Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2016 12:00:43 GMT -5
Hi all, new to this board, sorry I don't have a 65 but do have a 66 442. I am interested in the large number preceding the Julian date code on the B block (by the distributor hole). On the 442Bro site it shows three blocks and the numbers are shown to correspond with the year. After a conversation with Bro about this he took a look at his B block collection and found one block had a 1 and a 2 preceding the date code. Was hoping to have anyone with a B block 400 motor to take a look at what they have and answer back with that information. I am attempting to understand what the single number means on the 64-67 blocks. A lot of people will say it's a mold number. I think since the "B" block is a one year only block, I may be able correlate the answers you submit with a meaning to that number. Thanks in advance... List of B Block Date Codes - Updated 4/3/2016 Owner Number Julian Code Calender Date BRO 1 2 93 April 3rd 1965 BRO 2 1 34 Feb 3rd 1964 Ram Z 1 311 Nov 6th 1964 Shane 2 120 April 30 1965
|
|
|
Post by RAM Z on Apr 1, 2016 17:17:42 GMT -5
The one means it was cast in 64 and the 2 means it was cast in 65.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2016 19:13:29 GMT -5
How early in 64 did Oldsmobile start producing B Blocks?
|
|
|
Post by RAM Z on Apr 1, 2016 19:40:01 GMT -5
The block from my coupe is dated 311 1. Cast Nov 7th 1964.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2016 21:43:03 GMT -5
The block from my coupe is dated 311 1. Cast Nov 7th 1964. 64 was a leap year
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2016 21:47:58 GMT -5
I'm going to be creating a list of the block date codes on the first post.
|
|
|
Post by joepadavano on Apr 2, 2016 10:14:54 GMT -5
We just had this discussion over on Classicoldsmobile.com. I personally do not believe that the large number directly correlates to year. I think it has more to do with a mold number or similar production configuration. Restorers try to read WAAAAAY too much into these things.
Ask yourself, if these numbers are supposed to signify year, why do they restart with the 455 blocks, but not with the E-block 400? Are 330s different - production of those started in 1963. Does "1" = 1963 for a 330 and 1964 for a 400? Does that make any sense to anyone?
Mold use may ROUGHLY correspond to year, but not exactly, I suspect.
|
|
|
Post by RAM Z on Apr 2, 2016 10:26:19 GMT -5
We just had this discussion over on Classicoldsmobile.com. Does "1" = 1963 for a 330 and 1964 for a 400? Does that make any sense to anyone? Sure does. One is a big block and one is a small block, and didnt share a mold. It actually makes perfect sense if you subscribe to the year theory.
|
|
|
Post by joepadavano on Apr 2, 2016 10:32:32 GMT -5
We just had this discussion over on Classicoldsmobile.com. Does "1" = 1963 for a 330 and 1964 for a 400? Does that make any sense to anyone? Sure does. One is a big block and one is a small block, and didnt share a mold. It actually makes perfect sense if you subscribe to the year theory. Exactly. The numbers correspond to the configuration of the mold FOR THAT BLOCK. First version, second version, etc. One could argue that the B-block and E-block castings likely used the same mold, thus the continuation of the numbers for those. This is like the F-numbers in my book. Sorry, but unless someone uncovers a document from Oldsmobile engineering that shows this calendar year relationship, I remain a skeptic. There are documented 455s from different calendar years with the same digit, for example.
|
|
|
Post by RAM Z on Apr 2, 2016 10:47:00 GMT -5
Why would the 2nd mold of the 400 appear in exactly in 1965? Why would all the 1964 400s have a 1? Other than to signify the what calendar year the block was made.
|
|
|
Post by joepadavano on Apr 2, 2016 10:51:16 GMT -5
I've got a 350 that I pulled from a 1971 Cutlass parts car. The cowl tag date on that car is 03D - fourth week of March, 1971. The block is numbers-matching. The julian date on the block is 57 - Feb 26, 1971. That's completely consistent with the 03D build date. The large digit by the distributor is a "4". Olds started 350 production in 1967 for the 1968 model year. By your logic, 1967 = 1, 1968 = 2, 1969 = 3, and 1970 = 4. Why doesn't this 1971 block have a "5" You got some 'splainin to do, Lucy.
|
|
|
Post by RAM Z on Apr 2, 2016 11:38:54 GMT -5
I work for Ford. We build transmissions. Once a trans is built and taken off the line it goes to the dock where it sits for months at a time. We even had 4R75W transmissions that sat for over a year before being shipped. Thats a fully built ready to install trans.
You mean to tell me your block was cast, shipped to the engine plant, machined, sent to the line immediately, assembled, shipped to the car assembly plant and installed all in 4 weeks? Id be willing to bet, since by 1971 the 350 was the bulk of engines used, your 350 was cast in 1970 and thus why it has a 4 and not a 5. Lean manufacturing and just in time delivery were not around in 1970.
Parts from the 1960s are said to be date correct if they are within a 3 month period. Thats the date when the part was assembled. An engine would have a casting date that will be way earlier than its assembly date. Olds didnt cast and assemble engines the same day. Nobody did.
Since we dont know for certain my guess, and its only a guess, is as good as the mold theory.
|
|
|
Post by RAM Z on Apr 2, 2016 11:57:48 GMT -5
Also wasn't 1970 a strike year? Wouldn't Olds have 1970 cast blocks that didn't get built? Olds would have used them after the strike ended, which was into the start of 71 production.
|
|
|
Post by joepadavano on Apr 2, 2016 12:56:08 GMT -5
Thirty days prior to the car build date has been shown to be the normal lead time. Occasionally, casting dates up to 90 days prior have been documented, and ultra-rare parts (like D-heads and such) that were only made in very small quantities and cast in batches are an exception. This is a run of the mill 350 in a Cutlass. Thirteen MONTHS prior is unheard of. I don't claim to know for sure if the digit refers to the mold or some other engineering or manufacturing configuration control issue. I DO know that we have concrete proof that it does NOT reliably correspond to casting year. As I said before, there may be a loose correlation, but it is not 100%. The number is not the year, it is something else that is approximately annual, but not exactly. That makes it an unreliable indicator.
|
|
|
Post by joepadavano on Apr 2, 2016 13:06:47 GMT -5
By the way, the 1970 GM strike was Sept-Nov 1970. Do you REALLY think Olds had stockpiled a warehouse full of blocks in Feb 1970 to use in March 1971?
|
|
|
Post by RAM Z on Apr 2, 2016 14:13:25 GMT -5
By the way, the 1970 GM strike was Sept-Nov 1970. Do you REALLY think Olds had stockpiled a warehouse full of blocks in Feb 1970 to use in March 1971? GM knew that strike was coming, it happened in a contract year. The Big 3 still stockpile in a contract year. Ford had thousands of brand new F150s stored on an old GM bumper plant site near my house last summer. One of many sites around here they stored new trucks in case there was a strike. It's all speculation at this point. I'm not that concerned either way really. The mold theory has merit and there's some smoke to year theory. Doing research in the other GM makes would help since Olds didnt cast their blocks. CFD did. I'm sure the Vette guys have figured this out if Chevy blocks are coded the same.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2016 9:32:02 GMT -5
If the year theory is correct, then there will only be 1 or 2's for the B Block. So please get those casting numbers in, especially if you have an original motor in your 65.
|
|
|
Post by joepadavano on Apr 3, 2016 10:38:01 GMT -5
If the year theory is correct, then there will only be 1 or 2's for the B Block. So please get those casting numbers in, especially if you have an original motor in your 65. Doesn't prove or disprove anything. Now, if you found a B-block with a "2" and a date code after July, that would be interesting, since that would have been after the start of 1966 production and the use of the E-block, which would prove the large digit was NOT year-related.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2016 11:21:54 GMT -5
I didn't say that if there are 1's and 2's only that proves the year theory, I said that "IF" the year theory is correct, that there would only be 1's and 2's and that is solid logic, with no holes in it.
It can also be said that if the Mold theory is correct, and there are only 1's and 2's, then they only made two mold (types) for the B Blocks.
Joe, don't get a stroke over this, I'm just trying to get more data. Actually your mold theory is winning based upon the BRO 2 Block in the first post where I'm compiling the list. That is the 1 34 casting number which might be the smoking gun to this whole discussion. It would be nice to see more of the 65 owners look at their original blocks and get more data to backup any of the proposed theory's.
|
|
|
Post by shane on Apr 3, 2016 11:28:52 GMT -5
Car was built in May . 2 next to the distributor numbers below it are 120. 400 b block
1970 455 on the stand has 3 then 267
|
|