Re: Julian Date Codes vs Cowl Tag Build Dates
 

+1 for Sam's comment.

Re: Julian Date Codes vs Cowl Tag Build Dates
 

As an aside: They may or may not have indexed to 04A for the rest of the week. I've seen some weeks that were 1 to 1.5 days long - and in the middle of the month. NOR Fisher used this date as they chose; it definitely was only loosely based on a calendar.
Some plants may have been more regimented in their use of the date, but not at NOR.

Re: Julian Date Codes vs Cowl Tag Build Dates
 

Guys, FWIW, I track 69 Chevelle data and have this same issue and have tried many times to tie the build weeks to a calendar with no success. As far as the build month and weeks I have several that run beyond the monthly reported VINs for an assembly plant, example would be the Baltimore assembly plant in June 1969, many of the early June VINs have 05D build month and week. This did not occur at all the assembly plants and not for all the months but there are several where it runs over.
For my 1969 chevelle, the NCRS production date is the same as the transfer date that is found on the Manufacturers Certificate of Origin.

Re: Julian Date Codes vs Cowl Tag Build Dates
 

I'm not sure why this topic seems to cause so much confusion. For the years I have documented (58-64) I have MANY cars on record with a trim tag build date at the end of one month and a VIN within the next month, or a trim tag build date in one week and the VIN calculated within the next week (or two). As Phil and others have stated, delays due to problems with the body or line balance considerations or parts supplier delays did result in such spacing between the start/finish of the body and the final assembly.
Now if it was the other way around...........Houston, we have a problem!

Verne [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/flag.gif[/img]
PS: I hope I haven't offended anyone since my research isn't from 1969.

Re: Julian Date Codes vs Cowl Tag Build Dates
 

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Verne_Frantz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm not sure why this topic seems to cause so much confusion. For the years I have documented (58-64) I have MANY cars on record with a trim tag build date at the end of one month and a VIN within the next month, or a trim tag build date in one week and the VIN calculated within the next week (or two). As Phil and others have stated, delays due to problems with the body or line balance considerations or parts supplier delays did result in such spacing between the start/finish of the body and the final assembly.
Now if it was the other way around...........Houston, we have a problem!

Verne [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/flag.gif[/img]
PS: I hope I haven't offended anyone since my research isn't from 1969. </div></div>

x2. I think the confusion comes because people are trying to nail it to a specific day and it is not that exact. There's a lot of ebb and flow in the process.

Sidebar: I've shepherded thousands of engineering vehicles through the build process, and a couple of my own vehicles.

I watched my '87 pickup get built in Flint. Caught up with it at 4:30 pm on Monday September 29 1986 as it was coming down out of paint into trim. Followed the cab/box through trim until it went upstairs to the body accumulator; ran downstairs to follow the motor and chassis build through body drop. After body drop I followed it down the final line. I &quot;allowed&quot; one of the end of line drivers to roll test it and then I drove it from the short repair line over to the shipping building myself.

I told the shipping area supervisor &quot;Lloyd - that's my truck&quot; and left the plant at 1:30 am Tuesday morning. It was at Graff Chevrolet in Davison by 5pm that same Tuesday (9 miles away. $525 destination charge, btw).

I tell this story not only to highlight the build timing (at 60 jobs/hour, or one complete vehicle per minute) but also to share this: a few years ago I ordered the build information/invoice from the GM Heritage Center archive. I was somewhat surprised to find they had the &quot;shipping date&quot; wrong - it showed Monday the 29th even though I know it did not leave the property until Tuesday the 30th. The &quot;pay point&quot; was reported near the end of the final line, not by when it cleared the shipping building, so I suspect this is why the document did not match how I would have phrased it in layman's terms.

K


Also note that they spelled my name wrong (!):

http://i1016.photobucket.com/albums/.../Invoice-1.jpg

Re: Julian Date Codes vs Cowl Tag Build Dates
 

I do think we are trying to understand the process of the dates and how they apply to the dates on the cars.

For the YH wheel application, they only made them in sporadic batches - so trying to determine the right date for the car build was the intent here. Unfortunately the 04C car falls into one of those gray areas and like everyone has stated above, there is no exact process and definitive definition on the dates they apply to the car - due to many variables as also stated above.

For the 04C car, best bet is to see if there are any other 04C Z28's that have their original wheels and see what they have - would be the best approach or be safe and eliminate any controversy with using the Feb wheel dates.

Appreciate everyone's input and constructive thoughts

Mike Mike Mike - what day is it ?? HUMP DAY!!

Re: Julian Date Codes vs Cowl Tag Build Dates
 

Eddie,

For Norwood, likely the best we can do today is to perhaps triangulate the Fisher build date, the shipper date and to a lesser extent the VIN. I think in most cases you can reliably determine the week of production.

Given the normal production duration from the drop of the floor pan to road and roll you are already 2 business days into production on a single unit. Allowing for any repairs-potential re inspection(s) and vehicle transfer over to the &quot;OK lot&quot;, all is left is transition to the method of shipment. Either loading to rail (at rail load out) or direct to trucks via Complete Auto Transport both of these were at plant at the rear of the plant near the Foral Ave gate.