Here is what it reads:

ST 72-33687 Z 05228
TR 949 A52 57 - T
04B 193098 580557

Its a 72 Holiday "S" Coupe, Baroque Gold w/ Covert Tan Vinyl top...but that is about all I have decoded out of that.

Thanks in advance for any input!
Tim

 

Correct so far Z=Freemont, CA 05228=plant sequence
tr949= saddle interior A52=bench seat
04B= April 2nd week beginning build date

Pat

 

ST 72 = 1972 model year production
3 = Oldsmobile Division
3687 = Cutlass S Holiday Coupe
Z = Freemont Production
05228 = Body number assigned by Fisher Body Works at Freemont division
TR 949 = Saddle Naugahyde trim
A52 = Bench front seat
57 - T =Baroque Gold lower Body, Covert Gold Vinyl roof
04B = Time build code - Built in the second week (B) of April (04)
193098 580557 = Build sheet references.

Wow! Your car was built pretty close to the same time mine was. My car is from Lansing though and was built on the 1st week of April 1972 (04A)

What is your VIN?? Should start out as 3G87(_)2Z(XXXXXX) The first blank will have your engine descriptor. The last 6 X's will be the Freemont assigned Assembly line sequence.

 

Cool, I was able to find that info fairly readily online:

3G87H2Z123351

So is this right?:
3 - Oldsmobile
G - Cutlass
87 - Coupe 2-door Hardtop
H - 350/2bbl
2 - 1972
Z - Fremont Plant

Another question what is the "F" Body style in a VIN, I see it listed as Cutlass H.T. is that what a post coupe would have in its VIN?

Thanks!
Tim

 

You're pretty much right on, with the following exception. 3G87 is specifically a Cutlass S though. The letter F is a reference to the base Cutlass which was also available in 2 door coupe and sedan. The number 87 designates the body type. eg: 77 is a 2 door post coupe, 57 is for CS hardtop, 67 is CS verts etc.

The Cutlass S was produced as both 77 and 87 models and would have VIN's starting 3G77 or 3G87.

 

Great info, so if I'm understanding that right there is a 72 Cutlass S Post car? The non-post would be the holiday coupe and the post was something different? I'm not sure I've seen one of those....

Thanks for the info!
Tim

 

Correct, there is a Cutlass S Post coupe and a Cutlass Hardtop coupe.
The post coupes look like this; note vent window and enclosed side glass. The Post coupes have a 'B' pillar whereas the HT's don't

 

Very cool, I can't say I have ever seen one of those around here...never knew they existed!

Thanks
Tim

 

Only 4141 of them were built in 72 - that's why they're more rare. Most of them were lighter weight than the HT cars and were used and abused at the track. Still a highly desirable and collectible car today.

 

350-2 Cutlass post?

I also don't think there was a Cutlass post in '72.

 

There definitely was a Sports Coupe (Post) in 72. Check out the Dealer Ordering guide, or the 72 SPECS. All Cutlass models could be ordered with the L32, L34 and variety of 455 engines in 72. Just for the record the 72 Cutlass Post could also be ordered with the W30 package.

EDIT: A lot of times when people refer to Cutlass, they do so generically. That's how I interpreted Diego's comment about Cutlass post.

 

1. See below about the model availability.

2. My point about the 350-2 was that it likely was the most popular engine, which hardly suggests "most . . . were used and abused at the track" unless I've misunderstood you.

 

What in the world was a Cutlass 2-seat Cruiser?

 

Three rows of seating. I always thought they were rearward facing. Brochure says differently.

http://www.lov2xlr8.no/brochures/olds/72olds/32.html

Pat

 

I'm learning all sorts of stuff in this thread, certainly knew about the vista-cruiser but didn't realize there was a Cutlass version...my brain went the other way when I first read that and pictured a 2 seater coupe..that would have been a car!

Thanks for the info
Tim

 

1 What do you think G77 for Cutlass S means? It's the post sports coupe. G87 is the HT coupe. So you've proved to yourself with your own submission that in 72 the post coupes were produced.

2. You're drawing an inference I never suggested. I'd like to know the source of your claim that the 350-2 was the most popular engine, as I haven't seen any records that substantiate what engines were built into the various A bodies produced. It's a reasonable guess on your part, but that's about it. The CS had higher production (approx 132K units) than the Cutlass S (approx 78K units) and the standard engine for the CS was the 350-4bbl. That's not to say that a CS couldn't be downgraded to a 350-2 or a Cutlass S couldn't be upgraded to a 350-4 or better. I think you've misunderstood the general point of my comment by focusing only on the engine component you perceive to be the most popular. And for the most part, racers DID like the post coupes for their lighter weight. That has nothing to do with assuming they would retain the stock spec engine for that.

 

I didn't say post coupes were not produced, and it's very clear above that I didn't. What I had said was that I didn't think there was a Cutlass post built in 1972 in response to your comment in post 7:

I then posted evidence to support opinion in the form of factory documentation. It's quite possible that there was a change in production during the model year, but based on what I posted, it suggests that there wasn't a Cutlass post, which is contrary to your claim.


I didn't infer a thing - again, I read your words, plain as day, and dispute them. To wit:

I think it's perfectly reasonable to conclude that you imply that post cars were more popular with the racing crowd because they were lighter . . . but we're talking about a 1972 Cutlass S - hardly a performance car. Perhaps it's not my inference but, rather, your implication that you didn't mean to suggest.

While I'm going, I also will interject that I don't feel a '72 Cutlass S post is a highly desirable and collectible car today. The only people it would interest is Oldsmobile folks. It's not a 4-4-2, and it's not a '70. To a lot of people, it's just an old car, sorry to say. That's not to say it's not desirable or collectible, but certainly not "highly" so.

 

I'll give you that 72 production didn't include the Cutlass Post. I will correct my earlier post about that. The 70 f-85 and however was available as a Sports (post) coupe. I have no idea why the model 3677 Sports Coupe (post) was only offered in the 71/72 Cutlass S line up. In 71/72 the f85 was strictly a sedan. My apologies.

Yes, I was implying that and I think you'll find others that agree. I didn't however imply that the cars would be raced strictly as stock. To that extent I think it's fair to say they were used and abused as such. So were a host of other cars from all brands and model line-ups. And FWIW if it was a stock car that was raced at the track, I would also similarly conclude it was used and abused regardless of model.

You'd be right that the vast majority of the 72 production was not in the 'performance' car market any more than the 70/71 Cutlass S cars were. No argument from me. We both know the 72 body styles are basically a 70/71 Cutlass body that's mostly been cosmetically altered in some detail areas. Since there are no known records available to review specifics of engine production and assignment to non W30 cars in 72, all this discussion is just a matter of opinion on your and my part.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion as are all the folks on this site. I happen to disagree with you though. And FWIW? This IS an Oldsmobile forum so why do you think we wouldn't be feel that way?

What's that got to do with this? You said you were drawn to the conversation simply because of the body style comment? The 70-72 body styles are incredibly similar for all 3 years with basically minor cosmetic changes. Based on that alone the 70-72 models should be easily comparable.

Hmm, a 72 Cutlass S (post or HT) 4 speed, factory built as a W30 wouldn't be a performance car?? I think otherwise. Too bad the X engine cars are the exception in 72, probably one of the reasons 72 is ignored by so many of those interested in 'muscle' cars. If this was a 72 W30 car, I guess it would still be just another old car and not collectible or desirable or even a performance car judging by your earlier comment.

To most folks anything older than 15 years is just an old car. The discussion car was never claimed to be a 442 or a 70. Is that the limit of your interpretation of Olds performance? I'd bet there are 73 and up 442 owners who would disagree with your perspective.

You're right, the 350 2bbl is not a screaming huge power plant, but it gets the job done as well as a Buick, Pontiac or Chevy 350 2bbl. I will concede that Oldsmobile is not recognized as much as Pontiac, Buick and Skylark by the collector car market. So what? Most folks at a car show don't know anything but Chevy, Ford or Mopar nowadays. So we all have our individual dreams to keep alive. Obviously yours has boundaries that mine doesn't. I'm ok with that.

I don't think this discussion is relevant to the OP's question and it's clear we both have different opinions which aren't going to be resolved here. Nuff said.

Tim (Skitch72) - Enjoy your car and any plans for it. They are great rides and fun to drive. Just a FYI, the 2 A body wagons were called the Vista Cruiser (which you know) because of the Vista Glass and raised roof. It's little sister was the Cutlass Cruiser (which a lot of folks call the 'flat top'). Both the VC and Cutlass Cruiser could be ordered with the 3 row seating. Here are some stock file pics from the GM website. Note the trim differences and roof structure. If you were sitting in the drivers seat of either one just looking through the front glass? You'd be hard pressed to tell if you were driving a wagon, sedan or coupe.

72 VC


72 Cutlass Cruiser

 

Or deductive reasoning. What do you think is the most popular motor for these cars?

For what it's worth, I can access production information from the GM Heritage Center and note that 6.7% of 3600-series cars had the 350-4 through June 1972. There still was another month left but I doubt things changed much.

I would hope that members of this site can dispense objective information.

 

Thanks for all the info, didn't mean to stir up a debate. As I continue to dig into this car I am finding a great all original untouched survivor, is there anyway to determine if the rally wheels were a factory option?

I originally thought about maybe swapping to buckets and even an interior color change, but I think I am going to keep correct to the options on this car.

On another note and unnecessary back story, I bought this car because it is nearly identical to one I owned 20 years ago or so and always kicked myself for selling, I swear up and down that my earlier 72 S had a UHC 10.5:1 engine...was that even an option for a 72 S?

Appreciate any info.

Thanks
Tim

 

Yes your car had the option for super stocks, also the 350 big dog was 8.5:1 compression.

Maybe you should join wildaboutcars.com it's free to join and use!
Here is a 1972 brochure.
http://www.lov2xlr8.no/brochures/old...ds/72olds.html

 

Tim, if you ever find the actual build sheet for your car (A lot Freemont car owners have found them on the top of the gas tank), the SSIII wheels will be listed as code N67 in Box 107 of the build sheet. Here's an example of a Freemont build sheet that belongs to a guy I know 2 hours south of me. He's restoring a special order 72 Cutlass S from Freemont. His car was bypass coded for ebony black - a color not offered on 72 GM A bodies for some strange reason. It was taped to the top of his gas tank. It's in remarkably good condition.

 

That wildaboutcars site is quite a rabbit hole...I will definitely spend some time reading up there...thanks for the info...

A build sheet would be a fantastic find, might be worth trying to get to in my car.

Thanks again
Tim

 

The Brochure on lov2xlr8 is jpg the one on WAC is PDF and you can download it and print it out. Hans is a good friend of mine and his website name is the plate number on his Corvette and also the Plate on My Mustang Terminator "LOV2XLR8".

If you want to download the Brochure here is the link: http://wildaboutcarsonline.com/cgi-b...=9990335326629

Bob