Author Topic: 8N477196 M22 (Read 11409 times)

Nikke · « **on:** August 03, 2016, 12:52:44 AM »

I have 8N477196 M22 Gearbox small c

Nikke · « **Reply #1 on:** August 03, 2016, 12:57:09 AM »

bertfam · « **Reply #2 on:** August 03, 2016, 01:06:10 AM »

Nikke, can you post a picture of the input shaft please? The letter C doesn't mean M22 in 1968.

Ed

Nikke · « **Reply #3 on:** August 03, 2016, 01:36:21 AM »

I have had this Gearbox for 10 years and I know its a M22.
We had this discusion at Team Camaro at the time.
I had to open the gearbox to convince them.
They say the small c is a Inspection stamp.

bertfam · « **Reply #4 on:** August 03, 2016, 01:39:26 AM »

That's what I used to think too, but no, it's not an inspection stamp. But we're not sure WHAT it was used for! HERE'S more info. (Kurt, any new revelations on the square c for 1968 and the other stamps for 1967?)

Ed

Nikke · « **Reply #5 on:** August 03, 2016, 02:13:45 AM »

Okay, I didnt know that you had discussed this before.
The gearbox is in the car, but I'm going to get the engine out in the future and then i can take some pictures.
I dont know if its original M22.
I have another 68 Muncie in the garage.
I can look at it tomorrow.
And the 67 Muncie.

bcmiller · « **Reply #6 on:** August 03, 2016, 03:20:34 AM »

I still think the small squared off "c" is an inspection mark.

bertfam · « **Reply #7 on:** August 03, 2016, 01:23:08 PM »

Bryon, as Kurt eluded, that symbol was included in the date code gang stamp, which was used long before the transmission was inspected. The inspection stamp is located on top of the trans and was a different symbol (see attached for a few examples - 2 inside a circle and 3 inside a square).

So whatever it was, it was done by the person that built the transmission and stamped the date code. It may be something to do with the person that assembled the transmission (in other words, some kind of tracking information on who actually built it), but if that were true, there would be other symbols and we've not seen anything on 68 transmission except the squared off C, a funky looking M (?) and no symbol at all. It's a real mystery since I would assume there was more than 3 people building Muncie transmissions!

Ed

bcmiller · « **Reply #8 on:** August 03, 2016, 04:53:54 PM »

Ed I will send you a message. Honestly I don't know what it is for sure. Just my suspicion. I have examples back to 1964 or 1965 with inspection marks as part of the date code. I think somebody got smart and didn't want to stamp things twice. I don't remember if some of these had other inspection stamps or not.

Nikke · « **Reply #9 on:** August 03, 2016, 07:42:01 PM »

No funny marks on my other Muncies.
But I found one at ebay.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1968-CORVETTE-MUNCIE-TRANSMISSION-M22-STONE-CRUSHER-/272262352586?hash=item3f6419ceca:g:7GQAAOSwOVpXULeB&vxp=mtr

69Z28-RS · « **Reply #10 on:** August 03, 2016, 08:00:59 PM »

IIRC, it is only 68 Muncies that have the little 'c' after the code; I had one but sold it; it was an M21.

bcmiller · « **Reply #11 on:** August 03, 2016, 08:39:09 PM »

Gary, that is correct. At least from what I have seen. But there are other "marks" that are in other years with the stamped assembly date.

bertfam · « **Reply #12 on:** August 03, 2016, 08:41:18 PM »

Here's that funky M (if you can call it that) that I was referring to. Note that this one is on a CT transmission.

Ed

bertfam · « **Reply #13 on:** August 03, 2016, 08:46:02 PM »

And here's the partial 7 on a 1967 Muncie.

Ed

cook_dw · « **Reply #14 on:** August 04, 2016, 11:43:14 AM »

Could it have simply been a place holder in the gang stamp?

bertfam · « **Reply #15 on:** August 04, 2016, 01:05:42 PM »

Quote

Could it have simply been a place holder in the gang stamp?

If that were true, then ALL 68's would have the square c and [/b]ALL[/b] 67's would have the partial 7, but they don't.

Ed

cook_dw · « **Reply #16 on:** August 04, 2016, 01:15:47 PM »

Unless the gang stamp was swapped out from time to time or there were 2 different ones (gang stamps) used.. Not trying to argue just thinking of different possibilities..

bertfam · « **Reply #17 on:** August 04, 2016, 01:27:24 PM »

Even though he wasn't at the Muncie plant, I would have to let John comment on this. He may have inside information.

Ed

JohnZ · « **Reply #18 on:** August 04, 2016, 06:07:38 PM »

Quote from: bertfam on August 04, 2016, 01:27:24 PM

Even though he wasn't at the Muncie plant, I would have to let John comment on this. He may have inside information.

Ed

Sorry, can't shed any light on this; many others (like Jerry and "Crash") are much more knowledgeable than I am with those details.

bertfam · « **Reply #19 on:** August 04, 2016, 07:00:41 PM »

Thanks anyway John. This may just be one of those mysteries that we'll never figure out.

Ed

bcmiller · « **Reply #20 on:** August 04, 2016, 08:57:09 PM »

Bottom line - it is not a ratio code indicator. Whether it is an assembly inspection mark, internal tracking mark, or whatever...it makes no REAL difference at this point.

bertfam · « **Reply #21 on:** August 04, 2016, 09:02:03 PM »

Quote

Whether it is an assembly inspection mark, internal tracking mark, or whatever...it makes no REAL difference at this point.

Except to drive us nuts! I'm CERTAIN that the Muncie workers planned this! I can see it now...

"Hey Homer, let's randomly put some kind of weird character after the date stamp so those idiots collecting these cars 50 years from now will go crazy trying to figure out what it means!"

"Haw Haw. That's a great idea Jethrow!"

Ed

KurtS · « **Reply #22 on:** August 06, 2016, 01:02:43 AM »

The 68 little c is pretty common.
Darrell could be right, they could just be a placeholder. The c looks like the lower part of a broken E and the 7 is the top part of a broken 7.

bcmiller · « **Reply #23 on:** August 06, 2016, 06:18:28 PM »

Possible. But the number of digits did not change from 1966 to 1967, so I am not sure why that would be. 1966 format was P and 4 digits (two numbers for month, two numbers for day of the month). 1967 and later was P and 4 digits (number for year, letter for month, two numbers for day of the month).

I was bored so decided to check what I have here at home.

Two M22 cases, one from Camaro and one from Chevelle. Both had normal assembly date format, no funny characters.

Found one case here with the partial 7 and one with the small squared off c - both had normal inspection marks up on the top, center, back edge on the raised area. One had a diamond, the other a diamond with a line inside the diamond. Hmmm....this is the first time I have checked these over that closely.

Maybe the internal tracking mark idea has merit, or just someone wanted their stamp to look "different". I don't know. But there are other instances of inspection marks being part of the assembly date. See attachments, one from a 1964 Muncie and one from a 1965.

cook_dw · « **Reply #24 on:** August 06, 2016, 09:05:29 PM »

It still could have been a place holder. They could have had a blank stamp and lost it and then grabbed the next one they had which was a broken one.. Still not saying that's the reason but it's the only conclusion I can justify at this point..

KurtS · « **Reply #25 on:** August 16, 2016, 04:45:49 AM »

If so, I'm surprised they didn't just grind off the character....

News:

Author Topic: 8N477196 M22 (Read 11409 times)