Component dating in relation to the build date of the car

[Flowjoe]

As mentioned in another thread, I sold one of my '69s to a friend and he is in the dismantling phase.  The car in question is an 02B built Van Nuys car.

I understand that the car build date is a week long window and that the trim tag is drawn at the start of production and not the end.

I understand that components should be dated prior to the build date of the car.

The block lines up with both build date (02/04), cast date (A109) and VIN derivative.  When the Muncie came out it was revealed to be a 660 main case with an August build date and an early '70 Chevelle VIN derivative.  That sort of thing happens when a PO replaces a part.

The rear axle assembly has me a little stumped though.  It has a cast date of B209 and an axle tube stamping of BU 0305 G1 / E.  This is a good application fit for a Z/28 and amazingly close to the build date of the car yet too far to be within a reasonable completion date for the car.  Yet it seems against all reasonable odds that this was a random replacement by a PO (as we can see with Muncie above).


Is there a conceivable scenario under which this car could have left Van Nuys with this rear axle assembly?

Is it possible that it is a warranty replacement?  Are there any markings (e.g. the "CE" or "CT" cods for Engines and Transmissions) that it might have to indicate this?  Even if it is, the dating makes one want to run out and buy a lottery ticket. 

Thanks!

[Flowjoe]

Rear axle assembly photos

[william]

Re-stamp

[Flowjoe]

Engine or Axle?  Or Both.

[bcmiller]

In my opinion, the engine seems original, but the axle does not.

What do the ends of the axle tube look like? At the ends by the backing plates and near the center casting, can you see any non-original welding?

[Flowjoe]

In my opinion, the engine seems original, but the axle does not.

So just a really amazing coincidence then?  Better go buy that lottery ticket.

Edit:  Sorry quoted and responded before you'd edited

The axle will be at our shop (we specialize in differential rebuilding) for a rebuild this week so I will have a chance to examine the housing more closely.  I owned the car for 14 years but it lived in an enclosed trailer the whole time while I collected parts (and time which, ultimately, I never found).  I'll report back when I have that data.  It did not appear to be a re-tube but that's not a guarantee.

[bcmiller]

Ok you can email me direct if you want in the axle info.

[dannystarr]

I am still learning by a long shot. But I held a piece of paper up to the block picture, and I see that ALL the numbers are almost perfectly inline, how could that be? Like it was done with one long stamp. Also the edge of the block is smooth all the way around like it's been decked/cut? Too perfect?... Danny

[bcmiller]

Let me take another look...

Well, it is only an opinion, but I think the engine stamp still seems OK. I could be wrong. With things like this you always want to check the rest of the engine to see if components match up, and that things on the car also match up.

[68camaroz28]

The flint DZ stamping looks correct to me but I'm no expert. What say CRG faithful?

[69Z28-RS]

I see no issues with the engine stamping and the date lines up well with the car production (mid to late Feb), but the axle stamp date (early march)  is too late for the car (from the factory).

[Flowjoe]

Ok you can email me direct if you want in the axle info.

will do

[Flowjoe]

I see no issues with the engine stamping and the date lines up well with the car production (mid to late Feb), but the axle stamp date (early march)  is too late for the car (from the factory).

That’s essentially why I posted.  By everything I’ve learned in the last 34 years of messing with 1st gens that rearend is too late to have been on the car when it left Van Nuys.  But it boggles the mind to think that someone randomly found a 3.73 posi with a date that close to the cars build date to stuff in this car.  No one tried that hard nor got that lucky with the tranny.  Even if restamped, as suggested above, the cast date is amazingly close.  FWIW, The car is well worn and shows no signs of an abandoned restoration. 

I know that defects during production could send a car off to the side For correction but it seems unlikely it would sit for two weeks or so waiting for a rear end.

Which brings me back to my original questions about what could have happened in the factory (John??) or warranty parts. 

As always, not trying to make it something it’s not just trying to understand what it is.

[69Z28-RS]

If I owned the car, I would not worry about it..
Rebuild what needs rebuilding and DRIVE it..

[william]

L523425 was final-assembled on or about February 17th, 1969. Not going to have a March 5th axle.

I know that defects during production could send a car off to the side For correction but it seems unlikely it would sit for two weeks or so waiting for a rear end.

There was no "...off to the side." If a component had a problem it was replaced immediately. Other Feb Z/28s at Van Nuys had axles built late Jan/early Feb. March axles don't show up in Van Nuys data until mid-March.