PR coded 67 rear - 3.31 Posi metallic brakes

[firstgenaddict]

Recently acquired this rear end...
How rare is this animal?

[ZLP955]

Would that make it either J56 (205 units) or J65 (1217 units) then?

[firstgenaddict]

J65 the J56 is only available with the Z28.

[ZLP955]

So you know it's not from a Z James? Or is it the ratio or assembly date that makes you think unlikely to be from one? Then possibly an SS 350?

[bcmiller]

Pic has a shadow, can you confirm the casting date?

3.31 mostly like from an SS350 car. Pretty unlikely that it would be from a Z.

[vtfb68]

only 602 67 Z 28's
   VT

[firstgenaddict]

It is a J65 4 wheel metallic drums. From a 67 SS 350 most likely.


Z28 would have had J56.

[ZLP955]

Apologies for my obvious confusion, but how do you know this is a J65 rear end? I agree that the 3.31:1 ratio would suggest not originally from a Z, but maybe a road race application? Especially considering low level of 'general' public awareness of RPO Z28 in 67.
The PR application stamp only confirms metallic brake linings and final ratio, not what type of front brakes the car it was assembled in had.

[ZLP955]

Never mind, I read Jon Mello's comments in your thread over at sYc which explained why it's not from a Z: http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/630157/1

[Butternut1967]

Question, with a PR coded 67 rear built in October of 1966, prior to the introduction of the Z/28, would the car come with drum brakes on the front? Could the drum brakes have been power drum?
Thanks

[Jon Mello]

Question, with a PR coded 67 rear built in October of 1966, prior to the introduction of the Z/28, would the car come with drum brakes on the front? Could the drum brakes have been power drum?
Thanks

Yes, it would have come with drum brakes on the front because of the Oct '66 build date which is too early for J56.  The J65 metallic brake option could have had J50 power brakes added if a buyer wanted it.