VikingBlue

I've read on another site that the 1969 442 cowl tags stated the Cutlass body code (33687) rather than the 442 code (34487) at least through March of the 1969 production.

Was this for all 442s ? For some ? Only in Lansing ?

Given the above assumption, and with not seeing a lot of 442s around to compare, it struck me as odd that one that I saw recently with an early build date had the correct 34487 code on the cowl tag.

joe_padavano

Many (possibly most) but not all 68-69 442s got 36xx body tags. The difference may be assembly plant related, but I've never seen data to prove or disprove that.

kevdog442

I've always wondered that if thats true then why does every Cutlass Supreme I've seen (68-69 which have the same body as a 442) have a 342 body tag and others (F- 85,etc.) seem to always have the correct body tag. It just seems a little fishy to me, especially when I know how simple it is to change a vin tag. My 69 442 has the correct 344 body tag.

joe_padavano

I don't know about "fishy", but it is completely documented in the Fisher (sorry) Body Manual for the 1968 and 1969 model years. I've always suspected that this is a throwback to the 67-earlier cars where the 442 was an option package. Note that the Supremes for those years had different upholstery and trim, so that as far as Fisher Body was concerned, they were different and thus got a different body code. The 442s, on the other hand, got the same upholstery and trim as the Cutlass, hence the same body code as far as Fisher Body was concerned.

VikingBlue

Kev - is yours a Flint car ?

The car I saw with the correct 344 tag was a Linden, NJ car.

kevdog442

I guess I wasn't thinking about the upholstery and trim, only the body. So that makes sense. Mine was made in Fremont, Ca. and here in the midwest I see a lot of Cutlass tags on 442s so it could have been a Lansing thing.

joe_padavano

Cutlii of this vintage were not built in Flint.