cars have the same assembly date.

I'd love to compare notes on some of the other numbers, dates & features to see how consistent they are. I'll send you a PM & perhaps we can talk?

Todd

[Joe L.]

Re: 327/300 intake

That is strange your car was built the same day as mine but your engine was built a week before mine and you have the 459 intake. My car engine was built a week later and it has a 349 intake. My vin is 362

Anthony------


As the late Phil Hawkins who worked at St. Louis for a very long time used to say "we weren't in the grocery business; we didn't rotate our stock". He was talking about things like engines which were installed at St. Louis. At that time, the engines came into the plant via rail from the engine plants. They were placed in engine bays and the engines were drawn from the bays as needed. Some engines got "stuck" in the back of the bays and could stay there for a long time as other engines were delivered and placed in front of them. The exact same thing occurred with many other components used at St. Louis or any other vehicle assembly plant, for that matter.

The same sort of thing could happen at the engine plants with the components used to build up the engines (after all, the engine plants were assembly plants for engines just like the vehicle plants were assembly plants for vehicles).