stamp pad for a rock crusher transmission M22 option

[Anthony S.]

Can someone send me a picture of the engine block stamp pad of a mid-year with the M22 rock crusher transmission option. (Private messaging welcomed).
Trying to do some research, and gain knowlegde of characteristics of original cars with this option. Thanks Tony

[Wayne M.]

Re: stamp pad for a rock crusher transmission M22 option

Can someone send me a picture of the stamp pad of a mid-year with the M22 rock crusher transmission option. (Private messaging welcomed).
Trying to do some research, and gain knowlegde of characteristics of original cars with this option. Thanks Tony

Tony -- AFAIK, if the trans is in the car, there is no way to tell on a midyear. Same casting # maincase, tailshaft & sidecover as regular M20 or M21 production. In '65, the potential M22's have been narrowed down to those assembled within a few days in April. Perhaps if the original part # tag is still under a sidecover bolt . See appendix in Colvin's Chev-by-the-Numbers '65-69 book.

If out of the car, in 1965, with the ..325 maincase, the counter gear shaft is 1" (instead of 7/8"), and no circumferential grooves in the input shaft splines. And magnetic drain plugs added. Of course, all this could be modified after the fact.

Wasn't until Oct 21 1968 that Muncie began to add the A, B, or C suffix on the assembly date code (ie P9D21C).

Bottom line; on C2's very hard to prove that the M22 was born in Muncie IN by looking at the trans. You'll need paperwork.

[Anthony S.]

Re: stamp pad for a rock crusher transmission M22 option

Thanks...but let me clarify that I am looking for engine stamp pad....

[Leif A.]

Re: stamp pad for a rock crusher transmission M22 option

Thanks...but let me clarify that I am looking for engine stamp pad....

Anthony,

The engine stamp pad won't tell you what transmission the car left the factory with. The engine stamp pad is on the right front of the engine block directly below and in front of the cylinder head.

[Mike E.]

Re: stamp pad for a rock crusher transmission M22 option

Tony -- AFAIK, if the trans is in the car, there is no way to tell on a midyear. Same casting # maincase, tailshaft & sidecover as regular M20 or M21 production. In '65, the potential M22's have been narrowed down to those assembled within a few days in April. Perhaps if the original part # tag is still under a sidecover bolt . See appendix in Colvin's Chev-by-the-Numbers '65-69 book.

Didn't Colvin also claim there were 3846429 tale shaft housing used in early 1965 even though nobody has EVER seen a know original car with them?


Mike

[Joe L.]

Re: stamp pad for a rock crusher transmission M22 option

Anthony,

The engine stamp pad won't tell you what transmission the car left the factory with. The engine stamp pad is on the right front of the engine block directly below and in front of the cylinder head.

Leif and Anthony------



Yes, the ONLY thing the engine stamp pad will tell you about the originally installed transmission is whether it's a manual transmission or automatic. That's the extent of it.

[Wayne M.]

Re: stamp pad for a rock crusher transmission M22 option

Didn't Colvin also claim there were 3846429 tale shaft housing used in early 1965 even though nobody has EVER seen a know original car with them?


Mike

Mike --- Yes, nobody can prove what Colvin states. In fact, the July '64 Chevrolet new product (1965) training booklet: " the 4-speed trans extension housing and main shaft are revised to provide for right-hand speedometer take-off connection". This repeats in a late fall '64 issue of Chevrolet Service News.

However, other GM product lines (Pontiac, maybe others) continued to use the earlier ...429 extension housing.

[William C.]

Re: stamp pad for a rock crusher transmission M22 option

Pontiac for sure for many years, also olds 64-65, pontiac 69-70, tempest 66-70

[Tom P.]

Re: stamp pad for a rock crusher transmission M22 option

And speaking of Colvin, just like everything on this planet, you CANNOT, repeat, CANNOT believe everything you hear and only half of what you read.
I absolutely DO NOT know everything about GM products, parts and options. But, I have 5 of Colvins books and have read most of them cover to cover (some more than once) and compared what I know and what I've personally observed, to what is in his books. There are some erroneous comments/statements in his books. DO NOT MISUNDERSTAND me, his books are very good and contain a LOT of excellent information. But not everything is correct. So, just like all other automotive publications, do not blanket accept what is in his books as gospel.