IBM punch card (interior trim)

[mockingbird812]

I realize it is not unusual to find multiple buildsheets, but I found a second trim card in the springs of the back seat which was wrapped around the seat frame in my 06A Baltimore '69 Chevelle. This trim card belongs to this Chevelle because the unique body number matches the body number on the trim tag. But there are a couple differences between this punch card and the previous one. 1. The first punch card in 4th column from the left, titled "c", has the number "4" entered. My newly discovered card has a "1". The first punch card has "A52" and "B55" entered under the 5th column titled "OPTIONS" and the other card has no entries. The last 3 columns of the newly discovered card are unviewable as they are integrally wrapped around the frame work and I intend to leave the card in the car. Top picture is my 1st ibm card and below is my newly discovered one.

* Any insight as to meaning of column "c"?
* Any thots on why options are not included on the second card?
* I realize these IBM cards are not the mother load, but anyone else find multiple ones?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v697/mockingbird812/2447487960048494552IJuNJX_ph.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v697/mockingbird812/2032382460048494552QUbQbs_fs.jpg


Thanks! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif

[Postsedan]

Sam,

Here is the link from a prior thread about the Black 69 SS 300 Deluxe Post Sedan.

http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/201225/page/32/fpart/1/vc/1

As you can see I too have yet to determine what 0354? is on that particular IBM interior data card.

Here is what I do know about your IBM card....remember your car has a unique interior package for a 1969 Chevelle.

Your car is a 1969 300 Deluxe 2 door coupe....#13437.

Therefore is has a complete deluxe interior package....different than the Nomad Wagon, Greenbiar Wagon, Concours Wagon or 4 door Sedan, El Camino and Malibu.

Hence the first photo of your trim tag...that came out of the front seat with the codes A52 and B55....this tells me that is was for a "Front Bench Seat" with "Front Deluxe Seat".

Why the differnce between the 1 and the 4...I have no concrete answer....other than my guess is something to do with "Front Seat" vs. "Rear Seat".

I have also seen these punch cards with and without columns...perhaps they differed from plant to plant.

Sam...I believe your car was built in Baltimore? The Black 300 Deluxe Post Sedan was a Kansas built car.


Dan.

[mockingbird812]

Dan - this is not from my 300 but another Baltimore Malibu Chevelle. Both of these trim cards match up to the trim tag of this car, i.e. note the body no. in second column of each ibm card, they match the trim tag.

Now u can't blame that on a blurry picture - can u?! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[mockingbird812]

Anyone have any thots on this.

Thanks.

[Mr70]

I think your two punch cards were printed at different intervals along the assembly process of your Malibu,or distrubuted to the trim shop at different intervals during seat assembly.
Can you carefully remove that one from the rear seat spring and mate it up against the earlier one while holding it up to a light source?..i.e punch holes?
There may be some time code reference on it that you can't see right now that might explain their differences.

[mockingbird812]

Interesting idea Rick. I did count/locate punch holes and the 2 cards looked the same to me as far as placement and numbers of holes. Of course I could not see the last 1/4 of the card. Have you heard that they made multiple trim cards for cars? Perhaps each with a bit more information? Would the "c" column possibly be an indication of the sequence of the cards? I have replaced the seat, so will have to look into removing card a bit later.

[Woj]

My 69 SS Baltimore car has two of these. Only one of which is out of the car. The other is tucked up in the springs of the passenger bucket seat and is pristine, so I don't want to disturb it. Both cards have trim numbers according to what is in the car and match the "Body Style" number.

I wish someone had some definitive info regarding these cards. All the cards I have seen in the past don't unlock any serious mysteries about the cars.

Back when I was going to school, we used these cards for computer programming class. I'd say that unless you knew what computers and software GM was using at the time, only the inked information will be of benefit.

I have yet to find a 69 Baltimore Chevelle with an actual 8 1/2 X 11 build sheet. Plenty of computer cards though.

Phil Woj.

[mockingbird812]

Hey Woj,

Good info. Do yr 2 cards have matching Body Numbers that match yr trim tag? Did not know that '69 Baltiimore SS Chevelles were not likely to have Build Sheets. I don't have one either. Must have been a local practice to NOT put a BS in the car.

<font color="blue"> Anyone have a '69 Chevelle SS with a Build Sheet? </font>

In Postsedan's link above I find it interesting that some trim cards had drivetrain info (i.e. "M21") but no engine info.

[Rixls6]

I have a buildsheet from a Baltimore built 69 Malibu Convert. It's a 350 CI car, not an SS.
I'll check to see if there is a matching IBM card. The car is not mine, so I have to see what the owner has.

[Mr70]

I have some 1969 Super Sport Chevelles buidsheets built at Baltimore,Framingham &amp; Fremont plants sumbitted in the registry.
I also have a few 69 COPO Chevelle,(Baltimore),buildsheets as well.
Needless to say,they are scarce for these vehicles.

[Woj]

Sam,

The body number on the trim tag matches the body number on the computer card. I did not know that until today. I was thinking this card wasn't that important, I never realized the body numbers matched. Very cool.

I can't read all the numbers on the other card stuck in the bucket seat back. I'll try to get a portable mirror to check it out.

Will also post a picture as soon as I can figure out how to do that.

Phil W.

[mockingbird812]

[ QUOTE ]
I have some 1969 Super Sport Chevelles buidsheets built at Baltimore,Framingham &amp; Fremont plants sumbitted in the registry.
I also have a few 69 COPO Chevelle,(Baltimore),buildsheets as well.
Needless to say,they are scarce for these vehicles.


[/ QUOTE ]

Excuse my ignorance Rick, I did not know there was a '69 Chevelle SS registry. Do tell more http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif . Have you derived stats from it? What are your thots on the infamous "L" on the trim tags (Leeds &amp; Baltimore) and there association with an SS Chevelle?

Thanks,
Sam

[Mr70]

Sam
These were submitted from a few 1970 Chevelle owners for the 1970 Chevelle registry I oversee,be it Malibu,Super Sport,Elcamino,Convertible or Station Wagons.There is too much to correlate with the 1970 information vehicles alone,so the few 69's I receive are just for comparison with the 70's.
I tend to believe the "L" stood more as an indicator for a Big Block,vs. a Super Sport.

[Woj]

Back to the "L" discussion. I have two Baltimore 69 SS Chevelles and both have the letter "L" on the trim tag. A previously owned 69 SS from Kansas City also had the "L" on the trim tag.

I haven't yet seen or heard of a Malibu with the "L" yet. Would like to know more. This has been discussed on Team Chevelle and as of yet, no one has debunked the theory.

Phil W.

[Mr70]

In 1970,you could get a NON Super Sport Malibu or Elco with an LS-3 402/330Hp engine.It could show the letter "L" on the trim tag.
For 1969,the Super Sport Chevelle &amp; Elcamino came with Big Blocks only,so it is difficult to say for sure if that "L" denoted a Super Sport or a Big Block.
I believe 427 CID COPO Chevelles have been found with the "L" too. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/hmmm.gif

[Styles]

Contributing to the discussion (albeit very old):

'69 Baltimore-built SS396 Chevelle Convertible

Trim Tag:

<span style="font-family: 'Courier New'">
BODY BY FISHER 2
ST 69 13667 BAL121651 BDY
TR 791 51 A PNT
10D L048813
</span>

The 10D is consistent with the NCRS shipping report of 10/28/1968 assembly start.

The L is consistent with the car being an SS396, and the 'fossil find photos' showing all visible SS396 indicators on the car, including:

<ul style="list-style-type: disc"> SS396 emblem and blacked-out rear cove (body pierced) SS396 emblems on front fenders, behind wheels (body pierced) SS396 emblem on front grille SS396 emblems on interior door panels Black painted headlamp bezels, deluxe tail lamp bezels, polished trim bezels on front parking lights, and front side marker lamp bezels without engine displacement. Styled 5-spoke SS wheels[/list]

The 813 matches the inspection sequence on the car's IBM punch card.

Only thing left to decode on the TT is the 0-4-8 in between the &quot;L&quot; and the &quot;813&quot;

[Ryan1969Chevelle]

You have the right guys to get the details here!!

Ryan

[Verne_Frantz]

Sam,
I sent you a PM. I may be able to help.

Verne <<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/flag.gif

[mockingbird812]

i'm on it Verne! Thanks for the offer! <<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/laugh.gif

[Verne_Frantz]

Sam,
I received your info. It's a tough job because there's not much printing on it but I will get back to you. The key is the column codes where the punches are. If my deciphering agrees with what you know about the car, then the punch cards can be better than a build sheet because the people reproducing the build sheets know nothing about punch cards.
Keep in mind that I am basing this on my understanding of punch cards from 1964 back. Since the options changed over the years, the punch card keys may have changed as well. If a dealer ordering card (any card) for '69 can be found, then it will all make sense with no doubt how the car was built.

Verne <<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/biggthumpup.gif

[Woj]

Here's a resurrection of an old thread. I actually figured out how to read these cards. Quite simple in all reality. There are really no big surprises on the cards (except for one that I won't post on a public forum(fraudster block)). The confusing part is that the "option" section has all those punch-outs, but that data really just corresponds what is already written across the top of the card. Many of us assumed it was many or all of the RPO codes for our cars. I posted a thread on Team Chevelle and I can do one here if I can get my photos sized correctly and still have clarity.

I showed how to read what is on my black 69 SS computer card and what numbers correspond to the trim tag. I found the body number, trim number, body style and last three digits of the last line on the trim tag. This repeated itself on several cards that I read and had data on the trim tags.

I'm guessing this was more of a Fisher Body tag since info needed during body assembly is noted on the card (body style, body number and seat type for seat mounts. If anyone has a different view on this, please let me know.

Here's the link to my thread:

https://www.chevelles.com/forums/15-tag-team/1086822-computer-punch-card-deciphering.html

[mockingbird812]

First off Woj, nice detective work. Secondly, now I know what you do in your spare time - stare at little semmingly meaningless holes in paper!!!!! And....


I completely get it!!!!!

[SS427]

Thanks to Phil he confirmed that both my punch cards were in fact from our car. I already knew that based on several of the numbers that matched the cowl tag but he confirmed it with some other information that was located on the card which I would never have known about so thanks to Phil for taking the time to do that for me. Your help has been endless and much appreciated.

[Keith Seymore]

I think you guys are on the right track; just a couple nuances I would add:

A) The build sheets and broadcast sheets were not published at different times during the build process. All of the information was input before the beginning of the build and then disseminated ("broadcast") through the plant at the same time. Some individual operators responded to the paperwork hanging on the vehicle; other specific assemblers received a packet of information called a "manifest" at the beginning of each shift

B). That's why the various sheets look different. The information needed on the chassis line would be different then the information that's needed in the body weld shop which would be different then the information needed to build an individual seat. The information presented was tailored to the specific end user.

C). All of the paperwork was intended to be thrown away at the end of the line along with coffee cups, extra fasteners, lunch wrappers, etc. None of it was intended to be hidden away as a boon to future historians.

D). We've known how to read the Pontiac billing history punchcards for sometime now using the same rationale as described in this thread. The punches allow the computer to read the same information that we see printed with ink.

K

[m22mike]

Did you guys have any hanging chads that might put a option in question ?:eek2:
Sorry, had to do it.:rolleyes2:

[GotGrunt]

first off woj, nice detective work. Secondly, now i know what you do in your spare time - stare at little semmingly meaningless holes in paper!!!!! And....


i completely get it!!!!!

Now that’s funny :D