1100833 Alternator

[Dick W.]

Ralph asked that I post these photos. He wants to know if the back is correct for this alternator100_1341.jpg100_1337.jpg

[Terry M.]

Re: 1100833 Alternator

Looks like a 1970 back to me, but the angle of that photo makes it hard to tell for sure. On the other hand a July of 1969 alternator could have made it to a 1970 -- if the 1970 was something besides a Corverre or Camaro. I am not sure what other applications that alternator might have.

[Ruedi K.]

Re: 1100833 Alternator

There is a 1969 alternator (1100833) on Ebay at the moment. They are quite expensive. I think the back is correct.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1969-1100833-9B13-DATE-CORVETTE-ALTERNATOR-42-AMP-427S-W-CORRECT-FINNED-BACK-/250932888861?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item3a6cc4051d&vxp=mtr

[Terry M.]

Re: 1100833 Alternator

There is a 1969 alternator (1100833) on Ebay at the moment. They are quite expensive. I think the back is correct.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1969-1100833...c4051d&vxp=mtr

This one looks like a 1969 back. Given the date on this one is February 1969 I would expect a 1969 back.

[Graeme B.]

Re: 1100833 Alternator

The one on ebay looks like the numders have been shot blasted along with the case. Not sharp as they should be.

[David L.]

Re: 1100833 Alternator

My Delco-Remy Service Parts Catalog (May 1972) lists # 1846523 as the part number for the Frame (see #1 in the drawing) for the 1100833 alternator.

My 1969 Corvette Parts Catalog (Oct. 1969) lists GM # 1971526 in Gr. 2.297 as the frame for the 1100825, 1100833, 1100859, and 1100882 alternators.

According to Chevrolet Parts history GM # 1971526 was replaced with # 801309 in May 1970 which was then replaced with # 1846523 in Jan. 1971 and then to # 1852101.

I assume that the 1970 (or maybe "late" 1970) Corvette base is GM # 801309 but I can not confirm that as I do not have a 1970 Corvette Parts Catalog.

My 1972 Corvette Parts Catalog (Sept. 1971) lists GM # 1846523 as the service frame for the 70-71 Corvettes and 69 Corvettes w/1100825, -33, -59, -82 alternators.

There are 4 1970 Corvette alternators (1100900) currently on Ebay dated "9H27", "9L21", "9M3", and "0D3" with frames that look identical to Ralph's 1100833 alternator in the first post. As noted above service 1971526 frames were replaced with 801309 frames not until May 1970.

Dave

[Dick W.]

Re: 1100833 Alternator

The one on ebay looks like the numders have been shot blasted along with the case. Not sharp as they should be.

The art of stamping is pretty good today.....Just saying, not commenting about this alternator

[Joe L.]

Re: 1100833 Alternator

Ralph asked that I post these photos. He wants to know if the back is correct for this alternator[ATTACH=CONFIG]45293[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]45294[/ATTACH]

Dick------

This alternator appears to have a 1970 split ring (rear) case half. While the picture is not too clear, I can see the raised ground lug boss which is typical of the 1970 split ring case half. Could it be possible that the 1970 case half was used for a July, 1969 manufactured alternator. Yes, it's possible. However, my original 1969 alternator was manufactured after this one and it has the 1969 style split ring case half (i.e. with "flat" ground lug boss).

[Mike E.]

Re: 1100833 Alternator

The art of stamping is pretty good today.....Just saying, not commenting about this alternator

The vendor is also a bit questionable.

[David L.]

Re: 1100833 Alternator

Enclosed is a photo of a rear frame (aka rear case) from an original early 1970 Chevrolet (not Corvette) 1100834 alternator dated 9 K 10 (Oct. 10, 1969*). It is part # 800396 in Gr. 2.297 as per my four 1970 Chevrolet Parts Catalogs (Sept. 1969, Nov. 1969, Jan. 1970, and Oct. 1970).

The 1969 Corvette 1100833 alternator dated 8 K 14 currently on Ebay for $750 (see link below) has the same rear frame which, in my opinion, is incorrect.

* corrected year

CORRECTION: This 1100834 alternator must have been rebuilt as the rear frame is not correct as noted by Joe. I will do more research.

Dave

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1969-Chevy-Corvette-OE-Restored-Alternator-1100833-Date-Code-8K14-/280863969382?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item4164cc1066&vxp=mtr

[Joe L.]

Re: 1100833 Alternator

Enclosed is a photo of a rear frame (aka rear case) from an original early 1970 Chevrolet (not Corvette) 1100834 alternator dated 9 K 10 (Oct. 10, 1970). It is part # 800396 in Gr. 2.297 as per my four 1970 Chevrolet Parts Catalogs (Sept. 1969, Nov. 1969, Jan. 1970, and Oct. 1970).

The 1969 Corvette 1100833 alternator dated 8 K 14 currently on Ebay for $750 (see link below) has the same rear frame which, in my opinion, is incorrect.

Dave



http://www.ebay.com/itm/1969-Chevy-C...cc1066&vxp=mtr

Dave------


I think you mean October 10, 1969 for the alternator you pictured. For such an alternator, the split ring case half pictured is not correct (however, if the alternator had been manufactured in October, 1970, it would be possible it could have used the pictured case half). Actually, the split ring case half pictured is fairly common having been used on most 1971 and later alternators.

The eBay alternator also has a split ring case half incorrect for its time of manufacture. Also, the stamping on this alternator appears highly suspicious to me.

[David L.]

Re: 1100833 Alternator

Dave------


I think you mean October 10, 1969 for the alternator you pictured. For such an alternator, the split ring case half pictured is not correct (however, if the alternator had been manufactured in October, 1970, it would be possible it could have used the pictured case half). Actually, the split ring case half pictured is fairly common having been used on most 1971 and later alternators.

The eBay alternator also has a split ring case half incorrect for its time of manufacture. Also, the stamping on this alternator appears highly suspicious to me.

Joe,

My mistake, it is dated October 10, 1969. I will correct my previous post so as not to cause any future confusion.

I am confused about your comment. I stated that my "slip ring end FRAME ASSY." (as described in the parts catalogs) is not correct for the 1969 Corvette 1100833 alternator.

Are you saying that my end FRAME is not correct for the 1970 Chevrolet 1100834 alternator or not correct for the 1969 Corvette 1100833 alternators. I assume you mean that it is not correct for the 1969 Corvette 1100833 alternator.

Also, you call it a "split ring case half" while the parts catalogs describes it as a "slip ring end FRAME ASSY." in Gr. 2.297.

Dave

[Joe L.]

Re: 1100833 Alternator

Joe,

My mistake, it is dated October 10, 1969. I will correct my previous post so as not to cause any future confusion.

I am confused about your comment. I stated that my "slip ring end FRAME ASSY." (as described in the parts catalogs) is not correct for the 1969 Corvette 1100833 alternator.

Are you saying that my end FRAME is not correct for the 1970 Chevrolet 1100834 alternator or not correct for the 1969 Corvette 1100833 alternators. I assume you mean that it is not correct for the 1969 Corvette 1100833 alternator.

Also, you call it a "split ring case half" while the parts catalogs describes it as a "slip ring end FRAME ASSY." in Gr. 2.297.

Dave

Dave-----

I don't think your slip ring frame is correct for an SI series alternator manufactured in late 1969. At least, it's not correct if the alternator were a 1970 Corvette alternator. I can't really say that I have any direct experience with the 1100834 alternator but I would expect that it would either have the same style slip ring case half as 1969 Corvettes or the same as 1970 Corvettes. I cannot see why there would have been a difference between Corvette and other SI series alternators manufactured about the same time.

The 1969 Corvette alternator slip ring frame end had a "flat" grounding boss, "7 fin" heat sink, and no slightly raised rectangle under the Delco script. The 1970 had the raised grounding lug boss, identical "7 fin" heat sink, and a slightly raised rectangle under the Delco script.

The slip ring case half pictured is for 1971 and later, although it's always possible that some late 1970 used it, too. However, I don't think the latter would include one manufactured in October, 1969.

And, yes, slip ring end is the correct term.

[David L.]

Re: 1100833 Alternator

Joe,

Somewhere in my collection I have what I believe is an original 1100834 alternator that is correctly dated (May or June 1970, I forget) for my 1970 Camaro SS350 (long term project). When I find it I will make the comparison. I also have a 1100834 alternator dated sometime in 1971. The research never stops.

Dave

[Joe L.]

Re: 1100833 Alternator

Here's a photo of a typical 1970 slip ring end alternator case. This photo courtesy of Ralph Spears who sent it to me for posting to this thread.




100_1343(1).jpg