Author Topic: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles  (Read 18420 times)

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« on: January 09, 2013, 03:48:08 AM »
It appears that 12 bolt rear axles with casting number 3969341 started showing up in 69 Camaros sometime around early August of 1969.  Prior to this, only the 3894860 casting number was used.  

What I am looking for are dates (casting date of housing and assembly date stamp - with letter codes - on the axle tube) for early 3969341 axles and late 3894860 axles.  If you know it is original to the car, you can post the body assembly date from the cowl tag too.

Please let me know what you have.  Post pics if possible.  There was probably somewhat of an overlap, but not sure how much.    

Thanks in advance!

Bryon

1968 Camaro SS 396 - now 468 BBC, M21, 12 bolt.
Looking for 68 Camaro with body number NOR 181016
Bryon

x77-69z28

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 838
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #1 on: January 12, 2013, 07:30:37 AM »
Where are the casting numbers?
69 x77 burnished brown, 711 int 05A bought in 78
67 rs/ss 350 butternut yellow 4 speed 2nd owner
70 Z28 forrest green, green int, M40, bk vinyl roof PROJECT
99 SS hugger orange 6spd NO TTOPS bought new 1 of 54
11 cts-v blk diamond  edition wagon 556hp sick!

Ed B

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2333
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #2 on: January 12, 2013, 05:08:22 PM »
Here you go.

Ed


bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #3 on: January 12, 2013, 11:33:47 PM »
09A Dusk Blue Z28 124379N680789
12-bolt 3:73 Posi:
assembly stamp C BU 0828
                           E
Casting # 3969341

KurtS

  • CRG Coordinator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3522
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #4 on: January 14, 2013, 02:06:11 AM »
I parted out 9N677954  CBS0805G  341, cast G259. I only know of 2 341's before that one. There have to be more.....

Not a lot of axle casting data on these late cars in the db.
Kurt S
CRG

69Z28-RS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2928
  • owner since 4-Apr-1976
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #5 on: January 14, 2013, 05:22:18 AM »
My 09C Z28/RS has the 3969341 rear, stamped BU0828

Gary
Gary W / 09C 69Z28-RS, 72 B 720 cowl console rosewood tint
69 Corvette convertible, silver/black 350 hp,
60 Corvette white/red, 72 Corvette coupe, '70 Mach I 
90 ZR1 red/red #246, 90 ZR1 white/gray #2466
72 El Camino, '55-'56-'57 Nomads, '55-'57 B/A Sedan

x77-69z28

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 838
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #6 on: January 14, 2013, 07:09:30 AM »
Here you go.

Ed
Oh. Thought he was talking about the axles themselves! Duh!!!


69glacierblue

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 50
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #7 on: January 19, 2013, 04:11:27 AM »
Maybe a little earlier than you want, but here goes:
06A
9N665238
BM0625G
Cast 860

Dennis
Dennis
'69 SS350 Vert (X55) 4-sp.
'10 2SSRS RJT M6

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #8 on: February 09, 2013, 06:33:47 AM »
Keep the information flowing guys. Thanks for the replies so far!

restore-z28

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 273
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #9 on: February 10, 2013, 08:20:45 PM »
Build date 08E (Z28)
Casting number 3969341
Assembly stamp CBU 0828 G2
Casting date H139
                           
Sonny

1969 Z28 Camaro
1970 Z28 Camaro

www.bccamaroclub.com

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #10 on: February 12, 2013, 11:19:45 PM »
My 09C Z28/RS has the 3969341 rear, stamped BU0828

Gary

Gary, is it stamped BU or CBU?  The one Kurt posted had a casting date earlier than yours and it used the 3 letter code. 

I am just trying to see if maybe the casting date change corresponded with the change from 2 letter codes to 3 letter codes.

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #11 on: February 12, 2013, 11:20:42 PM »
Build date 08E (Z28)
Casting number 3969341
Assembly stamp CBU 0828 G2
Casting date H139

Thanks! 

69Z28-RS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2928
  • owner since 4-Apr-1976
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #12 on: February 13, 2013, 04:48:37 AM »
My 09C Z28/RS has the 3969341 rear, stamped BU0828

Gary

Gary, is it stamped BU or CBU?  The one Kurt posted had a casting date earlier than yours and it used the 3 letter code.  

I am just trying to see if maybe the casting date change corresponded with the change from 2 letter codes to 3 letter codes.

only 'BU'...  2 letter code..   (see photo attached)
and actually I see that I posted the incorrect date...   BU0829G1 ....

KurtS

  • CRG Coordinator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3522
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #13 on: February 15, 2013, 06:06:05 AM »
That looks like a C to the left of the BU. Pretty hard to see...

69Z28-RS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2928
  • owner since 4-Apr-1976
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #14 on: February 15, 2013, 01:46:37 PM »
..  then you have better eyes or a better imagination than I, Kurt..  :)
Do you have a photo of a CBU stamp?  I don't think I've ever seen one, so maybe it's not like I was expecting..?
or maybe Bryon can post a pix of his as he has a C BU code??

paceme

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 477
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #15 on: February 16, 2013, 12:35:25 AM »
Gary my car is a 9A and is coded C  BU date is 82X I believe either a 6 or 8. I think the exhaust system had rubbed against the tube and now the last digit is hard to identify.
Steve Shauger
Vintage Certification™ Program, Providing Recognition And Status To Unrestored Vehicles. Website www.vintagecertification.com

mickeystoys69RSSS

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 255
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #16 on: February 16, 2013, 03:47:36 PM »
No help in answering your question because my 69 is an early build 11C '68.

K 88 dated 860 casting with BI1115G1 assembly.

restore-z28

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 273
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #17 on: February 17, 2013, 04:29:50 PM »
Do you have a photo of a CBU stamp?  I don't think I've ever seen one, so maybe it's not like I was expecting..?
or maybe Bryon can post a pix of his as he has a C BU code??

Here you go Gary....



69Z28-RS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2928
  • owner since 4-Apr-1976
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #18 on: February 17, 2013, 07:50:47 PM »
Thanks for the photo Sonny.  It's interesting to see how much separation there is in the 'C' and the 'BU'.   Does anyone have any idea why the separation?  stamped separately?  or ??  if so, maybe the 'C' is carrying some other piece of information we aren't aware of?
and seeing the separation, perhaps Kurt was correct, and there 'was' a 'C' before my BU code, but if so, it was apparetly hit by a highway rock, or debris, and became obscured to the point it is no longer clear.

KurtS

  • CRG Coordinator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3522
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #19 on: February 19, 2013, 04:36:22 PM »
I think the axle stamp didn't have a place for the extra C character. Not sure how they handled it, but the letters are spaced like that.

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #20 on: February 20, 2013, 03:00:30 AM »
I agree with Kurt, I think it is C BU.

I am starting to think more that the 3 letter code started when the casting number changed to 3969341.  But more data points are needed.

69Z28-RS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2928
  • owner since 4-Apr-1976
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #21 on: February 20, 2013, 02:11:23 PM »
I went back to the CRG data on differentials, and it says the 3 letter code began wtih the '70 model year, and the 'C' represented 'cars' (I supposed as opposed to truck differentials?)..  Given that, it makes sense that at the time they would have normally began building the new model year (late July or August or so?), they would have began using the new parts; as they did for a number of different items on our late '69 cars; several items are labeled as, or carry characteristics of the '70 model year, rather than the '69 model year.

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #22 on: February 21, 2013, 07:15:32 PM »
The space between the C and the other two letters of the code is there for most (I am not quite sure I can say all) cases that I have seen for late 69 Model year and early 1970 model year Camaros.  It is not always there for Chevelles. 

Attached is a 1970 C OZ code that shows similar spacing.

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #23 on: March 27, 2013, 05:20:28 PM »
The attached image is from an Impala.  Casting number is 3969341 with casting date I 5 9.  Just for additional reference.  It has the C before the FW.

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #24 on: September 23, 2013, 07:06:28 PM »
Saw this one yesterday but did not get a picture.  Was in a 70 Camaro at one time so perches had been moved.  Was either in a 70 Nova or 69 Camaro originally from what I could tell.
Casting number  3894860
Casting date      F 24 9
Stamped code   C BM 0807G1

« Last Edit: September 23, 2013, 07:35:54 PM by bcmiller »

SgtHawkUSMC

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 130
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #25 on: January 30, 2014, 12:14:48 AM »
I wish I had better pics for you, but my rear end isn't there yet...

Casting Number 3969341
Casting Date H 11 9
Stamped Code C BS 0820G2





Hawk
69 SS396 L34 M21 BS Hugger Orange

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #26 on: January 30, 2014, 02:57:26 AM »
Thanks for posting the pics!

BULLITT65

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1881
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #27 on: January 30, 2014, 07:59:13 AM »
sorry just noticed this thread
Here is a pic of mine from a 08C ( August of 69) car.
1969 garnet red Z/28 46k mile unrestored X77
Looking for 3192477 (front) spiral shocks 3192851 (rear) please
Looking for an original LOF soft ray windshield
Looking for original Delco side post negative battery cable part # 6297651AV

SgtHawkUSMC

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 130
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #28 on: January 30, 2014, 04:57:15 PM »
sorry just noticed this thread
Here is a pic of mine from a 08C ( August of 69) car.
That's interesting. Five days between your rear end and mine and yours isn't a "C" rear end. Gary's is 9 days after mine and it isn't a "C" rear end either.

69Z28-RS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2928
  • owner since 4-Apr-1976
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #29 on: January 30, 2014, 05:14:09 PM »
Nope..   Gary's IS a C rear end..  although the C is partially obscured by an 'impact' wtih a rock or something in the past..?
(Bryan and Kurt finally convinced me there was a 'C' out there in front of the BU..)

see image here..     http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=10375.0;attach=10540;image

SgtHawkUSMC

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 130
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #30 on: January 30, 2014, 08:11:07 PM »
Nope..   Gary's IS a C rear end..  although the C is partially obscured by an 'impact' wtih a rock or something in the past..?
(Bryan and Kurt finally convinced me there was a 'C' out there in front of the BU..)

see image here..     http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=10375.0;attach=10540;image
Gotcha. I think I can barely see it now. That makes sense.

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #31 on: May 08, 2014, 03:50:59 AM »
sorry just noticed this thread
Here is a pic of mine from a 08C ( August of 69) car.

Do you have the casting number and casting date from this rear?  Maybe I missed it in an earlier post?

BULLITT65

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1881
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #32 on: May 08, 2014, 06:00:07 AM »
I am going to have look through my archive of pics, since I am not near the car right now.

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #33 on: May 14, 2014, 06:57:04 PM »
OK, please post up that data when you have a chance.

wisemanz28

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 193
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #34 on: June 18, 2014, 01:29:23 AM »
I have a 860 C.B.U. rear end, casting is  September 6th of 1969 and axle stamped 9 16. I will try to post pics of the C.B.U. axle stamp tomorrow.

wisemanz28

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 193
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #35 on: June 18, 2014, 11:41:47 PM »
I was incorrect , my rear end is not a 860 casting it is a 341 casting with a CBU 9 16 tube date and a J 6 casting. I took pics but not sure how to post on this site. My TT has a 9 A date ( 1st week of September) so my rear end is a little late for my car. I see some fellow members on this post have good dates that would be correct for my car. I'm assuming the rear ends are under there cars but if not are any of you guys interested in selling or trading your rear end ? 

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #36 on: June 27, 2014, 01:02:08 PM »
Kurt would be able to answer better, but your axle stamped CBU0916 may be OK for your car.  

You can send pics to my email and I will post them if you want. Click on my username to get my contact info.

BULLITT65

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1881
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #37 on: June 27, 2014, 01:43:21 PM »
Ok Gary got me back under my car and I got the rest of the info. I have the 3969341 rear end, dated (I think ) G 25. So far it looks like the only one with 341 casting but still has just the 2 letter format.
There are a couple of other 08C guys on here ( Sonny, vellu, Jims69, and nick -Daytona Yellow 69 Z)

BULLITT65

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1881
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #38 on: June 27, 2014, 01:46:50 PM »
I just went through my correspondence with Jim, and his vin is a couple of hundred after mine and his rear end is the 3 letter format. Hopefully he will chime in with his info. So mine may be one of the last of the 2 letter format, and Jims may be one of the first for the 3 letter format.

69Z28-RS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2928
  • owner since 4-Apr-1976
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #39 on: June 27, 2014, 02:03:22 PM »
Bullitt's 0815, without the C (but with the 341 rear), and Sarge's WITH the C, stamped 0820..  pretty well brackets the change to use of the 'C' (1970 format) to between the dates of 15 August and 20August 1969.   Bullitt's diff is the later casting number, but without the 'C', so that seems to imply that the two changes (C) and 341 casting, did not occurr simultaneously...

The rear end casting, and use of the 'C' in front of the diff app stamp are two more items to add to our list of intended 1970 changes that were applied to 'late 1969 extended production of Camaros and Corvettes.   I think it would be a good research report to itemize all the things that 'changed', as well as best known dates of change, for late production, and would be useful in the generation of an 'ultimate' Restoration and judging reference manual for Camaros.

BULLITT65

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1881
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #40 on: June 27, 2014, 02:10:08 PM »
Actually Jims69 will bracket it better, his car is about 197 after mine and his has the C. I sent him a message hopefully he can post the casting and date on his.

69Z28-RS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2928
  • owner since 4-Apr-1976
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #41 on: June 27, 2014, 02:49:52 PM »
Actually Jims69 will bracket it better, his car is about 197 after mine and his has the C. I sent him a message hopefully he can post the casting and date on his.

Wow..   197 cars is like a few hours, unless it's the end of one day/beginning of the next day production, OR with it being a new thing (stamping the C) in the differential plant, perhaps they just weren't consistent yet..?

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #42 on: June 27, 2014, 04:24:23 PM »
We are getting closer on this.  When you post, make sure you include not only the casting number and casting date, but the COMPLETE data on the assembly stamp. That includes 2 or 3 letter code, date code, assembly plant and shift.  

And having pics to back up the data would be great.

Will get something written up when things are closer to final.

Thanks!

BULLITT65

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1881
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #43 on: June 27, 2014, 05:29:05 PM »
You saw my earlier post with the pic of the stamp right?

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #44 on: June 27, 2014, 05:45:08 PM »
Yes, I see it now.  

sorry just noticed this thread Here is a pic of mine from a 08C ( August of 69) car.

You also said
Quote
I have the 3969341 rear end, dated (I think ) G 25.

Can you post a picture of the casting date please?

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #45 on: June 27, 2014, 05:51:56 PM »
I am going to try to summarize what we have so far and put into one post.

BULLITT65

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1881
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #46 on: June 27, 2014, 06:04:16 PM »
Sorry, my rear end is in the car. I tried to get off some undercoating and wire brush it, and while I can "see" it I can't get the camera at the right angle to capture it. I can try again in a few days when I am by the car again.

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #47 on: June 27, 2014, 09:35:31 PM »
OK, I went through what we have so far and tried to put them in order.  It is more difficult to put the data together if everything is not in one post.  Let me know if you see errors.

Looks like we have at least a few days of overlap of the housings used in early August at the axle assembly plants. Not surprising.

06A - 9N665238
BM 0625G
860

9N677954  
C BS 0805G  
341, cast G 25 9

Build week and/or VIN ?
C BM 0807G1
860, cast F 24 9

Build week and/or VIN ?
C BS 0820G2
341, cast H 11 9

08E  
C BU 0828 G2
341, cast H 13 9

09A - 9N680789
C BU 0828    
341

09A
C  BU date is 82X
xxx

09C
CB U 0829G1
341

Build week and/or VIN ?
C BU 0916
341, cast J 6 9
                        
« Last Edit: June 28, 2014, 04:25:52 AM by bcmiller »

BULLITT65

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1881
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #48 on: June 27, 2014, 09:40:34 PM »


Looks like we have some overlap in early August.

06A - 9N665238
BM 0625G
860

08C N672394
BU 0815G2
341, cast G 25 9


9N677954 
C BS 0805G 
341, cast G 25 9

Build week and/or VIN ?
C BM 0807G1
860, cast F 24 9



Build week and/or VIN ?
C BS 0820G2
341, cast H 11 9

08E 
C BU 0828 G2
341, cast H 13 9

09A - 9N680789
C BU 0828     
341

09C
CB U 0829G1
341

Build week and/or VIN ?
C BU 0916
341, cast J 6 9
                         
(I added my partial vin, and moved myself in the order)

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #49 on: June 27, 2014, 09:50:25 PM »
That's fine. I am trying to look at the data right now by assembly date stamp.

And I can go back to modify my posts.   :)

BULLITT65

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1881
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #50 on: June 27, 2014, 09:55:44 PM »
well that F24 860 must have been on the back of the rack when the 341's came in....?

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #51 on: June 27, 2014, 10:01:39 PM »
In my humble opinion, that would not be unusual.  There is almost always some overlap.

For example, on the weekend I saw Muncie M20 assembled in August of 1969, with a 1970 VIN on it (I think for a Buick).  It had the 660 case but with both a drain and a fill plug - and used the 1970 style plugs. 

BULLITT65

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1881
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #52 on: June 27, 2014, 10:04:31 PM »
well I guess there is always some exception to the rule.. :D

69Z28-RS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2928
  • owner since 4-Apr-1976
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #53 on: June 28, 2014, 02:37:25 AM »
In my humble opinion, that would not be unusual.  There is almost always some overlap.

For example, on the weekend I saw Muncie M20 assembled in August of 1969, with a 1970 VIN on it (I think for a Buick).  It had the 660 case but with both a drain and a fill plug - and used the 1970 style plugs. 

How is that unusual Bryon?   An August '69 Muncie trans for a Buick would be going into a '70 model Buick wouldn't it?   Typically model changeover during those days was July for the transition, and by late July and August they are building for the new model year..

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #54 on: June 28, 2014, 04:22:16 AM »
Gary, on the transmission, Yes, an August of 69 assembly sure could go into an early 70 Buick. No issue there.

There is some overlap on the 3925660 and 3925661 cases early in the 1970 model year (and in the extended 1969 Camaro production).  

The anomaly is that from what I have seen, any 3925660 cases used early in the 1970 model year with both a fill and drain plug were M22s.  The one I saw was definitely an M20 and it appeared to be all original, with both an original fill plug and an original drain plug.  

All 3925661 cases that I have seen had a fill plug and a drain plug.  
« Last Edit: June 28, 2014, 05:44:26 PM by bcmiller »

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #55 on: June 28, 2014, 04:25:10 AM »
sorry just noticed this thread.  Here is a pic of mine from a 08C ( August of 69) car.

This stamping looks anomalous.  I have consulted with others, so it is not just my opinion.  Sorry.

It also does not appear to fit well in the 2 letter / 3 letter code data.  I am going to modify my list of summarized data in the previous post above.  

Any late July or early August axle assembly data (plus casting number and casting date) will be greatly appreciated.  Post pics if possible.
 

KurtS

  • CRG Coordinator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3522
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #56 on: July 06, 2014, 05:07:23 AM »
Austin,
The axle stamp does not appear to be like other typical stamps that we have seen due to spacing. I know a lot of the history of your car is known, but it is not a typical stamp.
To help reduce possible distortion of the data, it will not be included with the other data gathered until other stamp photos corroborate it as a production anomaly.
Thanks!

69Z28-RS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2928
  • owner since 4-Apr-1976
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #57 on: July 06, 2014, 11:34:37 AM »
Kurt,

Thanks for putting those threads back in and for *improving* some of the wording... :) 
.. maybe you can give Bullitt an opportunity to 'reword' some of his original post(s) - eliminate use of the word 'ethics' from the title and text and perhaps improve some of HIS OWN wording - now that he's had a week to think about things...?   :)

(I'll be away this week for the CNA convention, but I wanted to Thank You first for trying to cool down some of the heat, and to Thank Ed Bertrand publicly for all his contributions and help in the past..... :)


6667ss138

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 343
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #58 on: July 07, 2014, 01:04:29 AM »
Hope this helps.
Here is my 07A X77 rear stamping and casting date photos. With the Norwood factory shutting down July 11th and not starting up again until August 11th I think my car would have been one of the last Z's built before the shutdown. My NCRS production date was July 10th.

VIN 9N6687XX
BU 0630 G2
E 26 9 casting date
#860NF
Len H.  Kansas
1969 Z/28 07A X77D80 Hugger Orange/Black Vinyl Top, born with drive train, complete 3 owner history.
1967 Chevelle SS396 138 Convertible/Red/Black int.
1966 Chevelle SS396 138 4sp California/Smog/Black/Red int. POP, born with drive train, original CA black plates

BULLITT65

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1881
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #59 on: July 07, 2014, 02:42:27 AM »
Interesting. So the cars that are 7A or 8A were they the cars that they assembled out of the rest of the parts that were on hand, until production started back up?

6667ss138

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 343
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #60 on: July 07, 2014, 02:53:39 AM »
I think so because I have a LOT of original May dated parts still on my car. I figure they were winding down and using up everything laying around knowing the shut down was coming. Trying to get rid of parts inventory.
According to William there were no cars manufactured at Norwood after July 11th until August 11th.
I will also ad that it would be surprising if they used up "everything" before the shut down so therefore I would assume that there were still parts around to be used up on the early August cars when production resumed on August 11th but that is only a guess.

http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?topic=12251.0

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #61 on: July 07, 2014, 01:15:33 PM »
6667ss138 -

Thanks for posting the information from your car.  I appreciate it.

6667ss138

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 343
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #62 on: July 07, 2014, 05:25:13 PM »
6667ss138 -

Thanks for posting the information from your car.  I appreciate it.
Thank you Bryon!

cook_dw

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1184
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #63 on: July 20, 2014, 04:42:57 PM »
Found this on craigslist.

Darrell Cook

1967 LeMans Blue SS/RS L35 clone
1968 Rallye Green SS L78 - unrestored original
1968 Matador Red Z28

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #64 on: July 21, 2014, 04:09:50 AM »
Thanks Darrell.

Looks like

Build week and/or VIN ?
C BS 1028
341, cast J 3 9 or J 8 9

flyingskibiker

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 310
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #65 on: August 10, 2014, 02:34:56 AM »
3894860NF
A239
BU 0128 E

It is in my '68.  So, no '69 build date or VIN...

« Last Edit: August 10, 2014, 02:50:12 AM by bcmiller »

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #66 on: August 10, 2014, 02:51:18 AM »
Looks like 0128 is the date.  You had 0218, so I modified your post so it matches the picture.

Thanks!

KurtS

  • CRG Coordinator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3522
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #67 on: February 25, 2015, 01:06:16 AM »
Here's an early 341.
08C CBL0806G1  I don't know the casting date.

BULLITT65

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1881
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #68 on: February 25, 2015, 01:39:22 AM »
Was the axel code " C BL" the last thing to get stamped ?

It looks like most rear ends the date is gang stamped, but the letters hand stamped?

Also, Kurt do you know the vin of that car?

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #69 on: February 25, 2015, 03:43:54 AM »
Thanks Kurt!  Here is another one.  

341 casting number
CBS 0829G1
Casting date H 17 9

Can't verify it is a Camaro axle.  Might be from a 70 Nova.  It was found under a pickup truck. 
« Last Edit: February 25, 2015, 04:36:38 AM by bcmiller »

rszmjt

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #70 on: February 25, 2015, 05:38:24 AM »
08E Z28, "341" cast number , BU0828G2

BULLITT65

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1881
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #71 on: February 25, 2015, 06:52:27 AM »
Just to clarify-
That looks like C BU 0828G2

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #72 on: February 25, 2015, 02:20:42 PM »
Here is what we have so far - arranged by axle date..  We need more data points for axle assembly dates between late June and early August.  

06A - 9N665238
BM 0625G
860, casting date unknown

07A - 9N6687XX
BU 0630G2
860, casting date E 26 9

08E  9N677954
C BS 0805G  
341, casting date G 25 9

08C
C BL 0806G1  
341, casting date G 23 9

Unknown build week and/or VIN
C BM 0807G1
860, casting date F 24 9

08D  9N6745xx
C BU 0818G2
unknown casting number or date

08D
C BS 0820G2
341, casting date H 11 9

08E  
C BU 0828G2
341, casting date H 13 9

08E
C BU 0828G2
341, unknown casting date

09A - 9N680789
C BU 0828    
341, casting date unknown

09A
C BU 0826 or 0828
unknown casting number or date

09C
C BU 0829G1
341, casting date G 31 9

Unknown build week and/or VIN
C BS 0829G1
341, casting date H 17 9

09C   9N685397
C BU 0910G1
341, casting date I 2 9

Unknown build week and/or VIN
C BU 0916
341, casting date I 6 9 (changed to I 6 9 - could not be J 6 9, J is October)

Unknown build week and/or VIN
C BS 1028G1
341, casting date J 3 9
« Last Edit: May 16, 2015, 02:15:41 AM by bcmiller »

69Z28-RS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2928
  • owner since 4-Apr-1976
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #73 on: February 25, 2015, 02:43:45 PM »
Bryon,

After noticing that I failed to provide you my cast date, I checked some photos of my differential made when I was cleaning it, and found one with the cast date..  G 31 9

Please update the following entry in your data...

09C
CB U 0829G1
341, unknown casting date  G 31 9

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #74 on: February 25, 2015, 02:51:32 PM »
Got it.  Thanks Gary!

BULLITT65

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1881
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #75 on: February 26, 2015, 08:25:33 AM »
Austin,
The axle stamp does not appear to be like other typical stamps that we have seen due to spacing. I know a lot of the history of your car is known, but it is not a typical stamp.
To help reduce possible distortion of the data, it will not be included with the other data gathered until other stamp photos corroborate it as a production anomaly.
Thanks!
Kurt another piece of info that you may want keep as a side note is John Berry's 08A car has a correctly dated rear end with the original axel tubes, but does not have any stamp present. I know originally it was thought that it was a replacement that happen to fit date wise, but maybe the time frame of early August of 69 there was something weird going on with the rear end stamping process? It would be nice to find more cars between his and mine that have there original rear end stamp. :)

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #76 on: February 26, 2015, 03:23:16 PM »
There are a few known replacement axles out there.  Nothing unusual happened with the stamping process around that time as far as we know.

BULLITT65

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1881
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #77 on: February 26, 2015, 03:35:29 PM »
I am sure replacements are out there. I just thought it was interesting that if it was a replacement, that it still had a good date for his car, I believe.

Also there was a couple of breaks in production around that time frame of late July beginning of August, and I think there are some mysteries from the factory that may never be solved.

 I'm just putting it out there as a side note, and hope to see more cars found within that time frame is all.

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #78 on: February 26, 2015, 04:02:28 PM »
There was probably a higher than normal need for replacement axles around this time based on the track and street racing that was taking place. COPOs, L78s, etc.  And the Novas used the same axle, so that added to the need as well.

69Z28-RS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2928
  • owner since 4-Apr-1976
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #79 on: February 26, 2015, 04:19:29 PM »
There was probably a higher than normal need for replacement axles around this time based on the track and street racing that was taking place. COPOs, L78s, etc.  And the Novas used the same axle, so that added to the need as well. 

A couple of possible answers to the question that Bullitt raised about 'no stamping' on the axle...  besides oversight.. is this:
1) Did replacement differentials (bought OTC) have the same date stampings?  (I'm guessing they probably did if they were complete rears)..
2) BUT... a replacement housing (no gears/axles/etc) would probably NOT be stamped, since it was sold without gears, etc.  I suspect this was what happened to the car that Bullitt questioned...

Note:  With the '70 models changing axle length, isn't it 'likely' that GM parts depots would stock spares for the '67/8/9 differentials??   and the cast dates on those 'spare parts' would more than likely occur near the end of the production year.. and August '69 would qualify for such a period?

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #80 on: February 26, 2015, 06:08:04 PM »
Gary, I believe into the 1971 model year, the Nova 12 bolts used the same dimensions as the 67-69 Camaro.

I will stick with the thinking in my previous post, at least for now.   :)

69Z28-RS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2928
  • owner since 4-Apr-1976
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #81 on: February 26, 2015, 08:00:58 PM »
Byron,

I think we're saying the same thing, that the 'unstamped' differential was likely an over the counter replacement axle housing...  at least that was what I was trying to suggest, and I *think* you were saying...  :)

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #82 on: February 27, 2015, 01:36:13 AM »
Gary, it is my understanding that a replacement empty housing would not be stamped.  So yes, I think we are saying the same thing.

I don't think they would stockpile extra housings though, since the same housing was used for Novas up into the 1971 model year. 

JohnZ or someone else would probably be able to answer better, but I believe that "in general" - service parts were produced based on demand. 

rszmjt

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #83 on: February 27, 2015, 01:43:44 AM »
I have seen 2 - Z28,s now with what I think are replacement hsgs under warranty. Both were "341 housings. 1 was a 02B Van Nuys car and the other a 11A Norwood Z. Both axle housing were cast date D-9?-1 ( might have been D-7-1), and neither car had any numbers on the tube.
 The 02B car had Dec/68 dated 373 gears and posi as well as original GM brake shoes and backing plates/axles etc. Housing appeared to be bare steel, looked newer than other components but the brakes backing plates/diff cover were black and appeared older.
 If cars ripped the spring perches off ( they wheel hopped without traction bars) while under the 5 yr warranty period, did GM just change the housing and reinstall the other diff parts?

KurtS

  • CRG Coordinator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3522
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #84 on: March 01, 2015, 06:06:41 PM »
I added the cast date to the 0806 axle and added an 0818 axle too.

BULLITT65

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1881
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #85 on: March 01, 2015, 06:57:23 PM »
Ft
There was probably a higher than normal need for replacement axles around this time based on the track and street racing that was taking place. Coops, L78s, etc.  And the Novas used the same axle, so that added to the need as well. 

A couple of possible answers to the question that Bullitt raised about 'no stamping' on the axle...  besides oversight.. is this:
1) Did replacement differentials (bought OTC) have the same date stampings?  (I'm guessing they probably did if they were complete rears)..
2) BUT... a replacement housing (no gears/axles/etc) would probably NOT be stamped, since it was sold without gears, etc.  I suspect this was what happened to the car that Bullitt questioned...

Note:  With the '70 models changing axle length, isn't it 'likely' that GM parts depots would stock spares for the '67/8/9 differentials??   and the cast dates on those 'spare parts' would more than likely occur near the end of the production year.. and August '69 would qualify for such a period?

Question: wouldn't they still have a date stamp, but not the two letter code for ratio? Also if the rear end already had a casting date, why would there be a need to stamp the date of assembly( quality  control?) Further  why  does it appear that the two letter axel code looks stamped separately from the date, and looks to be hand stamped, along with the "E" below?

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #86 on: March 01, 2015, 08:16:29 PM »
I am going to give my opinion but JohnZ or someone else may be able to answer better.

A complete rear axle for service/warranty would have an assembly stamp with ratio code.  These would not be common, in fact they would probably be pretty RARE. 

In most cases, only the bad parts would be replaced.  For example, see the post made by rszmjt above.  It appears that just the housing was replaced and other parts were reused.
A bare housing for service/warranty - would not have received an assembly stamp at the axle plant since it was not "an assembly".

Austin, I don't have an answer to every question and it is probably not in our best interest to answer every question anyway.  Those searching for information on how to restamp parts can see the same posts that we can.  That is why certain details about how or why tags / or drivetrain stamps were made or specific details will not be discussed.  Sorry, but that is the way it is. 
« Last Edit: March 01, 2015, 08:47:58 PM by bcmiller »

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #87 on: March 01, 2015, 08:17:07 PM »
I added the cast date to the 0806 axle and added an 0818 axle too.

Thanks Kurt!

BULLITT65

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1881
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #88 on: March 01, 2015, 09:18:38 PM »
I understand, just trying to piece it all together like everyone else on here. Some things are easy to extrapolate, others are still puzzling.
Also in looking at the pic you posted from reply #69 on this thread, it looks like the "C" was double stamped (look to the left), and possibly some other numbers as well?

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #89 on: March 01, 2015, 09:30:38 PM »
Yes, it appears that at least part of that axle assembly information was stamped at least twice on that particular housing.

BULLITT65

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1881
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #90 on: March 30, 2015, 07:07:50 PM »
Well just saw another 08A car ( N667270) at a show, it also had the 341 rear, and curiously enough no stamp on the axle tube. Could be just coincidence

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #91 on: March 30, 2015, 07:58:32 PM »
Well just saw another 08A car ( N667270) at a show, it also had the 341 rear, and curiously enough no stamp on the axle tube. Could be just coincidence

Are you sure?  I think that VIN should have an 07A tag.  And should be a 3894860 casting on the axle.  Did you see the casting date on the center of the housing?

Was it a Z?

BULLITT65

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1881
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #92 on: March 30, 2015, 08:04:26 PM »
sorry my mistake, it was a 860. It was a 08A on the tag could have been a repo tag I suppose? It was presented as a Z/28. I could not see the casting date on the housing, ( It was at a car show, not on jack stands or a rack). He let one of us go underneath with a small light and see the stamping on the axle tube, but there wasn't any it was smooth. I went under just to identify which housing, (860).

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #93 on: March 30, 2015, 08:08:38 PM »
It was a 08A on the tag could have been a repo tag I suppose?

Kurt would be able to answer that question better. 

But I think other VINs close to that are 07A.

69Z28-RS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2928
  • owner since 4-Apr-1976
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #94 on: March 31, 2015, 03:41:29 AM »
It was a 08A on the tag could have been a repo tag I suppose?

Kurt would be able to answer that question better.  

But I think other VINs close to that are 07A.

That VIN is 3260 or so into July's production total of 5111, but that is a 'funny month', in that only about 1/3 as many Camaros as a normal month are shown as being produced that month.  I have wondered if production stopped around 11 July for some reason and not resumed until around 11 August??

KurtS

  • CRG Coordinator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3522
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #95 on: April 02, 2015, 03:01:44 PM »
July had/has a 2-week shutdown, used for retooling the line for the next model year.

69Z28-RS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2928
  • owner since 4-Apr-1976
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #96 on: April 02, 2015, 03:29:36 PM »
July had/has a 2-week shutdown, used for retooling the line for the next model year.

For a normal year yes, but ... for '69 they continued current production for 5 more months.   Was the shutdown related to a union contract (ie. the workers expect the 2 weeks off in July?) or Was the extended production 'in doubt' at that time in July??  or ??   

August also had reduced production.. as if they were still shut down for half of that month...  Any idea on the reason for that?

cook_dw

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1184
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #97 on: April 02, 2015, 04:38:29 PM »
Not sure how accurate this is but this is what I have been told over the years.  GM always shutdowns during the July time frame (and still do).  Since there were other cars that were built at NOR & LOS along with the stamping dies discovered being incorrect for the 70 model they had to back pedal due to the led time to have another die made causing the lengthening of the 69 production life..  Im sure this caused suppliers to have to build back up enough units to cover the extended run which in turned caused a slowing of production during August.

Hopefully someone can confirm whether or not this is the truth.

69Z28-RS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2928
  • owner since 4-Apr-1976
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #98 on: April 02, 2015, 05:38:25 PM »
That's been sorta my thought a well Darrel, but I've never read/heard an official GM explanation..  it certainly makes sense to me.   30June has typically been the 'end of a model year'..  with July timeframe being the changeover (the actual changeover time depends on how much of a tooling change is required).

BULLITT65

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1881
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #99 on: May 10, 2015, 09:11:51 PM »
I am curious, of those that have the "C" stamping on there rear end, does anybody have the protecto plate showing the "C" as well?

I don't think you will find that on any POPs.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2015, 01:23:15 AM by bcmiller »

69Z28-RS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2928
  • owner since 4-Apr-1976
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #100 on: May 11, 2015, 03:46:02 AM »
That's a great question, Austin...  but I assume you mean a protecto plate for a 'late' '69 model Camaro, rather than for a '70 model, but the question really would apply for 70 models also?    The displacement of the 'C' from the rest of the stamped code still bothers me... Did the '70 models have the 'CAAnnnnGz stamp all together?

rspallina

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 51
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #101 on: May 12, 2015, 12:54:40 AM »
Axle information for VIN 124379N685397:

09C
C BU 0910G1
341, cast date I 2 9
« Last Edit: May 16, 2015, 02:12:44 AM by bcmiller »
Rob Spallina
2014 Camaro SS w/ 1LE Package - 376ci/426hp/6 Speed/3:91 (Summit White)
1969 Camaro Z-28 X33D80 - 302/290hp/4 speed/3:73 (Lemans Blue)

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #102 on: May 12, 2015, 01:25:29 AM »
Thanks Rob!  I will add to the summary list above.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2015, 12:33:05 PM by bcmiller »

69Z28-RS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2928
  • owner since 4-Apr-1976
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #103 on: May 12, 2015, 03:22:55 AM »
That's a great question, Austin...  but I assume you mean a protecto plate for a 'late' '69 model Camaro, rather than for a '70 model, but the question really would apply for 70 models also?    The displacement of the 'C' from the rest of the stamped code still bothers me... Did the '70 models have the 'CAAnnnnGz stamp all together?

rspallina's rear end data, along with the protecto plate has answered the question if the C would show up on a 1969 Protecto plate!~  It doesn't..  yet his late rear end has the 'C'....

rspallina

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 51
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #104 on: May 15, 2015, 10:09:19 PM »
REVISED Axle information for VIN 124379N685397 that now includes casting date:

09C
C BU 0910G1
341, I29

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #105 on: May 16, 2015, 02:12:05 AM »
Thanks Rob!

rspallina

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 51
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #106 on: May 16, 2015, 02:36:41 AM »
No problem Bryon - any idea why this date was on opposite side of the 860 casting location where the foundry stamp would be. And as a follow-up to my thread, where is the 341 casting number?  We can't find it in the spot where they are on the 860s.

bcmiller

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #107 on: May 16, 2015, 02:50:06 AM »
Rob, if the axle is installed in the car - the casting date is normally in the vertical "webbing" area on the top left or top right of the center section.  You will see it looking from the back of the car forward.  May not been in exactly the same place on every axle.

Casting number is normally on the front part of the lower "webbing" on the drivers side.  See this pic.

Edit:  To clarify wording and add back photo.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2015, 02:36:58 PM by bcmiller »

rspallina

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 51
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #108 on: May 16, 2015, 03:02:46 AM »
Bryon - the casting date was opposite side on passenger side where pics show foundry to be. But those pics reference an 860 casting and not 341. Darell and I did an extensive search and never found the casting number in the place it should be. Is it possible it wore off...jerry has it in the report. Thinking with these 341s that they, like the cast date, may be opposite side or different spot altogether.

rspallina

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 51
    • View Profile
Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles
« Reply #109 on: May 16, 2015, 03:13:53 AM »
Found a Google image of location and just found it 3969341NF...driver side of lower pumpkin facing forward. Maybe you have a new note...casting number location and casting date on 341s not in same location as 860s?  At least based on my location and the pics on this site of the 860s
« Last Edit: May 16, 2015, 04:06:25 AM by rspallina »