CRG Discussion Forum
Camaro Research Group Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: vtfb68 on September 11, 2014, 11:49:31 PM
-
Does any one have any information regarding wrong week being used on the trim tag for much of the month of may? My O5C's official production date is 5/6/68, I would think it should be O5A. Another member mentioned a "known" TT snafu occurred during this time period but was unable to expand on that. Does anybody have a LA O5A, O5B or O5D ?
Victor
-
That doesn't looks right. Maybe 5/16?
A car right after yours has a 0509 axle.
What's your axle date?
-
Kurt,
I will get the 12 bolt rear end date. The sch # is J543, plant 39094, L340398, are there 05A and 05B LA cars in the DB ? Looking at the SS hood thread there is one one other May car (05D). My car was first registered May 16, 1968.
Victor
-
There is a problem with may & june production number # because may numbers show twice as many build as any other month on Norwood cars. Have a 06a car with that starts with 449---. Have a one owner 06b car that starts with 453---.
-
All my Norwood build dates line up right. Trim tag has 05C. NCRS paper says build date was May 15. Engine and rear axle build dates are 05 08. Trrans was March 22 being an M22. All are the same on the Protecto Plate. Only conflict on the Protecto Plate stating it was sold on May 21 on place and May 22 on another place. Also original dealer did not put their info where it should have been stamped. The car was ordered maybe that may make a difference.
-
There is a problem with may & june production number # because may numbers show twice as many build as any other month on Norwood cars. Have a 06a car with that starts with 449---. Have a one owner 06b car that starts with 453---.
Well, there's asterisks next to the data and this statement is in bold on the page: "The data for some months (especially May and June 68 at Norwood) deviate significantly from actual build dates,....."
-
Kurt,
The rear end is: BR 0212G1
E
Any information about a May 68 LA deviation ?
Victor
-
I'm little confused by the data, mostly the date from the NCRS.
Yes, the month looks a little wonky. April ran long and 05C seems to be earlier in the month.
Fisher dates were for them and someday-weeks they cared more than others....
-
Would that have any thing to do with the labor disputes that GM had in 1968 ?
Victor
-
I don't think so. There weren't any strikes then and the monthly totals are consistent.
-
Kurt,
Thank you for the replies. So no 68 05A and 05B cars, something new to me.
VT
-
There is a problem with may & june production number # because may numbers show twice as many build as any other month on Norwood cars. Have a 06a car with that starts with 449---. Have a one owner 06b car that starts with 453---.
Well, there's asterisks next to the data and this statement is in bold on the page: "The data for some months (especially May and June 68 at Norwood) deviate significantly from actual build dates,....."
If Kurt thinks the Data from NCRS is confusing, I would suggest you have it rechecked by NCRS for accuracy, mistakes are often times easy to make reading microfiche digitization's.
-
I'm thinking that the NCRS is correct and, their date falls in line with everything else. Since there seems to be NO 05A or 05B cars I think it is just one of the cars affected by this error.
Thank's to all,
Victor
-
I agree I would have NCRS double check your car. Microfiche are hard to read sometimes. They were dead on to my car's MSO & date codes on car. Did not run other car because have protecto plate & build sheet to car!
-
There is a problem with may & june production number # because may numbers show twice as many build as any other month on Norwood cars. Have a 06a car with that starts with 449---. Have a one owner 06b car that starts with 453---.
Well, there's asterisks next to the data and this statement is in bold on the page: "The data for some months (especially May and June 68 at Norwood) deviate significantly from actual build dates,....."
If Kurt thinks the Data from NCRS is confusing, I would suggest you have it rechecked by NCRS for accuracy, mistakes are often times easy to make reading microfiche digitization's.
Roy, I sent a detailed email re my incorrect report, and I never heard anything... no response at all.. Seems the 'new folks' doing that job are not as conscientious as you...