vin # and Fisher body # spread

[xstates]

I have a 12C X33:  565665 VIN with a Fisher unit 172920

Ebay 12C X33: engine pad reads V1I22DZ, and the partial VIN 19N565815 with a Fisher unit 171668

Does Norwood mix-up data tags and unibody's on the same day of assembly?

I think the DZ stamp is 3 weeks, too early?

[MO]

Is the trim code the same for both vehicles?

http://www.camaros.org/numbers.shtml#CowlTag

[xstates]

same Norwood, same X33, same 12C, same 12437. same 711, same year,  different paint.  This Z28 was sold  by Mecum in the Nov 2022 auction.

[william]

The number on the body tag is the confirmation number, assigned when Central Office accepted the dealer order. It is printed on production paperwork including the window sticker. It had nothing to do with production scheduling. For 1969, both plants were on the same system. For the normal production model year, the sequence started at 100001; highest number I have seen over many years of research is 377197. That's 277,197 dealer orders but only 200,282 cars were built. Many orders were cancelled for a variety of reasons. When 1969 production resumed at Norwood August 1969 the numbering was reset to 100001.

Norwood and Van Nuys operated differently. Norwood serialized assembled bodies as received from Fisher. The were then slotted into one of the six lines in the schedule bank, not released to final assembly in VIN order. N565815 may have been final assembled prior to N565665. For the most part, they were not that far off.

Van Nuys built several other cars. It appears they serialized bodies as they were issued to final-assembly, built them in model order. However consecutive Camaro VINs may have had several other models between them in final assembly.

http://www.camaros.org/assemblyprocess.shtml

[xstates]

I would consider 1,252 far-off, for same everything, X33,  Camaro, except color. They were assembled within 2 hours of each other.
My car is Yellow, the other is Orange on Ebay.
The focus is Norwood. In addition, block date seems dubious to me?
I have a 3rd VIN, 600 units, after mine as well. I needed the block, I bought in 2017, from Swartzy Emporium on the recommendation of Bill Shirley.
Thanks for the info on the lines, I know Mahwah Ford plant well, full size & F-Series.

[william]

I would consider 1,252 far-off, for same everything, X33,  Camaro, except color. They were assembled within 2 hours of each

Nope.

I could list dozens of examples from our db of consecutive VINs with body #s thousands apart.

Built a few minutes apart on March 4th

ZL-1 Camaro #3 N608193/NOR 211785
ZL-1 Camaro #4 N608214/NOR 222015

From Jerry's book:

Z/28   Camaro N637170/NOR 309166 built Friday May 2
COPO  Camaro N638868/NOR 286131 built Monday May 5

The body number had nothing to do with production scheduling.

[xstates]

William:  Interesting exceptions: ZL1's had their own set of ordering problems. 7 litre V8 Camaro would be harder to build/source than a 5 litre V8 Camaro. Good point, Fisher # does not mean much.  Any info on that block of Camaro VIN #'s with no shipping info? I have 2 Yellow Camaro's, 12C and 1C, '69's which it would help? The 7 Litre, solid lifter,  engines were always in short supply at the Ford plant in Mahwah. Many went over the fence, disassembled.

[william]

The NCRS does not have shipping info for Norwood cars in the VIN range N508855-N587275 [September 24, 1968-January 28, 1969]. It could be the paper records were simply discarded. Or they were never generated. In his book "On a Clear Day You Can See General Motors" Chevy General Manager John De Lorean stated Chevy had just installed a new system designed to manage dealer orders all the way through production. Start-up was a mess.

"But the bugs hadn't been entirely worked out of the new system. It simply did not work. The division was unable to invoice dealers for thousands of new cars which were shipped."

COPO Camaro orders were limited by rear axle availability. The internal docs I have seen indicate planning was well underway by July 1968, plenty of time to establish ZL-1 engine production. There were some start-up problems with the new open-chamber head, that is a discussion for another day.