GM Norwood Salaried Christmas Party

[William]

Body tag questions would have to be directed to Fisher Body Production Control employees. They released the order to produce the body, including punching the tag. Chevrolet Final Assembly had nothing to do with the tag, never looked at it.

02D tags were built into March; there was no 03A for some reason.

[70 copo]

Computer scheduling guy and the key punch girls are still with us and are listed as coming to the party.

Fingers crossed for an answer.

[Mr.Nickey Nova]

That would be great if they have an answer on the trim tags, thanks Phil.

[NorCam]

Another obscure option that I would like to know more about is V75 Liquid Tire Chain.

Being a rare option, it is reported as being documented in only four Z/28's and a handful of Copo cars leaving Norwood in 69. It leaves me to wonder if any of the Norwood line workers or managers recall the option and how well it seemed to work, or for that matter, didn't work well in solid lifter cars when tested?

I ask due to it being Vacuum actuated and wonder how effectively it performed in these solid lifter cars when installed new, and how it was tested before leaving Norwood. Hearing anything at all from plant workers on this option would be kind of cool to me?

Thanks and enjoy the Party!

[70 copo]

Originally Posted by NorCam

Another obscure option that I would like to know more about is V75 Liquid Tire Chain.

Being a rare option, it is reported as being documented in only four Z/28's and a handful of Copo cars leaving Norwood in 69. It leaves me to wonder if any of the Norwood line workers or managers recall the option and how well it seemed to work, or for that matter, didn't work well in solid lifter cars when tested?

I ask due to it being Vacuum actuated and wonder how effectively it performed in these solid lifter cars when installed new, and how it was tested before leaving Norwood. Hearing anything at all from plant workers on this option would be kind of cool to me?

Thanks and enjoy the Party!

They were aware of the option, but nothing remarkable to report on LTC from the workers as it was not something that was tested on the line.

[Paul_S]

Anyone attending that worked back in 1963-64 for 1964 production? Not sure if these were asked in the past (maybe documented somewhere?):

-How did they feel about the Nova Convertible, Hardtop/Coupe and SS being cancelled for '64? -Coupe and SS did return few months after production started.

-How did they feel about V8 finally being a regular production item/option (L32 2-brl 283 only for '64)? Any inquiries/responses why no 327 offered? This would have required additional training for the new V8 specific components (now offering four engines: 153 4cyl, 194 & 230 6-cyl & 283 V8).

-Any info on the late '64 introduction of the L77 4-brl 283 (220HP)? Remember it being a short run or delayed introduction?

-Any special builds or issues they remember during that time frame?


Thanks, Paul

[olredalert]

Originally Posted by Paul_S

Anyone attending that worked back in 1963-64 for 1964 production? Not sure if these were asked in the past (maybe documented somewhere?):

-How did they feel about the Nova Convertible, Hardtop/Coupe and SS being cancelled for '64? -Coupe and SS did return few months after production started.

-How did they feel about V8 finally being a regular production item/option (L32 2-brl 283 only for '64)? Any inquiries/responses why no 327 offered? This would have required additional training for the new V8 specific components (now offering four engines: 153 4cyl, 194 & 230 6-cyl & 283 V8).

-Any info on the late '64 introduction of the L77 4-brl 283 (220HP)? Remember it being a short run or delayed introduction?

-Any special builds or issues they remember during that time frame?


Thanks, Paul

----Paul,,,There are many 327/250hp 64 Chevelles out there. Late production for sure, but they are around! There may have been 327/300's, but I'm just not sure. Memory is not what it used to be!.....Bill S

[Tracker1]

Possible transmission anomaly question about my 10D '68 built 1969 Z28:

The M21 transmission is a bit of a mystery. The family members of the original deceased owner have no recollection of the car ever needing trans work. But the VIN is 528195 on the case and this car is 529996. So if the transmission was replaced in the 70's or 80's they hit a home-run with the replacement because it is (A) a 1969 M-21 from (B) a Norwood Camaro and (C) built within 48 hrs. of this car, thus perfectly dated to it, at October 19th, with its original tag in place and it is equally dirty as the motor. That is quite a match for finding a random tranny.

GM of Canada has no record of a 1969 Camaro with a VIN ending in 528195 being imported and also 528195 unfortunately falls outside the roll of VINS with info available from NCRS so I cannot rule out that this trans is from a real Camaro. My gut tells me its an assembly line mis-stamp, or swap maybe, but then again numbers are numbers.

Also, my car is built right at the October 21st 1968 date when the Muncie model designator letters started to be stamped into the cases. But I found a B (usually for M21) here in this location (see pic) not at the end of the P9R19 Muncie number.

Just wondering if it is possible an assembly line worker might have a plausible explanation for these two queries. Thank You.

[70 copo]

Originally Posted by Tracker1

Possible transmission anomaly question about my 10D '68 built 1969 Z28:

The M21 transmission is a bit of a mystery. The family members of the original deceased owner have no recollection of the car ever needing trans work. But the VIN is 528195 on the case and this car is 529996. So if the transmission was replaced in the 70's or 80's they hit a home-run with the replacement because it is (A) a 1969 M-21 from (B) a Norwood Camaro and (C) built within 48 hrs. of this car, thus perfectly dated to it, at October 19th, with its original tag in place and it is equally dirty as the motor. That is quite a match for finding a random tranny.

GM of Canada has no record of a 1969 Camaro with a VIN ending in 528195 being imported and also 528195 unfortunately falls outside the roll of VINS with info available from NCRS so I cannot rule out that this trans is from a real Camaro. My gut tells me its an assembly line mis-stamp, or swap maybe, but then again numbers are numbers.

Also, my car is built right at the October 21st 1968 date when the Muncie model designator letters started to be stamped into the cases. But I found a B (usually for M21) here in this location (see pic) not at the end of the P9R19 Muncie number.

Just wondering if it is possible an assembly line worker might have a plausible explanation for these two queries. Thank You.

"The mystery transmission was likely a goofed up assembly from the manufacturing plant, the original car it was installed in would not shift correctly at roll test and was sent to AGR where the tranny was pulled and sent to the salvage shop and quickly repaired. Now the next car that showed up at AGR (Your buddie's car) also had a goofed up Tranny and had its tranny pulled and it also sent to salvage for repair, In this scenario the VIN your asking about is now sitting in AGR without a tranny so an exchange was made form salvage with the previous tranny that was already repaired as repair swap part. Trannies coming out of salvage could be mix masters, case and parts swaps were common. Functionality and cost savings were the priorities to management back then"

[Lee Stewart]

Originally Posted by olredalert

----Paul,,,There are many 327/250hp 64 Chevelles out there. Late production for sure, but they are around! There may have been 327/300's, but I'm just not sure. Memory is not what it used to be!.....Bill S

http://chevellestuff.net/1964/engine_id_codes.htm