Hurst Comp Plus

[NorCam]

Yes Sam, I think there is a lot to be learned on shifter body codes to try and ascertain what the numbers <span style="font-weight: bold">truly mean</span>. There are a couple guys up here that have done a lot of restorations on Pontiacs &amp; Chevrolets and one of them can look at a shifter code and tell you what it's out of without ever seeing the shifter handle. He's done hundreds of 4 speeds and a friend of mine threw a shifter body at him one day and said, hey hero what's this from. He laughed and said that's easy, XX Firebird and threw it back to him??? Is he right, wrong? Dunno but he seemed to think the numbers decoded to assembly divisions and batch codes?

The sampling of known prefixes on CRG seem to be prevalent to 19/29/39/69/89 series codes with 19D being &quot;the largest&quot; grouping of codes? If you read from the sampling and suggest those are dates, it would then suggest 10's of thousands were built in January and much smaller batches in the second, third, 6th and 8th months of the year. That does not add up for me as I would have thought they built thousands and thousands of these shifter bodies each and every month of the year and none of the other months are represented there including big build periods like April and May for example?

I discussed this with Pete Serio he went into detail talking about the change orders given to Hurst by GM throughout the 69 model year as various changes were made with locking steering columns, reverse lockout issues and so on. In one such case, he shared a note on GM having law suit claims where a few people were killed when the shifter was locking up the transmission where it was shifting into low and reverse at the same time and caused the trans to lockup. This was related to the new columns and there was another circular sent requesting another change that came with a column update due to the rotator sleeve on the column creeping out of sink and causing further issues that GM were concerned about. All of those internal memos led to changes in the shifter mechanisms themselves to help mitigate the problems that were occurring and the possibility of lawsuits.

Peter went on to tell me that change orders would hit the floor at Hurst and there were many within the 69 model year alone. Does this help explain the 5 prefixes shown on the sampling of codes where these are the actual revisions to the series made in 69? Perhaps those are indicative of 5 change orders throughout the year and that's exactly what Pete thinks they are. The last thing he shared with me (and he can talk I tell you) was that you cannot take one 69 shifter and start to interchange the internal parts within the case as there are a few different series and changes in parts coming from the change orders issued that year, and that not all shifters are the same internally. How subtle the parts variations are I cannot attest to, but Pete can. Just ask him, but be prepared for a 20 minute dissertation on the anomalies of vintage shifters. He knows his stuff.

Truth is, Pete Serio has probably seen more than anyone else and he hasn't figured it out either. It's easy to pull a bunch from 69 Camaros and analyze all the numbers and if the pattern fits to where the first digit can be &quot;assumed&quot; to be the month followed by the second digit being the year...it can be misleading i'd suggest. I applaud the guys at CRG for trying to figure it out but a sampling of 40 pieces in what may be only one model and year is hardly going to be enough to determine anything with any certainty. That and the change order revisions would have to be noted within the shifter code so that the plant could identify the series when warranties were sent in or handled? I myself don't think they were concerned about date coding like GM did with their parts, and would reason to bet those codes were internal for revisions, batches and assembly codes so when one screwed up, they could identify the series and would know what internal parts were used? I know...just another theory, but it has weight.

I'm not suggesting I know anything more about it, but the more I look at the codes, the more I learn and still think the first digit <span style="font-style: italic">could be</span> for revision codes Suffice to say, there are a few theories on the coding, but ask any expert who's handled hundreds of them or those who restore them and they will tell you its all over the map with 4 to 8 characters and makes no sense at all? Peter Serio does not think it's dating the way some others assume it to be, and I'd think he's one of the top experts in the field when it comes to shifter bodies. That's all I'm saying? What someone really needs to do is catalog thousands of shifter bodies and then look at the thing as a whole to try and figure it out. That or canvas the cities where Hurst made these to try and find an old timer who actually worked there as a kid. That would help to put an end to all the myths out there and give someone an idea of how they were coded. I'm sure there's an old guy out there who worked for Hurst over the decades.

Sorry for the long post...but this needs to be discussed and figured out. [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/hmmm.gif[/img]

[mockingbird812]

Thanks for taking the time to put your thoughts/experience down Earl. We understand 99% of the numbers on these cars and it is frustrating with all of our collective brain-power and experience that we can't come up with a good explanation of these shifter body codes. [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/hmmm.gif[/img]


[img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/biggthumpup.gif[/img]

[NorCam]

Yeah...but most of what we know are GM parts. These were not, and I don't think Hurst as an independent company really gave 2 nickels damn about casting numbers or date coding the way GM used it on their assembly lines or how some people in the hobby may want to interpret it?

It would appear some people want to attach a &quot;date&quot; to these parts and perhaps to substantiate claims their car has the &quot;born with&quot; dated shifter rather than get to what the true meaning of what the coding might actually mean. Its like grasping at straws and until someone can show me how the dating applies to &quot;all&quot; years, models and divisions I'll remain somewhat unconvinced.

Time will tell.

[JoeC]

I have been working on Hurst Shifters for many years and noted many of the OEM Hurst Shifters are date coded.

It has been proven by far too many examples for it to be a coincidence or a miss read code

GM used date codes on many parts including blocks, heads, manifolds, distributors , alternators, carburetors, starters etc.

Even parts from vendors like Holley carbs and Kelsey-Hayes and Magnum 500 wheels were date coded