CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 01, 2014, 09:08:42 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.
105870 Posts in 12355 Topics by 4762 Members
Latest Member: HarryQ
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  CRG Discussion Forum
|-+  Camaro Research Group Discussion
| |-+  Decoding/Numbers
| | |-+  VIN assignment - JohnZ?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2  All Print
Author Topic: VIN assignment - JohnZ?  (Read 4485 times)
Flowjoe
Member
***
Posts: 340


View Profile Email
« on: November 29, 2010, 01:50:00 PM »

I understand that the VIN is assigned to the body shell when it crosses from Fisher to Chevrolet (as per JohnZ's report).  But is the following statement correct?

"... Vin #'s have notting [sic] to do with the built [sic] date. The Vin # is assigned to the order sheet when placed by the dealers or GM. The built [sic] date should not be used as a gage [sic] on early cars of any make. I [have] seen many cars with built [sic] dates and even on parts that are way off from the Vin [sic] and are 100% true survivors!  If a car was ordered for a special purpose or is awaiting back ordered options or parts then it would be put on hold until availible [sic] and later cars are built before it. If you check most of the early car Vin #'s from Van Nuys they don't run in a consecutive date order. You will always find a low vin [sic] with a later than normal built date."

Were VIN's assigned to the order sheet when placed by dealers as suggested above?  That doesn't make sense to me.  It seems to me that wouldn't happen until production either when the paperwork hit Fisher (VIN attached to order and then mating up to body when it hit the Chevrolet side).

If the statement above is incorrect, when were the VIN's assigned?   

Was it common practice to hold cars back once assigned a VIN?  Never?  Sometimes?

FWIW, the above statement was made about '70 Camaros but I would think that GM had made few changes to the process of assigning VIN's between '69 and '70 (of course I could be wrong)
Logged
jdv69z
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 652


69 RS Z/28 52E


View Profile Email
« Reply #1 on: November 29, 2010, 03:49:43 PM »

If the statement above is incorrect, when were the VIN's assigned?

When the body came thru the wall from Fisher to Chevrolet
 

Was it common practice to hold cars back once assigned a VIN?  Never?  Sometimes?

Chevrolet had the ability to re-arrange the sequence of production (to balance the work load on the line) in their "Body Bank". Thus VIN's did not necessarily come off the end of the assembly line in sequence, although they would have not been far apart from each other. That is my understanding.

Jimmy V.

Logged

Jimmy V.
Flowjoe
Member
***
Posts: 340


View Profile Email
« Reply #2 on: November 29, 2010, 04:39:16 PM »

If the statement above is incorrect, when were the VIN's assigned?

When the body came thru the wall from Fisher to Chevrolet

And this was my understanding as well based upon JohnZ's article  - which I mentioned above - hence my questioning of the assertion that the VIN was assigned to the order sheet when placed by the dealer.
 

Was it common practice to hold cars back once assigned a VIN?  Never?  Sometimes?

Chevrolet had the ability to re-arrange the sequence of production (to balance the work load on the line) in their "Body Bank". Thus VIN's did not necessarily come off the end of the assembly line in sequence, although they would have not been far apart from each other. That is my understanding.

Jimmy V.



This is my take also based upon JohnZ's article - it clearly flies in the face of the assertion quoted in my initial post.
Logged
Z71
Member
***
Posts: 80


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #3 on: November 29, 2010, 06:53:35 PM »

The VIN could not be assigned to a car that was not yet in production.  And the order was just that an order, it was not a car till it arrived on the final assembly line.

The way I read the report, the body bank had a staging area and the VIN were assigned once the body came into the bank.  Then the bodies were released onto the line irregardless of the vin sequence assigned but by work content.   If you got 20 cars in the bank but only 1 line to feed, some are going to get released before others.  They had job numbers they worked with so the vin sequence never meant anything to the assembly line operations, that was just a legal thing they had to install.  Chevrolet released monthly reports showing the last VIN built during the previous month. 

That statement might be correct as it pertains to the body number BUT not the VIN IMO.
Logged

Mike
Owned new (and still have stashed away) LOL
1966 Impala SS396
1970 Chevelle SS454
1972 El Camino SS350
1973 Chevelle SS350
2002 Trans Am WS6 Ram Air
KurtS
CRG Coordinator
*****
Posts: 3253


View Profile Email
« Reply #4 on: November 29, 2010, 07:59:10 PM »

You guys are correct and that statement is a bunch of hooey. Smiley
Once a car was started, it was built. And in the middle of the process, the VIN was assigned and attached.

Now, if he's talking order /body #'s (69+), maybe, a little.....
Logged

Kurt S
CRG
Flowjoe
Member
***
Posts: 340


View Profile Email
« Reply #5 on: November 29, 2010, 08:24:47 PM »

You guys are correct and that statement is a bunch of hooey. Smiley
Once a car was started, it was built. And in the middle of the process, the VIN was assigned and attached.

Now, if he's talking order /body #'s (69+), maybe, a little.....

That's what I thought - thanks guys
Logged
vtfb68
Member
***
Posts: 371


View Profile Email
« Reply #6 on: December 01, 2010, 10:43:38 AM »

Kurt,
 How would the plant labor strikes affect the above mentioned process?  Would cars have been caught in limbo and have odd body, build, and VIN numbers?  Do you know the weeks involved?
  Thank you,
  Victor
Logged

05C LA RS/SS U2 712 L34 M21 BR
08E LA RS Y2 749 L30 M35
"In the pursuit of accuracy"
Mark
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 944



View Profile Email
« Reply #7 on: December 01, 2010, 12:44:48 PM »

Wouldn't affect them at all.  Think of the VINs being assigned on an assembly line, car reaches the point the VIN is assigned a number plate is stamped placed on the car and the car rolls on, next one pulls up increment the VIN by one and repeat the process.  If the plant shut down there would be about 2 days worth of production already on the Fisher side of the plant (in the case or Norwood) so when the issue was resolved, be it labor, or equipment related and the line restarts the next body thru gets the next VIN number, no gap in numbers.  Now if the strike went on for a couple of weeks, you may get a gap in the build week numbers (a jump from say 10A to 10C or D) but body numbers were already assigned, and the VINs had ot been issued yet so you never see any huge jumps the sequences.
Logged

Mark C.
1969 Indy Pace Car
350/300HP RPO Z11
DONCZ28
Member
***
Posts: 77


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: December 01, 2010, 07:24:07 PM »

Does any one know why, all  June 1969 body's,  cowl tags are  stamped  06A ,   NOT   06B,  06C, 06D.........?
Logged
william
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 1169


View Profile Email
« Reply #9 on: December 03, 2010, 07:20:54 AM »

Does any one know why, all  June 1969 body's,  cowl tags are  stamped  06A ,   NOT   06B,  06C, 06D.........?

Fisher body either did not bother to re-set the tag stampers or released all 13,682 orders during the first week. It was not unusual for them to skip a week. Norwood was either shut down the last week of June or just built Firebirds.
« Last Edit: December 03, 2010, 11:46:27 AM by KurtS » Logged
jdv69z
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 652


69 RS Z/28 52E


View Profile Email
« Reply #10 on: December 03, 2010, 11:50:24 AM »

So were there other weeks during the year which not used? I've sort of been compiling some data on VIN's, to build week, and there seem to be some which were not used. I was thinking that might be the case, but wasn't sure. Either that or I just hadn't seen any cars which had a trim tag with certain build weeks yet.

Jimmy V.
Logged

Jimmy V.
KurtS
CRG Coordinator
*****
Posts: 3253


View Profile Email
« Reply #11 on: December 04, 2010, 05:11:05 PM »

Some weeks have real low volumes, some weeks weren't used. It varies by plant and year.
Logged

Kurt S
CRG
Z71
Member
***
Posts: 80


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #12 on: December 05, 2010, 09:27:04 AM »

Does any one know why, all  June 1969 body's,  cowl tags are  stamped  06A ,   NOT   06B,  06C, 06D.........?

More than likely just a big screw up by a new employee. 
Logged

Mike
Owned new (and still have stashed away) LOL
1966 Impala SS396
1970 Chevelle SS454
1972 El Camino SS350
1973 Chevelle SS350
2002 Trans Am WS6 Ram Air
jdv69z
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 652


69 RS Z/28 52E


View Profile Email
« Reply #13 on: December 06, 2010, 11:35:26 AM »

Some weeks have real low volumes, some weeks weren't used. It varies by plant and year.

I was only  compiling the 69 Camaro at Norwood. Was interested in narrowing down the build week/VIN correlation more closely. But if is known that certain weeks were not used, it is another way to spot a fake tag.

Jimmy V.
Logged

Jimmy V.
srode
Member
***
Posts: 173



View Profile Email
« Reply #14 on: February 03, 2011, 07:01:58 AM »

I have seen more than one 1969 2D cars with VINs that should be March built according to the cross reference of VIN to firewall tag information here, and they appear to be legitimate from all other information.  How does that happen?  Was 3A not used perhaps?
Logged

Steve - 02D Z11 and a Plain Jane hardtop
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 0.087 seconds with 17 queries.