John Doe

I noticed a lot of different OPINIONS regarding the 1964 442s and that there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of REAL knowledge available . I saw that someone's 442 came from Lansing and that the "experts" said not possible . I have a 442 that has the M in the vin and Lansing Michigan on the data plate . I have looked at other 1964 Olds 442s with the same information . Perhaps the early ones came from Lansing and then the public production ones were built in Fremont . I have found 3 cars , including mine , that were built prior to the March of 1964 production release dates . If anyone reading this is old enough to actually have first hand knowledge to clarify some of the mysteries of the first 442s built and would share that knowledge with us or me , it would be greatly appreciated . I am tired of hearing that these cars are not real or can't exist because they were built in October , 1963 or November or December or January , 1964 even . When ALL of the date codes on the drivetrain correspond to the build date on the data plate , how can anyone say that they are not real cars ??
I am going to try to insert a photo of my data plate , you folks decipher it and comment back if you would be so kind .

John Doe

By the way , the 962 trim code IS jade green interior and my car is the cutlass hardtop , not a convertible . I read that this interior was only available in the convertible , which may be possible for the "public production" cars from Fremont . My interior is still original to the car .

jaunty75

I don't think there's anything on the data plate on a '64 Cutlass to indicate whether or not it's a 442. The VIN won't tell you, either.

I don't know what the 2Y-L means, but the rest of it decodes as 1964 Oldsmobile Cutlass Holiday Coupe (2-door hardtop) built at Lansing, Fern Mist lower body color, Provincial White upper body color, dark green vinyl interior, built 4th week of October 1963.

John Doe

Some people say that my 442 is the first one ever built , a field test car . ALL ARE INVITED TO COME LOOK !!

66-3X2 442

You will need some documentation to prove that there were 64 B-09 cars built before the February release date. All of the info I have seen show the production date codes start the 1 st week of March. Of course there were 64 B-09 442's built in Lansing. How long have you owned your car,what is the history of your car? If you purchased the car with no documentation,there's really no way of knowing for sure but it being built outside the window of what's known,you will have a hard time verifying it as a 442.

John Doe

Do you have any knowledge of the early 442s ?? The ones that "can't" exist ??

John Doe

This 442 has ALL of the correct , date coded , engine components , carb , heads , intake , block , tranny , everything that says Olds built it in October 1963 . It has the B-09 suspension package but no rear sway bar , it also has no back-up lights in the rear bumper , they apparently hadn't got them built yet , this car has metal plates instead . Did you work at Oldsmobile in the 60's ???

John Doe

One last thing , none of my suspension bolts , besides the shocks , have ever been turned by a wrench . Oldsmobile put every piece on this car .

66-3X2 442

I own a 64 442 Convertible and have some knowledge of these cars. The December JWO has a great write up on the 64 442 cars. There's also a photo of the factory bulletin saying that General Merchandising Bulletin # GM-4-64 dated 2-21-64 revealed full details and pricing information concerning the B-09 Police Apprehender Pursuit Group. Did you know they're were some B-09 4 door cars built? No I didn't work @ Olds in the 60's,but I did stay @ a Holiday Inn Express.

66-3X2 442

There's never been any doubt they exist but little is known except to those who really know these cars. I'm not a 64 expert as you call them and I keep an open mind about these cars. Is it possible your car was the first built?yes,is it possible that it was some kind of prototype,yes but the problem is going to be documenting it as such. There were 4 speed Cutlass's built before the 442's too,so it could be somebody added the emblems to make a 442,I just don't know. Just trying to help you with your car and exactly what it is.

jaunty75

Here's a semi-dumb question. The literature, including Setting the Pace, says that the 442 was "derived" from the B09 police pursuit package. Emphasis on the word "derived," which suggests that the B09 package could have been ordered prior to the introduction of the 442, and it would have carried whatever options that package included. But that package might not have included everything that later came on the 442, which might explain why the OP's car has some of the features of a 442 but not all, like the sway bar.

In short, is it possible that the OP's car was originally ordered as a police car? Maybe someone added the 442 badges later?

2blu442

Well, if your car is in nice condition I'd want to be real careful taking things apart to look for paperwork. But below is what I found under a seat on a 1964 F85 I was dismantling, a Fremont built car. I don't have a 1964 442 but I do have a Cutlass that came as a factory 4 speed car, build date fourth week of April. So there were cars built with the 330 4 speed that weren't 442's. I think to be sure you'd need some kind of paperwork or a paper trail from previous owners. Its like many of the W30's that were built. Without paperwork its really hard to verify if it was born with that option or if parts were added on sometime in the past. But hey, if your enjoying the car who cares. Any factory 4 speed car of the era is a really cool car and fun to drive.


P3160570.jpg

TK-65

It wouldnt happen to be this car would it?

TK-65

Back up lights were an option. If you didnt order them you got plates that covered the holes. So that story about them not being ready yet is false.

I am fairly sure the frames under the 442s were the same as the manual trans cars. Thats how the 65s are. So you cant just look at the suspension and tell its a 442.

Olds did build it in Oct 63, but just because everything is dated in the same time period doesnt mean its a 442. It means its a Oct 63 built Cutlass.

Frankly by the tone of your posts its quite obvious you are trying to prove you have something that in fact is not what you think it is.

66-3X2 442

That's what I'm thinking but was waiting to see where this went.

joe_padavano

This isn't the green faux-four-two again, is it? That car gets discussed here about every six months. You've apparently posted six times in the last 24 hours, all somewhat argumentative. I'm guessing you are smart enough to know that real 1964 442s weren't even announced for sale when your "pilot" car was built in Oct 1963. That is a fact, not an opinion.

"Date-coded" parts are irrelevant - there were tens of thousands of parts built by Olds that are appropriately date-coded for that car (also a fact). None of them are unique to a 1964 442 and any of them could have been installed during the complete restoration of the car. Did "pilot cars" exist? Sure they did, but without ironclad factory documentation to back up such a claim, it's just a story.

Good luck with your car. We don't need the trolling.

oldsmobiledave

of course this thread is about the fake green car again.

TK-65

Id like to know what experts said 64 442s were not built in Lansing and only verts from Fremont could have green interior.

joe_padavano

I'd like to know why we're all wasting our time with "John Doe"...

Diego

I was thinking the same thing.

This is not going to end well.

Hairy Olds

The color in the first post pic sure looks like the green on the car.
Hmmm

66-3X2 442

I knew what he was up to & was giving him enough rope to hang himself. There has been many instances where somebody says they have a car that defies all of the info/facts/documentation etc. and it never ends well for them. This has been tried with a couple of 66 W-30 cars with the same result. I try to keep an open mind about these cars and never say never but in the end,the facts always prevail.

Sporty45

So does his data plate!



This picture is from this site I found
http://www.autobrokercenter.com/1964..._229009940.veh

Hairy Olds

If you shout "This is real" long enough and loud enough someone will start to believe it is real. There are a few others that are trying this.

war eagle

I have enjoyed collecting firewall codes and deciphering their meanings for years especially if they have the 1964 acc. line. Later tags have only the groups and labeled 1 thru 5 and some plants omit the "1". I collect mostly a-body tag info and have stuff to about 74.
The tag in question has the acc. line and gives us 2Y-L. This tells us a few things as this is the line that Fisher Body was responsible for, not Olds. With group 1 missing, which is the group for power top, Ez eye glass, pwr seat, and pwr windos, it must be assumed the car came with clear glass. Group 2 lists the Y which 'usually' is Cordoba top or two tone paint. Again making Fisher responsible for the necessary chrome separator strip holes, or sometimes called paint dividers. Next the 'L' from group 2. This again makes Fisher the guilty party. This is a hole cut into the front floor hump of a pre built body in warehouse. (Like Coupe, Ht, convert etc). The 'L' is the intended code therefore for a floor shifted Std. shift transmission, either 3 or 4speed. (An auto floor shift hole would be indicated with a different letter)
It`s nice to find the build sheet stuffed into the seat spings or glued to the inner front fenders and other places. This sheet in duplicate follows all of the assembly steps and will give you almost everything the body was built with along with the alterations like floor cutout, reverse lite provision, or simply radio ant placement. The sheet may also be called out as the Billing Sheet which is better yet. The birthdate is the billing date....not the tag on the firewall. That's the Fisher body date with instructions for paint, style, and accessories requiring body alteration, plus the sequence number for the build.
So without some records like the protecto plate or build sheet like 2Blu shows, this might be hard to prove what the end build was.

66-3X2 442

Notice the contact name in the ad? John Dorazi,hum.

Sporty45

Yup, I sure did notice!

Diego

I hope the OP comes back to present his case. I don't think any of us want to beat him up, but he probably didn't work for Oldsmobile either - these are qualifiers set up to show that any kind of educated opinion can't pass his muster.

But, right now, the evidence that we know of and that he presented doesn't pass the hobby's muster. The onus is on him to present documentation or some form of evidence, and so far I don't think that has happened. I do believe there are situations where the masses can be wrong, but it is the OP's responsibility to show that.

Koda

I would be very interested to know how a trial "pilot" car ended up with a sellable vin tag on it and is a legal vehicle.

And I agree with Diego.

Diego

Ya mean like the Fouronado?

442Fred

Back then cars like this made it out of GM's proving grounds through the brass hat program or some of the employees were able to but them out right. There have been many cars around the Phoenix area from the proving grounds. I owned an early production Freemont built car that had the Mesa proving grounds as the destination through Big 2 Oldsmobile.
The car is still around in Lewiston Idaho.

Anything is possible, the Fouranado is proof of that. in today's world that car would never have been sold to the public but not back in the 60's.
This is just my opinion from the last 38 years in the hobby living in Phoenix and what I have seen, owned and learned from past employees.

While documentation will be difficult to produce after more that 50 years I don't see any reason to beat the guy up. I challenge anyone here to prove it is not! With factory documentation of course.

joe_padavano

The reason to "beat the guy up" is because someone with the screen name "John Doe" joined yesterday, posted six trolling posts about what is apparently a one-of-none car that's been well discussed on this and other sites in the last couple of years, and then sits back to watch. And frankly, your position that the car is "real" unless proven otherwise is naive at best. Sorry, but I'm done wasting my time on this one.

TK-65

The GTO was barely into production and Olds already had pilot cars in Arizona for testing.

442Fred

This is the problem with sites like this the same people discuss the the same stories and come to a conclusion then it is gospel. Naive? Really Joe? I don't claim to know everything but I am willing to learn, more than I can say for others here.
You are a knowledgeable guy but frankly you don't know everything none of us do. I never said it was a real car but so far NO ONE has proven it is not with HARD facts just opinions.
Like I said earlier cars made it out of the proving grounds.

Diego

I think the proof needed is to show that it is something, not that it is not - every car starts off as something that it is not, and then evidence should add up to prove something.

TK-65

I think the problem is a dealer has a car with a dubious story and is trying to prove his car is what he says it is. Key word is he, because nobody else thinks it is. Guys that have researched 64 442s know this car is not real. But since we don't have proof we have to believe it is?

442Fred

It goes both ways guys. Opinions are just are just that facts are what is needed. While I could care less about this partiicular car it is the tone of this I struggle with.
Just because it is different or you haven't seen one before doesn't mean it wasn't built.

Sharing knowledge is important for the hobby but it has to be with an open mind and factual.

Koda

Yes. Like it. Maybe back 50 years ago, manufacturers weren't concerned about liability. Nowadays, you can't make a new car as saleable until after the crash tests are done. My company's trial cars all die nasty deaths or never leave the plant they are made in because the VIN cannot be titled. It's a problem if you want to drive the car from one facility to a nearby one because it is an illegal vehicle to operate on the road, and never can become legal.

The very last trial we do before start of production makes vehicles that will get sold, but they only beat the official ones by two weeks, and Toyota doesn't make anything cool anyways, so it's not a big deal.

The only legal way to do a GM thing in the past, I think, was to make something officially as X, and convert it into Y. Like the first Hurst Olds cars, they were officially Cutlasses with creatively obtained engines. Or maybe they were 442s. I don't know. Maybe it's possible, however, the odds of it happening, it not already being known about, and it belonging to someone without any connections or reputation is approaching zero.

66-3X2 442

I'm sorry you think that's "the problem with sites like this". I disagree,that's what's right with sites like this. Where else does a person go for info and knowledge on any Oldsmobile? The factory damn sure didn't do a very good job @ record keeping or the info was lost in a fire. You say it's up to somebody to prove the car isn't what he says it is,again,I disagree. We have the proof with the release date bulletin,he has nothing to the contrary. There's a lot of knowledgeable people on this and other Olds sites and you are correct about nobody knows it all. I think I'm pretty knowledgeable on 66 442's and I'm the first to admit I learn something almost every day but I know BS when I see it. If there wasn't sites like this keeping tabs and learning about these cars,the market would be flooded with one off cars with no proof or documentation. I guess the guy selling the 64 442 convertible with an automatic trans on eBay was just as correct as this guy because we didn't have proof it wasn't built by Olds. You also say you don't like the tone of this,did you see the attitude he came through the door with,works both ways,right? I admire you for your collection and contributions to the hobby but I think you're off base with your feelings.

TK-65

survey1_zpsxzaafnpj.jpg

survey2_zpslioq8i1v.jpg

survey3_zpsmklyl7nn.jpg