VIN vs. Fisher body # on cowl tag correlation???

[JHS]

I heard from a guy who heard from a guy who..., well, you know, that GM VINs typically are within a 100 digit spread of the Fisher body number on the cowl tag, a possible way to make sure the cowl tag goes with the car. I compared these two numbers on my 67 Z28, 69 Impala SS, 70 Nova SS, 70 Camaro RS/SS and 68 Buick GS 400. Guess what? They all fell well within the 100 digit spread, the farthest off being 35! Has anyone else heard of this or am I just a novice late comer to the hobby? Is this a good way to verify a car's real cowl tag?

[Chevy454]

Nope...!

[JHS]

[ QUOTE ]
Nope...!

[/ QUOTE ]

Does this mean it is not a good way to verify or that you have not heard of this before?

[JHS]

Clarification: one only compares the last 3 digits of each set of numbers.

[Chevy454]

Both...never heard it before, and it's not a good method...

[JHS]

I realize it is not a proof positive method but it sure was strange to find that my cars all fell within the parameter indicated, noting that only the last 3 digits of each set of numbers are used. Just wondered if this applied to other members cars?

[Chevy454]

My guess is it's gonna be more of a coincidence thing as the VIN and body # were 2 different entities? Fyi: I grabbed a page of COPO Chevelle #s, and out of the 10 on that page, only 1 of them worked out to be within 100...

[Don_Lightfoot]

I also have not heard of any type of correlation between the two, wish there was. As a matter of interest the difference on my Chevelle is 76 (264 vs 188).

[Denis]

I think you should tell us about your 67 Z28...

[JHS]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you should tell us about your 67 Z28...

[/ QUOTE ]

Butternut Yellow w/std. black interior, black vinyl top, console w/out gauges, factory original drivetrain w/MO code block, restored in the mid to late 90s w/lacquer paint, just certified by MacNeish and car #170 in the registery. I meant to post this thread in the general discussion forum, sorry.

[Verne_Frantz]

JHS,
It gets kind of complicated. If a plant is producing more than one model, such as coupe, convertible, sedan, etc., each body style will have it's own consecutive numbering from Fisher on the cowl tag. The VIN of course is assigned to a chassis in the order of final assembly, no matter which body style winds up on that chassis. There is a correllation of course, but not one where a "difference" in both numbers should be any certain value.
The best way to determine if one number agrees with the other would be to find a known original car built early in production and one late in production. Take the difference in body numbers and the difference in sequential VINs and plot both on the same time line. Then when you find a car with a VIN somewhere within that range, an approximate "expected" body number can be derived. You'd need to plot those production lines for each body style.
Again, it's only an approximation, since the rate of production of one style or another may vary, such as more convertibles in the Spring, etc.
Hope this helps...

Verne http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY]

[ QUOTE ]
JHS,
It gets kind of complicated. If a plant is producing more than one model, such as coupe, convertible, sedan, etc., each body style will have it's own consecutive numbering from Fisher on the cowl tag. The VIN of course is assigned to a chassis in the order of final assembly, no matter which body style winds up on that chassis. There is a correllation of course, but not one where a "difference" in both numbers should be any certain value.
The best way to determine if one number agrees with the other would be to find a known original car built early in production and one late in production. Take the difference in body numbers and the difference in sequential VINs and plot both on the same time line. Then when you find a car with a VIN somewhere within that range, an approximate "expected" body number can be derived. You'd need to plot those production lines for each body style.
Again, it's only an approximation, since the rate of production of one style or another may vary, such as more convertibles in the Spring, etc.
Hope this helps...

Verne http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Ditto, well said http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggthumpup.gif

[JHS]

Thanks for the explanation, I have no knowledge as to how the production line process works so this was a good primer. I just thought it interesting that all of my vehicles fell within the 100 digit range. As I said, never thought of this as a difinitive way to prove a cars cowl tag authenticity but thought the members might beinterested in an old mechanics tale I heard. I am learning quite a bit about the hobby from you guys so thanks.

[firstgenaddict]

Here is a very good "Primer" on the complete process from order acceptance at Fisher all the way through final assembly...
http://www.camaros.org/assemblyprocess.shtml

[Kurt S]

What Verne said is correct (assuming you compare the #'s from the same style code) for 68 and earlier. Starting in 69, the body # was the order confirmation #. The correlation to the VIN becomes much more vague.
See http://www.camaros.org/bodynumbering.shtml for more info.

[deuce-less]

superb information and concisely written, well worth the visit to crg http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Verne_Frantz]

I have read the excellent tech description of the Camaro build process by John Hinckley before and was very impressed. John is one the very few people around today who were around back then and paid attention to how things were done. He is an extremely invaluable resource to our historical restoration endeavours today.

My contribution is only from research by logging many original cars, and it's only most accurate when considering full size cars built at 15 different assembly plants between '58 & '64. Those full size cars amount to over 20 different body styles, not counting 6cyl vs V8, each with their own Fisher sequential number.
Lots of arithmetic........ http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Verne http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Verne_Frantz]

Kurt,
I haven't read the link you provided, but I just can't understand how the body number could be the order number. Orders came in one after the other for different styles of bodies, so if the number on the cowl tag was the order number, there would no sequential numbering of each body style at all. They would be all mixed together. I don't have any facts or knowledge to dispute that, but it just doesn't make sense that Fisher would not want to sequentially number each style of body, when they always did prior to that time. Is it possible that the record of numbers of each style existed only on paperwork???

[Kurt S]

Verne,
That's correct, there's no sequential # of the body #'s from 69+. 69 Camaro and 69 full-size data proves this out and this is documented by Chevrolet in one of the dealer sheets.
I highly doubt that Fisher had much input into such a change.