12-Bolt Axle numbers stamping inquiry - Page 3

rpoz11 · #21 05-31-2005, 06:18 AM

Could Ed Cuneen possibly chime in on this?

**YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY** · #22 05-31-2005, 06:19 PM

The '69 Novas were not COPO's, so they did not get the COPO 'BE' version of the 4.10 rear - they received the standard 'BV' 4.10 version.

The '70 Novas were indeed COPO's, and received a uniquely coded rear - 'CBW'. However, according to our research, the 'CBW' rear doesn't appear to be all that different from the prior year's 'BV' rear - ie; no special plates, springs, or clutch packs. We believe that the 'CBW' code installed under the COPO was necessary because 4.10 rears were special order only in '70, and the 3.55 was the lowest ratio under RPO's. We are still researching this though.

rpoz11 · #23 06-01-2005, 12:09 AM

Ok, with that I accept but would the Nova axle have a different casting # center section vs. the 12-Bolt center sections used in 69 Camaros or the BE axle?

**YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY** · #24 06-01-2005, 12:15 AM

No, same casting number, only the carrier assy was different due to the different posi components, and axle assy was different for the hardened shafts.

rpoz11 · #25 06-01-2005, 05:26 AM

Can we talk via PM ?

rpoz11 · #26 06-01-2005, 06:30 AM

Ok, as we understand COPO cars, the blocks and Heads are understood unless otherwise doc'd. Muncies as supplied via GM as they were given, Intakes, carbs, water pumps, etc..etc...etc....
Have we ever done a full documentary on all BE's in every known existing car on the lists???
Is there any discrepancies on the BE at all throughout the build assmebly that would show anything unusual????
So many things occured back then, variations, etc between many RPO's;
Could there be any variances to the BE whatsoever?

**Kurt S** · #27 06-05-2005, 09:22 AM

If that's a CBE1030 axle, I'd guess that it's a service part. Could be from a last week of 69 car, but it would be pushing it vs observed data.

Not sure what your question is in your last post.

rpoz11 · #28 06-05-2005, 09:54 PM

Ok...Thanx for your input!

I have found this table, with these axle codes added:
(all were for the NOVA application of 1970)
CPO-"Heavy Duty"; change COC to CBQ; new codes CBI, CPL, CPM, CPT, CPU
************************************************** **********
The chart attatched provides what codes are known...

The Camaro codes seems to be in the COA-COZ & CRA-CRY order, so if you suggest a CBE, this would be...?

rpoz11 · #29 06-05-2005, 09:59 PM

Here is what I have....

rpoz11 · #30 06-05-2005, 10:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The '69 Novas were not COPO's, so they did not get the COPO 'BE' version of the 4.10 rear - they received the standard 'BV' 4.10 version.

The '70 Novas were indeed COPO's, and received a uniquely coded rear - 'CBW'. However, according to our research, the 'CBW' rear doesn't appear to be all that different from the prior year's 'BV' rear - ie; no special plates, springs, or clutch packs. We believe that the 'CBW' code installed under the COPO was necessary because 4.10 rears were special order only in '70, and the 3.55 was the lowest ratio under RPO's. We are still researching this though.

[/ QUOTE ]
So, As I approach the list I provided, with added updates, and as I read the quote here above, the 4:10.1 was not on the list and should be a special order?

Dedicated to the Promotion and Preservation of American Muscle Cars, Dealer built Supercars and COPO cars.