Real or not real BE rear

[brent396]

Is this a known date or to early

[brent396]

Another picture

[cook_dw]

J 1 8 date?

Regardless it’s not the date I have and with that casting date I feel good about saying no it’s not legit. But I’ve been wrong more than once today..



Seems like I have a BL with that date though.. I need to look and see.

[LITTLE TOMMIE]

almost looks like a F was stamped over a L if you look close, but its just my opinion

[Mr70]

The E looks too elongated.
The never made a BF rear,so looks like a messed with BL 3.07 open.

[William]

The earliest known real BE axles are dated mid November '68. Re-stamp.

Just for the record, there was a BE 12 bolt axle in '68, a 2.56 open.

[WILMASBOYL78]

Fugazy :cool2:

[turbojet427]

There are 1968 BE rears that are multi leaf 12 bolts. I had one, its a 2.56 open 12 bolt. This could be a real BE but not the one you want.

[big gear head]

I don't know anything about stamps, but that E doesn't look right to me.

[cook_dw]

IF this was a real BE (2.56) and being it would have been made for a 68 then the casting date would not have been J-1-8... Which means this would be an early 69. 69 2.56 ratio would be a BA (non posi) or BB (posi). The likelihood it was a warranty replacement would be slim also.. Please someone correct me if I am out of line in my way of thinking. Or open it up and see what guts it has. But I still think its a modified BL.

[Flying Undertaker]

Shouldn't there be a letter E under the date stamp designating Eaton Posi? Don.