Help with Body tag decode
#44
Car does come with POP. I suspect Build Sheet is still with the car. (can't wait to start the hunt!). It's essentially a 1 owner car. Bought at an estate sale and flipped once or twice since. My intentions are not to repaint but to retain 'as is' originality and keep as a survivor...with a few tweaks. I've essentially got a deposit on the car for < $10K. Unfortunately, I'm unable to inspect the car in-person so unless I hire an inspector, gonna have to roll the dice on this one. However, given the reputation of the seller and all the pics and Q&A sessions, I don't feel much like a river boat gambler. Anyway, I really appreciate all of the candor and valuable info provided. Might be posting pics of my new ride before new years!! Thanks again.
Found the Build Sheet in my Freemont car under gas tank, passenger side....
#45
Just an Olds Guy
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Edmonton, AB. And "I am Can 'eh' jun - eh"
Posts: 24,525
Car does come with POP. I suspect Build Sheet is still with the car. (can't wait to start the hunt!). It's essentially a 1 owner car. Bought at an estate sale and flipped once or twice since. Unfortunately, I'm unable to inspect the car in-person so unless I hire an inspector, gonna have to roll the dice on this one.
BTW if the car has it's original POP it will tell you what zone/dealer it was delivered to, plus the mileage on the car when delivered, and the date of delivery. Will also have the cars VIN on the POP. Since this is a Freemont car, if it's never been apart it MAY have that elusive build sheet in it. Ask for the original docs that went with the car.
#47
Yes, it does show that more than the digit "2" was used ..... my comment was not a statement of fact it was questioning the use of that digit as an extention of the "body number".
The Fremont plant built a number of different "bodies" in 1970. Each different body would've started with a specific Fisher Body BF # for that specific "Body Style".
The El Camino example is from a different plant, using it only confuses the issues as does anything about Lansing as Lansing built hundreds of thousands of cars and Fremont didn't break 100,000. Also, the number of shifts at one plant has nothing to do with the number of workers, number of days worked, the shifts, or the number of cars produced at another.
VIN sequence is NOT the assembly line sequence - it is simply the VIN sequence.
The Fremont plant built a number of different "bodies" in 1970. Each different body would've started with a specific Fisher Body BF # for that specific "Body Style".
The El Camino example is from a different plant, using it only confuses the issues as does anything about Lansing as Lansing built hundreds of thousands of cars and Fremont didn't break 100,000. Also, the number of shifts at one plant has nothing to do with the number of workers, number of days worked, the shifts, or the number of cars produced at another.
VIN sequence is NOT the assembly line sequence - it is simply the VIN sequence.
#48
summary, is this right?
Scott 442 is 5462 body #
Z136364 sequence #
built for June of 1970 delivery? late build?
Ted is 4493 body #
Z100891 sequence #
built for Sept delivery 1969?
Scott 442 is 5462 body #
Z136364 sequence #
built for June of 1970 delivery? late build?
Ted is 4493 body #
Z100891 sequence #
built for Sept delivery 1969?
#49
The latest Cutlass to join this thread is the 449th Olds Cutlass Supreme 2 dr hardtop body (34257), it was assigned the 891st VIN (0Z100891) & was build during the 5th week of August '69 at the Fremont plant.
The pic below is the 2,373rd Olds Cutlass Supreme 2 dr hardtop body (34257), it was assigned the 5,376th VIN (0Z105376) & was build during the 4th week of October '69 at the Fremont plant.
The OP's subject car was the 10,546th Olds Cutlass V8 2 dr hardtop body (33687), it was assigned the 36,364th VIN (0Z136364) & was build during the 1st week of June '70 at the Fremont plant.
What other "bodies" did they build at Fremont for the '70 model year? Anyone have any VIN and/or body tag examples?
The pic below is the 2,373rd Olds Cutlass Supreme 2 dr hardtop body (34257), it was assigned the 5,376th VIN (0Z105376) & was build during the 4th week of October '69 at the Fremont plant.
The OP's subject car was the 10,546th Olds Cutlass V8 2 dr hardtop body (33687), it was assigned the 36,364th VIN (0Z136364) & was build during the 1st week of June '70 at the Fremont plant.
What other "bodies" did they build at Fremont for the '70 model year? Anyone have any VIN and/or body tag examples?
#51
If memory serves, the old man used to mention that change over was usually in the first couple of weeks in July. Someone mentioned that the plants ran two shifts? Here in Lansing they ran three shifts. On the subject of hand stamp on cowl tags, has anyone seen that on a Lansing car? Pure speculation here that Freemont and possibly other plants were told to stamp shift #???? by bowtie, tri sheild or red arrow and just followed suit on Olds.
Also in a previous subject thread that Lansing was the first build on any model year to work out the issues here in Lansing.
My sources are retired hourly or salary from plants 1,2 and Fisher body.
FYI my 70 CS is 06B Lansing build.
Pat
Also in a previous subject thread that Lansing was the first build on any model year to work out the issues here in Lansing.
My sources are retired hourly or salary from plants 1,2 and Fisher body.
FYI my 70 CS is 06B Lansing build.
Pat
#52
Scot - how could this be a late production for 70 with a VIN and body number that low? Something here doesn't make sense. I find it hard to believe that Freemont would have just 'stored' that body till June of 70 and thrown it into the lineup in June. If that VIN was from June, it should be much higher. My car's VIN is 208783 and the body is 442325 and it was produced in April!
I compared this body number to cowl tags I have seen from other plants, even similar ones that were produced close to mine at Lansing. I recently found out that one of our members has a car that was built the day after mine, and the body number was 900+ higher, and the VIN was 1200+ higher, indicating how many Cutlass models and other models were built there in a single day.
I compared this body number to cowl tags I have seen from other plants, even similar ones that were produced close to mine at Lansing. I recently found out that one of our members has a car that was built the day after mine, and the body number was 900+ higher, and the VIN was 1200+ higher, indicating how many Cutlass models and other models were built there in a single day.
I'm having a hard time wrapping that one around my thoughts. I believe the body tags were started each model year and division at 000001. I have yet to see any from the era of this car that went over 650,000 in a single year. If you were to combine all GM A body production - no contest but even looking at Pontiac, Buick and Chev cowl tags it doesn't suggest that happens.
Yes, it does show that more than the digit "2" was used ..... my comment was not a statement of fact it was questioning the use of that digit as an extention of the "body number".
The Fremont plant built a number of different "bodies" in 1970. Each different body would've started with a specific Fisher Body BF # for that specific "Body Style".
The El Camino example is from a different plant, using it only confuses the issues as does anything about Lansing as Lansing built hundreds of thousands of cars and Fremont didn't break 100,000. Also, the number of shifts at one plant has nothing to do with the number of workers, number of days worked, the shifts, or the number of cars produced at another.
VIN sequence is NOT the assembly line sequence - it is simply the VIN sequence.
The Fremont plant built a number of different "bodies" in 1970. Each different body would've started with a specific Fisher Body BF # for that specific "Body Style".
The El Camino example is from a different plant, using it only confuses the issues as does anything about Lansing as Lansing built hundreds of thousands of cars and Fremont didn't break 100,000. Also, the number of shifts at one plant has nothing to do with the number of workers, number of days worked, the shifts, or the number of cars produced at another.
VIN sequence is NOT the assembly line sequence - it is simply the VIN sequence.
The latest Cutlass to join this thread is the 449th Olds Cutlass Supreme 2 dr hardtop body (34257), it was assigned the 891st VIN (0Z100891) & was build during the 5th week of August '69 at the Fremont plant.
The pic below is the 2,373rd Olds Cutlass Supreme 2 dr hardtop body (34257), it was assigned the 5,376th VIN (0Z105376) & was build during the 4th week of October '69 at the Fremont plant.
The OP's subject car was the 10,546th Olds Cutlass V8 2 dr hardtop body (33687), it was assigned the 36,364th VIN (0Z136364) & was build during the 1st week of June '70 at the Fremont plant.
The pic below is the 2,373rd Olds Cutlass Supreme 2 dr hardtop body (34257), it was assigned the 5,376th VIN (0Z105376) & was build during the 4th week of October '69 at the Fremont plant.
The OP's subject car was the 10,546th Olds Cutlass V8 2 dr hardtop body (33687), it was assigned the 36,364th VIN (0Z136364) & was build during the 1st week of June '70 at the Fremont plant.
#54
I'm guessing this is the same car? http://www.oldsmobilecentral.com/for...and%20Park.php
#55
"The time build sequence should be 2 numbers (month) followed by a letter (A-E) indicating which week of the month the car was built."
Interesting. I have heard this also. A thru E weeks.
Which begs the question, what about a month like 12/2012, which spans -6- weeks on the calendar? Did they just ignore one? Or is 12/12 a once per 100 years phenomenon?
Interesting. I have heard this also. A thru E weeks.
Which begs the question, what about a month like 12/2012, which spans -6- weeks on the calendar? Did they just ignore one? Or is 12/12 a once per 100 years phenomenon?
#56
Going back to the '70 Supreme added late in the thread with "08E" - August '69 had 5 Fridays/Saturdays/Sundays, so is it week ending or week beginning?
or is
week A(1) days 1-7 of the month
week B(2) days 8-14
week C(3) days 15-21
week D(4) days 22-28
week E(5) days 29+
anybody know??
#57
I'll "ASSUME" their week designations were actually based on a week starting on Monday or ending on Saturday (or similar) thereby only needing A-E for any given month/year.
Going back to the '70 Supreme added late in the thread with "08E" - August '69 had 5 Fridays/Saturdays/Sundays, so is it week ending or week beginning?
or is
week A(1) days 1-7 of the month
week B(2) days 8-14
week C(3) days 15-21
week D(4) days 22-28
week E(5) days 29+
anybody know??
Going back to the '70 Supreme added late in the thread with "08E" - August '69 had 5 Fridays/Saturdays/Sundays, so is it week ending or week beginning?
or is
week A(1) days 1-7 of the month
week B(2) days 8-14
week C(3) days 15-21
week D(4) days 22-28
week E(5) days 29+
anybody know??
#59
True, both didn't. All Cutlass VINs for these cars did however start at 100001
I've seen this before and will stand by my statement. The plants only had 2 shifts, and I've seen images of these tags with higher numbers stamped there to show a sequence. Been discussed on this site several times
VIN of 136134 would make it the 36,134th car in Freemont sequencing, but the body number is way low.
Scot - how could this be a late production for 70 with a VIN and body number that low? Something here doesn't make sense. I find it hard to believe that Freemont would have just 'stored' that body till June of 70 and thrown it into the lineup in June. If that VIN was from June, it should be much higher. My car's VIN is 208783 and the body is 442325 and it was produced in April!
I compared this body number to cowl tags I have seen from other plants, even similar ones that were produced close to mine at Lansing. I recently found out that one of our members has a car that was built the day after mine, and the body number was 900+ higher, and the VIN was 1200+ higher, indicating how many Cutlass models and other models were built there in a single day.
So, are you saying that the body numbers just keep rotating from 1-999999 and then start over? The only difference being the ST-model year, body style and plant? I'm having a hard time wrapping that one around my thoughts. I believe the body tags were started each model year and division at 000001. I have yet to see any from the era of this car that went over 650,000 in a single year. If you were to combine all GM A body production - no contest but even looking at Pontiac, Buick and Chev cowl tags it doesn't suggest that happens.
I've seen this before and will stand by my statement. The plants only had 2 shifts, and I've seen images of these tags with higher numbers stamped there to show a sequence. Been discussed on this site several times
VIN of 136134 would make it the 36,134th car in Freemont sequencing, but the body number is way low.
Scot - how could this be a late production for 70 with a VIN and body number that low? Something here doesn't make sense. I find it hard to believe that Freemont would have just 'stored' that body till June of 70 and thrown it into the lineup in June. If that VIN was from June, it should be much higher. My car's VIN is 208783 and the body is 442325 and it was produced in April!
I compared this body number to cowl tags I have seen from other plants, even similar ones that were produced close to mine at Lansing. I recently found out that one of our members has a car that was built the day after mine, and the body number was 900+ higher, and the VIN was 1200+ higher, indicating how many Cutlass models and other models were built there in a single day.
So, are you saying that the body numbers just keep rotating from 1-999999 and then start over? The only difference being the ST-model year, body style and plant? I'm having a hard time wrapping that one around my thoughts. I believe the body tags were started each model year and division at 000001. I have yet to see any from the era of this car that went over 650,000 in a single year. If you were to combine all GM A body production - no contest but even looking at Pontiac, Buick and Chev cowl tags it doesn't suggest that happens.
And what makes you say that the number were "sometimes the early ones were stamped at the factory by workers there". Later (and some early) ones don't have them?
You are confusing your conclusions with facts. Nothing wrong with speculations until you start stating them as facts.
#60
Just an Olds Guy
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Edmonton, AB. And "I am Can 'eh' jun - eh"
Posts: 24,525
The pic below is the 2,373rd Olds Cutlass Supreme 2 dr hardtop body (34257), it was assigned the 5,376th VIN (0Z105376) & was build during the 4th week of October '69 at the Fremont plant.
The OP's subject car was the 10,546th Olds Cutlass V8 2 dr hardtop body (33687), it was assigned the 36,364th VIN (0Z136364) & was build during the 1st week of June '70 at the Fremont plant.
The OP's subject car was the 10,546th Olds Cutlass V8 2 dr hardtop body (33687), it was assigned the 36,364th VIN (0Z136364) & was build during the 1st week of June '70 at the Fremont plant.
Statistics for 1970 Cutlass S Holiday coupe shows 88,578 cars. Given the door sticker on the OP's post showing the VIN and build mo/year I withdraw my earlier comment about being an early build. Dan and Scot were correct to politely offer me the right info. My apologies for being stubborn on that topic.
VIN (according to CSMs) is the plant sequential number. Unless you have a better explanation of this, it means this to me: The order in which the production plant sequenced production of the vehicles. From actual GM pics I've seen of Lansing, Ninety Eights, Custom Cruisers and Cutlass models were built on the same line. This means that the 'sequential number' assigned in the VIN would be the 'order' it came down the line. So a cutlass with VIN 100002 could be followed by a CC or 98 with VIN that would be 100003 or 100004. The next Cutlass would get 100005 and so on.
You can stand by your statement, but you are wrong. The "extra" stamped digit is *not* an extension of the body unit number. The body unit number is shown on build sheets and do not have that number included.
And what makes you say that the number were "sometimes the early ones were stamped at the factory by workers there". Later (and some early) ones don't have them?
You are confusing your conclusions with facts. Nothing wrong with speculations until you start stating them as facts.
And what makes you say that the number were "sometimes the early ones were stamped at the factory by workers there". Later (and some early) ones don't have them?
You are confusing your conclusions with facts. Nothing wrong with speculations until you start stating them as facts.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ethn_bert
General Discussion
18
March 22nd, 2012 05:18 AM