CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 25, 2014, 01:23:05 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the CRG Discussion Forum!
Forum registration problems: Make sure you enter your email correctly and you check your spam box first. *Then* email KurtS2@gmail for help.
105761 Posts in 12346 Topics by 4757 Members
Latest Member: chelltab
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  CRG Discussion Forum
|-+  Camaro Research Group Discussion
| |-+  Restoration
| | |-+  Service Order Block
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]  All Print
Author Topic: Service Order Block  (Read 7718 times)
ccargo
Member
***
Posts: 236


View Profile Email
« Reply #15 on: May 07, 2007, 09:39:57 AM »

This is great info Don, great to hear from someone with direct knowledge of the process as both the owner and service writer. Could you give a little more detail about the "inoperative ordering method"?  Included in a forward from Harvard, he mentioned something about a "dedicated order" that included a factory partial VIN stamp? If this was done do you know the location? I'd sure appreciate any photos of the block stamps you might be able to get for the data I'm collecting. The assembly stamp location is on the flat milled surface at the starter mount and is not visable with the starter in place. It would be interesting to find out if a "fitted" block would have that stamp?

Pat
patjillr@gmail.com
Logged
zdld17
Member
***
Posts: 41


dd1872
View Profile Email
« Reply #16 on: May 07, 2007, 10:54:33 AM »

Pat, the the car inoperative order was a pink sheet manually printed and submitted via mail.  That was the quickest way of ordering from GMPD.   We usually made manual comments to the side such at warranty or tourist tie up etc.  Dealer got their normal pricing here but if we called in the order, we got a grouchy parts order desk person and I can't recall his name, good guy but we just learned to live with him.     The other sheet was a black and white it was something other than dealer reg order. Regular order pad got an additional discount and had select preferred mail in time schedules. My guess was batch shipping mode where all dealer orders going to south Texas were on the Missouri Pacific truck on certain dates.     

As for the dedicated stamping, this was done in the dealership and it may have been due to some Georgia laws?   Texas required some of this information on titles and most dealership complied but outside dealership or over counter was very lax.  If I am able to get photos , I will post later or send to you. 
As for my date stamping, do you think that the pad numbers are actually the block cast numbers?
 Thank you for your reply. 
« Last Edit: May 07, 2007, 10:57:46 AM by zdld17 » Logged

Don Dabbs
JohnZ
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 4125


View Profile Email
« Reply #17 on: May 07, 2007, 11:07:44 AM »

Reading members comments let me to observe my block coding which appears to be a CE 0629 with a cast # of F290.    I would presume that this block was built in 1970?    Block was replaced late 1970.   It was a 302 fitted block.   I recall some of members reports of some service order # stamping on starter pad? of which I do not find.   Am I understanding these stamps correctly?

F 29 0 says the block was cast on June 29, 1970. Is CE 0629 the entire pad stamping? Usually there's a number digit after the "CE" (for the year), followed by five numbers (between 20,000 and 50,000 for Flint V-8, or between 50,000 and 80,000 for Tonawanda); yours is from Flint. Ccargo (Pat) has been tracking numbers stamped on the starter pad.
Logged

'69 Z/28
Fathom Green
CRG
ccargo
Member
***
Posts: 236


View Profile Email
« Reply #18 on: May 07, 2007, 11:13:55 AM »

Thanks for the response Don, great first hand information. I noticed that the CE sequential numbers on your block are very close to that of the block casting date? This could be coincedence or some other sequence variation used for the type of component you were issued? I would like a photo of the stamp for that reason. I would have expected the code to read CE 0##### and this # sequence being between 20000 and 49999 but this is the reason I'm trying to establish a base.
Logged
zdld17
Member
***
Posts: 41


dd1872
View Profile Email
« Reply #19 on: May 07, 2007, 12:19:47 PM »

Maybe I listed the number wrong but it was all together, CE0629 and I am reading it seperate from CE.   So it could be CE0 629 . I will again look at the cast # F 290, which makes me think F= June , 29 = day and 0 = 1970?  .   I am aware of the large number sequence but its not there.  Will post photo when I find a roundtoit.   Odd that the casting and stamp are the same?  Yes, its a Flint  block and a 010/020 hi tin nickel  block.  . 
Logged

Don Dabbs
69er
Member
***
Posts: 30


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: May 09, 2007, 07:40:07 PM »

Mr. zdld17.

When you received the warranty replacement engine. Do you know if it came with full floating piston pins?
I am just wondering if GM changed the connecting rods to press fit due to the problems that were
being encountered with the full floating piston pins.

69er

Logged
zdld17
Member
***
Posts: 41


dd1872
View Profile Email
« Reply #21 on: May 09, 2007, 08:09:12 PM »

Good to see your response.   The absence of floating pin  may have been cause of the first loss as pin appeared to be locked into piston.   Upon dismantling motor, this was something we thought was odd as the 302 was or had always been known to have full floating pins on rods and pistons.  The second CE motor did have the pink rods and full floats.  This motor developed oil consumption problem with the chrome rings.    We could never seat these GM rings.    Last effort after I left the Chevy house, my zone rep issued me a fitted block and I transferred all over to this case.   Again, that motor had floating pins on rods. 
To this date, nothing was ever mentioned about the pressed on rods on a 302 nor was it ever suspected.   One rod broke iin mid section and took lower half of case out.   All of this happened as I was behind the parts counter so I never got to see total tear down, just broken pieces.     The second motor , I was warranty clerk and got to witness that tear down, and write the claim with zone approval. 
« Last Edit: May 09, 2007, 08:10:51 PM by zdld17 » Logged

Don Dabbs
69er
Member
***
Posts: 30


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: May 09, 2007, 09:36:05 PM »

Mr. zdld17,

Are you saying that the first warranty block did not have full floating piston pins?

69er
Logged
zdld17
Member
***
Posts: 41


dd1872
View Profile Email
« Reply #23 on: May 10, 2007, 06:19:43 AM »

As I said before,  I was behind the counter so I did not see this but it was brought up.  Total tear down was  not done.   All that was found was 1 piston that was slipped out of cly hole with half rod and that rod was locked into rod and piston.     
Some one on this site was mentioning this or made comment to,  thats the first thing that went thru my mind.   That there were some 302 motor that got pressed in pistons??    Have  you ever heard of this?   Now , I could be wrong as all rods in my motor being non full floating,  it was just one that was found.  The other 7 could have been floated and only one locked  up causing momentairlily siezure at hi rpm? 
Logged

Don Dabbs
Pages: 1 [2]  All Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.086 seconds with 17 queries.