[RAII 4-speed]

Originally Posted by John V.

RAII, A49 is the code for the Custom Seat Belt w/ Retractors option.

GM made front seat belts standard in all GM passenger cars starting with all builds after Dec. 31, 1963, during the 1964 Model Year. They bowed to gov't and insurance industry pressure when they announced the move.

PMD raised the Base Sticker price of all '64 A Body Models by $11 to account for this change. Base prices were in whole dollar increments.

Since front seat belts were not yet Federally mandated, PMD introduced a Seat Belt Delete option at the same time that would give you a credit of $11. This option could only be ordered for cars to be sold by dealers NOT in a State that had already legislated front seat belts. For example, NY state passed a law that went into effect starting with all cars built after July 31, 1964 (so effectively intended for the '65 Model Year.

The A49 option in '64 was REDUCED in price by $10.76 at the same time (prior to Jan 1, 1964, the A49 option was priced at $18.29). $10.76 was the price for the standard belts option (A20) prior to Jan 1, 1964, since it was no longer an option, the standard (no retractors) seat belt option was eliminated. Since belts were now standard, the revised price to get the custom belts with retractors was only to cover the cost of the retractors.

In '65, the same situation existed.

Standard belts were included in the base content and Base Price.

The Seat Belt Delete option was still offered with the same $11 credit.

The A49 Custom Belts with Retractors remained an option for '65, UPC A49 and the price remained the same $7.53 as it was for the latter half of '64 even though the retractors were a huge improvement over the cheapie winders used in '64.

The original owner is remembering it incorrectly. He did in fact order the A49 Seat Belt option.

But he would have gotten seat belts even if he had not ordered the Custom Seat Belts with Retractors option.

I do not believe Calif was even one of the first to pass a seat belt law. I'm pretty certain he could still have ordered the seat belt delete option in Calif for '65 (not withstanding the Navy's rule that his car would have needed seat belts to get on base).

My recollection is that only NY & Wis state law required seat belts in '65.

No state required you to order the seat belts with retractors, so he could have skipped that option and the car would have gotten seat belts anyway.

Not all Fremont builds intended for the Cal market got the A49 belt option in '65 (or late '64 either). But unless the rarely ordered seat belt delete option was specified, the car was built with front belts.

The Cal emission option is a different story. That WAS a Cal law and all builds intended to be sold in Cal required that option starting Jan 1, 1964 (my Fremont '64 was built in Nov. '63 and sold in Fresno but was not equipped with the Cal emission option because the law had not taken effect yet).

I do not think The original owner is remembering it incorrectly.... I think I am misunderstanding him. After reading the above, it makes sense that he was stating they were on the cars already..That infact could have been why he ordered the retractable ones..I am having lunch with him tomorrow, I will pick his brain some more..... Thank you for your post

[John V.]

Sloan66, it isn't entirely understood, but it has nothing to do with the Zone.

It is related to the "gate" used by Fisher Body when welding the body panels into a Body Assembly. Think of a fixturing jig.

It is probable that the 2nd digit represented the fixture and the 1st digit represented the shift (1st or 2nd shift). (edit note, I think I had this backwards, so I changed it)

Similar coding used on the Pontiac Plant Data Plates except that had a lot more "gates" for each Model Series and built the entire line up so something like 60 different "gates" will show up, Fremont had somewhere around 5 IIRC and only built the A body.

Identifying the "gate" helped with QC if it was discovered that there was a fit up problem with the Body Assembly during Final Assembly. Knowing the "gate" allowed them to trace the problem back within Fisher Body.

In '64, this code was embossed on the Data Plate at Fremont with the rest of the codes. For some reason, I think it was stamped on the Plate in '65 presumably after the Data Plate went on the firewall.

[27jalopy]

HOLY MOLY there is no greater treasure than this!

1: Absolute coolest car ever EVER made. Like cooler than an A/C Cobra. Like cooler than
A Ferarri GTO. I mean the greatest automobile ever made!

2: The options! (Call me weird, but I would love a '65 GTO convert that was originally tri power and automatic...but that is off topic)

3: IT IS A TRUE TIME CAPSULE! I would take your car over three totally restored '65 convertibles, Hurst wheels and gobs of options regardless!!

This car gives me the chills!

Holy crap, this should be front page news!!!!!!!!!

[60sstuff]

Originally Posted by Sloan66

Any idea what the "2 1" on the upper right corner is for? I know on my fremont build 66 I have a 23 which is the zone.
This car is amazing! Gives us all hopes of others sitting out there!

Another Fremont built 65 GTO with that 2 1 looking as though it was stamped loosely afterwards. Also note the diamond punched hole and A49 code. This other car has the retractable seat belts also.
First pic = The amazing GTO in this thread
Second pic = Another Fremont 65

[60sstuff]

[QUOTE=RAII 4-speed;4951762]

Originally Posted by 60sstuff

Thank You for sharing such a special document as the Original Window Sticker!
Are going to put an original 65 AM radio back in the car?
Also I'm guessing a 3:55 or 3:36 gear in the back since it has the smaller standard fan and clutch?[/QUOTE


The original radio was an AM radio............The original owner did order the AM/FM but cancelled it to lower the cost of the car...... He did go back to the dealer and had them install the AM/FM 8-track that is now in the car, I do have the original AM still in the box that the AM/FM 8-track came in.
The owner tells me that the car has the 3:55 gears in it that was standard on the car, He did order the Posi (AKA safety track) I am not sure what you mean when you satated "since it has the smaller standard fan and clutch?"

Someone will hopefully correct me if I'm wrong on this but the standard fan with the curved tip blades was about 18" with a small clutch which you have. If the car came with a 3:90 or Air Condition it would have the 19-1/2" notched fan with a larger clutch.

[Keith Seymore]

Originally Posted by 60sstuff

Someone will hopefully correct me if I'm wrong on this but the standard fan with the curved tip blades was about 18" with a small clutch which you have. If the car came with a 3:90 or Air Condition it would have the 19-1/2" notched fan with a larger clutch.

This is correct.

K

[Keith Seymore]

Originally Posted by RAII 4-speed

a few members have asked me about the seat belts option, I called the original owner a few mins ago and he told me that seat belts had to be ordered in California on this car, he stated it was like the emissions they had to be ordered as well..... He then told me that he was stationed on a Navy base in Sacramento and that no one could enter the base without seat belts on....In fact he claims that he would sometimes have passengers in the rear seat and he had the dealer install the rear seat belts..... In the picture attached, you will see the option for the seat belts on the fire wall tag A49.

John (RAII 4 speed) -

Thanks for the clarification.

John V -

I believe the distinction here is that RPO A49 was the retractable seat belts (front only), which the original owner ordered.

Since these cars did not come with rear belts then the original owner had the dealer install the rear belts (only).

My car has retractable front belts and (as far as I can tell) does not have rear belts.

K

[Keith Seymore]

Originally Posted by John V.

It is probable that the 2nd digit represented the fixture and the 1st digit represented the shift (1st or 2nd shift). (edit note, I think I had this backwards, so I changed it)

I believe it's the other way around (1st digit is gate number designation; second digit is shift). Usually they look like "16-1" or "14 -2".

K

[Keith Seymore]

Originally Posted by RAII 4-speed

12A build week.

So apparently the order paperwork sat in the que from July to December; the car was built in the December timeframe and shipped (relatively immediately) after completion.

K

[RAII 4-speed]

Originally Posted by Keith Seymore

John (RAII 4 speed) -

Thanks for the clarification.

John V -

I believe the distinction here is that RPO A49 was the retractable seat belts (front only), which the original owner ordered.

Since these cars did not come with rear belts then the original owner had the dealer install the rear belts (only).

My car has retractable front belts and (as far as I can tell) does not have rear belts.

K

I believe that is correct

[RAII 4-speed]

Originally Posted by Keith Seymore

12A build week.

So apparently the order paperwork sat in the que from July to December; the car was built in the December timeframe and shipped (relatively immediately) after completion.

K

The original owner told me that he indeed DID order the car in July of 1964 and with the 45 day strike there was a back log to make these cars and that is why he did not get his car till the first week of December.

[RAII 4-speed]

here is a picture of the firewall, as you can see, there is a red x marked on the firewall with a crayon. I assume it is an inspectors mark...Your thoughts?

Also, there are a series of numbers punched into the firewall in fact there are 2 sets of them anyone know what they are for?
THANK YOU in advance.

[Keith Seymore]

Originally Posted by RAII 4-speed

The original owner told me that he indeed DID order the car in July of 1964 and with the 45 day strike there was a back log to make these cars and that is why he did not get his car till the first week of December.

Yes - I was making a distinction between that scenario vs a car that was started in September (for example) and then trapped mid process during the strike.

We normally will cover the cars on the final line with plastic/visqueen during extended downtime but cars that are stuck in paint or in the primer dip tank can get messed up.

K

[Keith Seymore]

Originally Posted by RAII 4-speed

here is a picture of the firewall, as you can see, there is a red x marked on the firewall with a crayon. I assume it is an inspectors mark...Your thoughts?

Not sure on the red X - that one is un-descriptive enough it could be anything.

Regarding the numbers: can you determine what the digits are? I'm wondering if it is some kind of build sequence number, but it could also be a part number/date code for that individual part (cowl panel).

K

[RAII 4-speed]

Originally Posted by Keith Seymore

Not sure on the red X - that one is un-descriptive enough it could be anything.

Regarding the numbers: can you determine what the digits are? I'm wondering if it is some kind of build sequence number, but it could also be a part number/date code for that individual part (cowl panel).

K

I will have someone look at the numbers (I have a vision problem) and I will get back you you here.

[Andre]

The original owner of this car is truly a hero in my eyes. To have kept a car like this one in about as good a condition as you could hope for, is darn near a miracle. The second amazing thing is that this was a factory assembled car that wasn't built to last much more than 5-10 years, yet has made it 48 years, and everything still works, and looks pretty good.

[GTOnly70]

Fwiw, below is the trim tag off my Fremont built '65. Car was delivered in Sept. '64. Original, #'s matching block (EUN matches Protect-o Plate) is coded late July '64.

[John V.]

Keith, thanks for correcting me on the gate/shift order. I had it that way at first, but Sloan66 mentioned he had a 23 on a '66, figured there is no 3rd shift so wound up confusing myself. Can't explain a 23 on a '66, but you are correct about the '64s & '65s from Fremont. My own is coded 1-1 so couldn't figure it out from that.

And yes, there was NOT a rear seat belt factory option in '64 or '65, just the Dealer Accessory Packages. RAII mentioned the Owner had the Dealer add the rear belts, so that would be accurate.

In '64, the Model Year started with two Front Seat Belt options, standard without retractors and custom with retractors.

The standard belts were coded A20 at Fremont on the Data Plate. At KC & Pontiac, the standard belt accessory code was 5Z. Pontiac continued to show 5Z on the late year Data Plates even though that was now a standard feature (references had long indicated 5Z was seat belt delete but this was wrong). The only time the Pontiac Plant didn't code the 5Z after Dec was when the custom belts were ordered, code was 5W or when the Seat Belt Delete option was ordered, code was 5O. Obviously, there was NOT a seat belt delete option until the belts were made standard equipment in Jan, so early in '64, the lack of either a 5Z or 5W code meant no seat belts since they were only installed as optional equipment. But from Jan on, the 5Z code is very common on Pontiac Plant Data Plates in '64 once the standard belts were made part of the base equipment.

At Fremont in '64, it seems that it was a bit more hit or miss after Dec. Some late year cars built with standard belts were coded A20 on the Data Plate, some were not but still got built with the base content standard belts. Early year at Fremont, lack of A20 or A49 code meant no seat belts installed. My own early '64 was built without seat belts, so no A20 or A49 on the Data Plate.

I have never seen a '64 Fremont build with the Seat Belt Delete option, the UPC was A48. I assume A48 would have been coded on the Data Plate if it was ordered with Seat Belt Delete, but I've yet to see one with that factory credit option.

Not sure about '65, I don't think the standard belts were coded on any Data Plate for '65, so you will not see A20 (or 5Z at Pontiac or KC) for '65. Only the A49 (or 5W at Pontiac & KC) when ordered with the custom belts/retractors. The Seat Belt Delete option UPC reportedly was changed to A62 per Eric White's book. I can't vouch for that, never seen one. But I am skeptical since his book shows the Seat Belt Delete as A48 for '66. I doubt that they changed the UPC in '65 and reverted back in '66. JMO.

The nos. stamped on the sheetmetal are identifiers for the individual metal stampings that make up the Body Assembly.

I don't believe they were specific to the build, pretty sure they were generic to the piece parts.

IIRC, they might generally indicate the stamping plant or the application for the part, or perhaps a p/n.

There is also a date coding.

You can find these stampings on many of the individual body panels on the car.

There was a thread awhile back where this was discussed. Maybe somebody here remembers it and can provide the link.

The date coding on the body panels is a way to detect whether panels have been replaced. Generally, all of the panel parts will have date codes from the same time frame. If a panel shows a "wrong" date, it can indicate that it had been replaced or even evidence of a "rebody".

I don't think the nos. on the firewall have been very carefully researched. But it is unlikely that they would be very meaningful either.

The owner waited an extraordinarily long time for his car to be built. Even with the strike. The national strike was settled by end of October but it is unknown when individual plants went back to work. According to Calif employment history, the strike ended Sun Nov 8 but I still don't know when Fremont resumed production.

But if the dealer actually placed the order as soon as possible, there should have been time to build the GTO prior to when the strike began on Fri Sept 25th.

You mentioned the Owner had to reenter the order after his bank refused to lend him what he needed. Isn't clear how quickly the Owner placed the 2nd order, but I wonder if the dealer dragged his feet if he thought the Owner might not secure financing? Otherwise, the dealer might have gotten the car built when production began in August.

Generally, customer orders got priority, so even the fact that this GTO wasn't built until early Dec suggests it got low priority if Fremont began production in early Nov following the strike.

Just to be clear, I am not questioning the Owner's account. But I'm thinking that there may have been aspects to the story that the Owner was never aware of going on "behind the scenes" that resulted in the build being delayed.

He understood the strike to have lasted 45 days. Officially, I think the strike was considered to be 38 days. But Fremont may have restarted production a week after the national strike was settled/ratified and production restarted at some of the plants on Mon Nov 2. If Fremont restarted Nov 9, that would have made it 45 days. And that corresponds with the Cali employment history record of the GM strike ending Nov 8.

Plenty of cars were built before the strike, dealers had a significant supply of cars available. '65 production got underway on Mon Aug. 24 so production was blowing and going prior to the strike and new '65s weren't allowed to be sold until on or about Sept. 24, the traditional opening day 30 day wait period to allow all dealers to build inventory. If the GTO wasn't built in the month prior to the strike, but the order had been entered when PMD first started accepting '65 orders, the Owner was either unlucky or some other circumstance caused the order to be delayed.

Maybe the Owner was aware of other circumstances about the wait that you haven't shared yet. I apologize for my speculations if they are off-track.

I see your post where the Owner mentions there was a backlog of orders entered in anticipation of the strike. That is certainly valid. Just seems to me Warren-Vivaldi would have wanted to have the GTO which was already "sold" vs. inventory builds so from a "priority" standpoint, I would have expected the GTO to get built sooner than later. Just speculating that the dealer may have had his own reasons to back burner the GTO order.

This is just the kinda stuff that fascinates me. That is the reason I've posted all this.

You have acquired a very cool car in large part because it has a pretty interesting story associated with it and also because it remains in such exceptional survivor condition.

Most of the above is just to add a little historical context.

[John V.]

Originally Posted by GTOnly70

Fwiw, below is the trim tag off my Fremont built '65. Car was delivered in Sept. '64. Original, #'s matching block (EUN matches Protect-o Plate) is coded late July '64.

Also cool. Note, the gate/shift code 1-1 looks to be embossed like the '64 style. Interesting. Wonder why they began stamping them later?

Another point to note. Your Hardtop is Body No. 490 and a 9B Time Built code. As popular as the Lemans Hardtop was, that is a paltry no. if they had been building them for 2 weeks already.

Perhaps Fremont was cranking out Chevy's to build there inventory prior to the strike and the Tempests were few and far between?

If Pontiac was sucking hind tit at the start of production at Fremont, that may have accounted for why RAII 4-speed's GTO got pushed back. Would be interesting to learn the highest Lemans convert Body No. prior to the strike. May have been less than 200.

[RAII 4-speed]

I just took some more pics of the GTO and thought I would share them.
let me know your thoughts.
Thanks