[loadedgoat65]

Does anyone know if there is any date codes on a 65 GTO frame? I know there is a partial VIN number on top of the left rear frame rail but wanted to know if there is any other numbers. Also is there any on the front and rear control arms? Thanks

[dld]

there is a mfg. name and a date. also a part # on mine. found on side rail in left rear. forward of bumper brk.

you may want to do a search in this forum. it has been discussed. I posted pics once Don

[John V.]

No part nos. on the rear control arms that I know about. However, I have a pair of upper rear control arms that are stamped "PONT" on top.

Pretty certain they are original but not sure if they are original to a '64 or '65.

I've heard others mention the PONT stamp but don't know if all were stamped that way in '64 and/or '65.

[dld]

I think he was asking about Frames.

i have a set of those rear upper control arms with PONT stamped also

['ol Pinion head]

Originally Posted by dld

I think he was asking about Frames.

i have a set of those rear upper control arms with PONT stamped also

I do as well, also have a few pair of boxed manual trans '66 442 upper arms.

[John V.]

dld, you missed his question about the front & rear control arms in his opening post.

You are correct about the frame stamping, p/n, date of fabrication, and vendor's ID stamp all on the side of the LH rail, well to the rear. My '64 frame is stamped same way.

OPH, do you know anything more about the PONT stamping?

Was it common in '64?

When I first saw it on mine, I wondered if maybe it was needed for the satellite Assembly Plants, perhaps not done for control arms installed at the Pontiac Plant. That was assuming that not all upper rear control arms were stamped to ID them. And also assumes that Buick or Olds used a different upper rear control arm, something I know nothing about.

[JAKE 64]

For 1964

Loadedgoat65

Some of the frame "rails" carried the date code, but not all, and when provided, were likely to be found on the driver side rail to the rear of the left rear tire. However, when the frame "rail" did not carry the date code, a myriad of stamped codes could be found on the frame "assembly". Depending upon the condition of the frame assembly, over 30 identifying codes can be found stamped into the individual components making up the frame assembly. About 20% of these indentifying codes will carry a date code. The date codes for these components can be as few as 2 days prior to the date stamped on the side rail, with other dates as much as several weeks prior.

I don't believe all of the upper control arms had "PONT" stamped into the top of them. Typically, these arms were free of paint, and could be found with paint markers on them, providing an additional means of identification. Attached are after and before photos. The arms pictured did have the PONT stamped into them, and were out of the Fremont plant.

[JAKE 64]

For 1964

Here are a couple of examples of frame coding and date codes. These are digital photos of old photos, so not the clearest (but probably par for me). I highlighted the stampings with orange paint to enhance the shot.

[John V.]

Jake, I can't really tell what part of the frame those pix show. But I suspect the stampings are peculiar to a specific frame vendor. Who was the vendor for that particular frame? What p/n?

My '64 frame was manufactured by A.O. Smith. Pic attached of the p/n ID stamping on the side of the left rail, rearward of the wheel arch.

Aside from this, only other stampings include the full Fremont VIN, was found on top of the frame rail at the bend just ahead of the frame rail, LH side. Very difficult to see, small characters, lightly stamped. The VIN stamp of course was done at final assembly.

Also a large "-10" stamped on the front side just ahead of the widest part of the frame. On the RH side it is stamped upside down, on the LH side it is right side up.

Haven't spotted any other stampings.

I'm sure Parish Pressed Steel and the Pontiac Plant, the other two producers of '64 frames, had their own unique way of marking individual frame parts that became part of the frame assembly.

But for the finished product such as my 9773002 convertible frame, the finished assembly p/n was the most important p/n.

Per Pontiac requirements, the frame was to be stamped with the p/n and the vendor's ID mark, S for A.O. Smith.

I don't think PMD cared about the date coding and the shift identifiers or any other mark that the vendor chose to add. I expect these markings on my frame were helpful in the event the frame was rejected for not meeting spec. A.O. Smith might be able to pinpoint the problem. Or perhaps they just used the info to monitor productivity for each day and shift.

[JAKE 64]

[QUOTE=John V.;5223748]Jake, I can't really tell what part of the frame those pix show. But I suspect the stampings are peculiar to a specific frame vendor. Who was the vendor for that particular frame? What p/n?


John:

For 1964

The manufacturer and part number is shown in the photo below. I agree that the identifiers used on the individual components making up the frame assembly were most likely used for QC purposes. The car was assembled at the Fremont plant, and I believe spent its entire life in the Frisco area. As such, the frame was in excellent condition, revealing the stampings on the individual components. In an effort to document these stampings, I purchased an alphabet letter kit, comprized of letters that I could stick at each stamping. I would then photograph each stamping, using the letter to identify my write-up in my notebook. I used up all the A-Z letters, and had to resort using A1, B1, etc.

[John V.]

Jake, PON means your frame was produced by PMD at the Pontiac complex.

My car was also assembled at Fremont and sold in Fresno. In '66, it was sold off a Reno used car lot and then spent its life in a very dry climate in Boise, Idaho where I bought it.

My frame was also very good condition in terms of corrosion. The rear crossmember was torn away on the RH end and repaired with vertical angle iron welded into the corners to repair the damage on the right end and presumably to avert potential similar failure on the left end. But aside from that, great shape.

The pic was taken after I got the frame back from Redi-Strip (caustic stripping process) and prior to me painting it. It is still bare so easy for me to eyeball. No individual piece markings like yours.

If you study the frame diagram in the Inspector's Guide, I bet each of the individual piece markings on yours corresponds to the individual pieces identified in that diagram. There are about 20 individual pieces on each side of the frame plus the "common" crossmember pieces.

Interesting difference between the A.O. Smith and Pontiac produced frames.

I also have wondered if Pontiac supplied frames to the satellite plants, yours answers that question.

Did you find the VIN stamping on your frame? I'm curious about that because I know at some point the stamping placement and even I think the character size/font used by Fremont changed compared to my Nov '63 VIN stamping. My recollection is the later style shows up on '65 builds. I'm wondering if your much later '64 build reflects the later style VIN stamping.

[JAKE 64]

Originally Posted by John V.

Jake, PON means your frame was produced by PMD at the Pontiac complex.

My car was also assembled at Fremont and sold in Fresno. In '66, it was sold off a Reno used car lot and then spent its life in a very dry climate in Boise, Idaho where I bought it.

My frame was also very good condition in terms of corrosion. The rear crossmember was torn away on the RH end and repaired with vertical angle iron welded into the corners to repair the damage on the right end and presumably to avert potential similar failure on the left end. But aside from that, great shape.

The pic was taken after I got the frame back from Redi-Strip (caustic stripping process) and prior to me painting it. It is still bare so easy for me to eyeball. No individual piece markings like yours.

If you study the frame diagram in the Inspector's Guide, I bet each of the individual piece markings on yours corresponds to the individual pieces identified in that diagram. There are about 20 individual pieces on each side of the frame plus the "common" crossmember pieces.

Interesting difference between the A.O. Smith and Pontiac produced frames.

I also have wondered if Pontiac supplied frames to the satellite plants, yours answers that question.

Did you find the VIN stamping on your frame? I'm curious about that because I know at some point the stamping placement and even I think the character size/font used by Fremont changed compared to my Nov '63 VIN stamping. My recollection is the later style shows up on '65 builds. I'm wondering if your much later '64 build reflects the later style VIN stamping.

For 1964

John,

What I find curious is that only a couple of digits separate the part numbers for the two frames (Parish uses a completely different sequence, and supplied the hardtop frames to the Baltimore plant).
Yes, my VIN stamping was located at the number 3 bushing mount, and only appeared once on the frame. Parish frames could have had the VIN number stamped at both the #3 and #4 bushing mounts. The complete VIN number was provided. Having never seen the VIN number on your frame, I am not familiar with the size/font used on your frame, and can't comment.

[dld]

my Baltimore 65 post car has the Parrish frame p/n 3864503

[Simpson]

Originally Posted by John V.

No part nos. on the rear control arms that I know about. However, I have a pair of upper rear control arms that are stamped "PONT" on top.

Pretty certain they are original but not sure if they are original to a '64 or '65.

I've heard others mention the PONT stamp but don't know if all were stamped that way in '64 and/or '65.

[John V.]

Jake, not sure if I understand why you think the p/n difference is curious.

The p/ns were issued by PMD engineering, not by the vendors. It was common for PMD to issue frame p/ns that were "in sequence". And typically, each vendor was capable of producing and did produce all of them. There is no indication that any one vendor only produced frames for a specific Plant or that any Plant only received frames from a single vendor. I was a little surprised to learn PMD supplied frames to Fremont as your example showed since I had thought that perhaps they only produced frames for the home Pontiac complex. So perhaps it depended more on which vendor had the capacity at a given moment to supply each Plant's needs.

The Inspector's Guide also shows frames as a "1964 FRAMES MANUFACTURED BY Pontiac FOR CHEVROLET, BUICK & OLDS USAGE"

Two frames are listed, p/n 9773004 for Chevy Wagons, Olds & Buick exc. Convertibles and 9773003 for Chevy exc. Convertibles and Station Wagons.

I mention this to show that there were (3) p/ns issued by PMD engineering in sequence to cover a variety of A body applications.

Although the heading says manufactured by Pontiac, I don't take that quite literally. Since A.O. Smith (who I believe was possibly the largest automotive frame manufacturer at the time) produced 9773002 frames (such as mine) as a PMD vendor, I'm pretty sure they also produced the 9773003 frames as well, frames that PMD sold to Chevy along with the 9773004 frames too.

dld's 3864503 '65 frame was a p/n issued by Chevrolet engineering and was an optional frame choice for '65, optional to the PMD issued p/n 9780502.

The '64 Inspector's Guide shows the same situation for '64.

The Chevy issued optional Tempest frame p/n for '64 was 3837595. It was the optional choice in lieu of 9773004.

I have no evidence that A.O. Smith produced frames for Chevy with the Chevy p/n but I would be surprised if they didn't.

The frame p/n usage chart in the Inspector's Guide only lists the (4) frame p/ns I've mentioned.

There is also a Frame Thickness Chart which identifies the steel thickness used for the various frame sub pieces.

The 9773003 frame is not listed in this chart.

This chart shows that the steel thickness for the 9773004 frame, and in the adjacent column for the 3837595 frame, only one difference is noted. This note is for the Rear Outer Side Bar which is shown as .090 thick in the 9773004 column, in the 3837595 column the note says, "Exc. AOS .120". This is circumstantial evidence that A.O. Smith also produced the 3837595 frames.

The next column adds yet another p/n to the mix. It is Chevy p/n 3837597 and shows as for Chev. Conv. The adjacent column is PMD p/n 9773002 and shows for BOP Conv.

I do not know why the Chev. Conv. p/n is listed. Perhaps it was optional to the 9773002 although no indication of that is seen in the Frame Usage Chart whereas the optional sedan/coupe/wagon optional Chevy p/n frame is listed.

Late in the year (I believe around March or April), a specific frame for the '64 GTO Convertible was released, p/n 9777047. This frame has been discussed here a couple times.

Parts Catalog evidence indicates the 9773002 continued to be used for the 2167 and 2267 without GTO option.

This was the same situation as existed in '65, the '65 GTO convertible got a specific frame p/n 9780911 which was not shared with the 3567 or 3767 without GTO option (they got frame p/n 9780503 instead).

9780911 was the superseding service frame for the '64 GTO convertible also.

The first time I learned of the 9777047 was in a thread here. The car was a June build from the Pontiac Plant. The frame was produced by A.O. Smith. Compared to the 9773002 frame, the 9777047 had additional gussets at the rear crossmember, the very area where my own crossmember tore apart. Apparently PMD learned pretty early that the GTO Convertible rear crossmember was in need of strengthening, hence the release of the 9777047 frame for GTO Convertible use.

Jake, after all this typing, I'm realizing you think Parish did not produce the PMD p/n stamped frames. I'm not sure if that would be correct or not. I have always assumed PMD did use Parish as a supplier. Perhaps you've only noted Parish frames with the alternate Chevy p/ns. Since the Chevy p/n was optional for the sedan/coupe/wagon Tempest frames and since Baltimore, like Kansas City, was Chevy controlled, perhaps they did not use the PMD issued p/n frames there. I don't know one way or the other. I think it is just as likely that Baltimore did use the PMD p/n frames also.

But either way, I hope what I have written up helps you to understand the PMD vs. Chevy issued frame p/ns that were in use for '64.

[Keith Seymore]

Originally Posted by John V.

Jake, not sure if I understand why you think the p/n difference is curious.

The p/ns were issued by PMD engineering, not by the vendors. It was common for PMD to issue frame p/ns that were "in sequence".

This is absolutely correct and how it is still done today.

I don't even know how many part numbers I have design/release responsibility for (…there are a lot of little pieces that make up a car body...) but often when I request new part numbers to support new option content (like a cargo tiedown system) I'll get five or six part numbers in sequence.

K

[JAKE 64]

Originally Posted by John V.

Jake, not sure if I understand why you think the p/n difference is curious.


"John, I found them curious because the part numbers for both Pontiac and A.O. Smith were running in sequence, whereas the part number used by Parish was not."


The p/ns were issued by PMD engineering, not by the vendors. It was common for PMD to issue frame p/ns that were "in sequence". And typically, each vendor was capable of producing and did produce all of them. There is no indication that any one vendor only produced frames for a specific Plant or that any Plant only received frames from a single vendor. I was a little surprised to learn PMD supplied frames to Fremont as your example showed since I had thought that perhaps they only produced frames for the home Pontiac complex. So perhaps it depended more on which vendor had the capacity at a given moment to supply each Plant's needs.

The Inspector's Guide also shows frames as a "1964 FRAMES MANUFACTURED BY Pontiac FOR CHEVROLET, BUICK & OLDS USAGE"

Two frames are listed, p/n 9773004 for Chevy Wagons, Olds & Buick exc. Convertibles and 9773003 for Chevy exc. Convertibles and Station Wagons.

I mention this to show that there were (3) p/ns issued by PMD engineering in sequence to cover a variety of A body applications.

Although the heading says manufactured by Pontiac, I don't take that quite literally. Since A.O. Smith (who I believe was possibly the largest automotive frame manufacturer at the time) produced 9773002 frames (such as mine) as a PMD vendor, I'm pretty sure they also produced the 9773003 frames as well, frames that PMD sold to Chevy along with the 9773004 frames too.

dld's 3864503 '65 frame was a p/n issued by Chevrolet engineering and was an optional frame choice for '65, optional to the PMD issued p/n 9780502.

The '64 Inspector's Guide shows the same situation for '64.

The Chevy issued optional Tempest frame p/n for '64 was 3837595. It was the optional choice in lieu of 9773004.

I have no evidence that A.O. Smith produced frames for Chevy with the Chevy p/n but I would be surprised if they didn't.


"Parish, rather than A.O. Smith, as the pictures below show."


The frame p/n usage chart in the Inspector's Guide only lists the (4) frame p/ns I've mentioned.

There is also a Frame Thickness Chart which identifies the steel thickness used for the various frame sub pieces.

The 9773003 frame is not listed in this chart.

This chart shows that the steel thickness for the 9773004 frame, and in the adjacent column for the 3837595 frame, only one difference is noted. This note is for the Rear Outer Side Bar which is shown as .090 thick in the 9773004 column, in the 3837595 column the note says, "Exc. AOS .120". This is circumstantial evidence that A.O. Smith also produced the 3837595 frames.


"Parish, rather than A.O. Smith."



The next column adds yet another p/n to the mix. It is Chevy p/n 3837597 and shows as for Chev. Conv. The adjacent column is PMD p/n 9773002 and shows for BOP Conv.

I do not know why the Chev. Conv. p/n is listed. Perhaps it was optional to the 9773002 although no indication of that is seen in the Frame Usage Chart whereas the optional sedan/coupe/wagon optional Chevy p/n frame is listed.

Late in the year (I believe around March or April), a specific frame for the '64 GTO Convertible was released, p/n 9777047. This frame has been discussed here a couple times.

Parts Catalog evidence indicates the 9773002 continued to be used for the 2167 and 2267 without GTO option.

This was the same situation as existed in '65, the '65 GTO convertible got a specific frame p/n 9780911 which was not shared with the 3567 or 3767 without GTO option (they got frame p/n 9780503 instead).

9780911 was the superseding service frame for the '64 GTO convertible also.

The first time I learned of the 9777047 was in a thread here. The car was a June build from the Pontiac Plant. The frame was produced by A.O. Smith. Compared to the 9773002 frame, the 9777047 had additional gussets at the rear crossmember, the very area where my own crossmember tore apart. Apparently PMD learned pretty early that the GTO Convertible rear crossmember was in need of strengthening, hence the release of the 9777047 frame for GTO Convertible use.

Jake, after all this typing, I'm realizing you think Parish did not produce the PMD p/n stamped frames. I'm not sure if that would be correct or not. I have always assumed PMD did use Parish as a supplier. Perhaps you've only noted Parish frames with the alternate Chevy p/ns. Since the Chevy p/n was optional for the sedan/coupe/wagon Tempest frames and since Baltimore, like Kansas City, was Chevy controlled, perhaps they did not use the PMD issued p/n frames there. I don't know one way or the other. I think it is just as likely that Baltimore did use the PMD p/n frames also.


"No, just the opposite, as the photos below show. This GTO was manufactured in April, at the Baltimore plant."


But either way, I hope what I have written up helps you to understand the PMD vs. Chevy issued frame p/ns that were in use for '64.

"Always."

[John V.]

Originally Posted by JAKE 64

No, just the opposite, as the photos below show. This GTO was manufactured in April, at the Baltimore plant.

Jake, maybe you misunderstood me. The PMD issued '64 Frame p/ns were 9773002, 9773003, 9773004, and 9777047.

The frame pix you posted are for a Chevy issued p/n 3837595.

This was an optional frame for the '64 Tempest, but the p/n was NOT issued by PMD.

My point was, perhaps Parish only produced frames with the Chevy issued p/ns, and perhaps did not produce the frames with the PMD issued p/ns.

I have never before seen pix of a Parish produced frame for a '64 Tempest, so I really do not know one way or the other.

And since it was from a Baltimore build, I still do not know if Baltimore used any Tempest frames with the PMD p/ns and if they did, did Parish produce any of them, did A.O. Smith produce any of them, did Pontiac produce any of them?

I'm aware of '64 frames with PMD p/ns on them produced by both A.O. Smith and Pontiac being used at the Fremont Plant and also both being used at the Pontiac Plant.

One thing that did surprise me, the Resto Guide says that the Manufacturer's ID code for Parish frames was "PPS". The company name being Parish Pressed Steel Co. at the time.

But apparently that wasn't the case or at least wasn't the case for this 3837595 frame, the code is "PARISH".

Unless and until somebody reports a Parish frame with a PMD p/n on it and what Manufacturer's ID code was used, I simply don't know one way or the other. Same for the 3837595, I have no way to know what Plants used them and if A.O. Smith and/or Pontiac produced this frame, unless evidence is found.

If you have seen multiple '64 Tempest frame examples from Baltimore (or elsewhere), please share the info.

[JAKE 64]

For 1964

Just a couple follow up comments for this thread.

I believe A.O. Smith supplied the boxed, convertible A-body frames to all four assembly plants in 1964. It would be great if someone with a 1964 A-body convertible frame not made by A.O. Smith could volunteer this information.
I did not do a search in this forum (which may confirm this belief, but I believe the 9777047 1964 A-body convertible frame reflected the structural reinforcement of this frame ater in the year.

I have only seen the Baltimore A-body hardtop frames at the Baltimore plant supplied by Parish, but not yet ready to claim that Parish was the sole frame supplier of the A-body hardtops to Baltimore.

But if A.O. Smith was the sole supplier of the A-body convertible frames to all four assembly plants, I would expect that only one (A.O. Smith, Pontiac or Parish) frame manufacturers were set up to supply the hardtop frames to each plant. In other words, you did not have both Parish and Pontiac supplying the hardtop frames at any of the four plants.

[John V.]

Jake, there are a couple threads where I've mentioned the 9777047 frame. John Misny had the revised '64 MPC listing showing it as GTO only, 9773002 remained for the Lemans and Tempest Custom convertibles.

The 1st time I learned of the 9777047, it was fabbed 6-1-64, AO Smith produced, mid June GTO. Not sure of the Plant.

My own Nov Fremont GTO got the 9773002 frame, AO Smith produced.

Gussets in the lower corners of the rear cross member (K member) distinguished the late 9777047 from the 9773002.

I never thought about only one vendor for a specific frame. AO Smith was the largest frame supplier for many years so I'm never surprised to see a frame produced by them.

A 3837595 frame under a April KC GTO was reported as an AO Smith frame.

The link is to the thread where I first learned of the late released 9777047. Some pix of the 9777047 and the added gusseting.

http://forums.maxperformanceinc.com/...=615248&page=4

I eventually concluded that the same reasoning for the 9777047 frame led PMD to specify a specific frame for the '65 convertible also.

I'll be surprised if it turns out as you theorize. I've always assumed each vendor produced all p/ns. I've assumed Pontiac mainly produced frames for the home plant, but even that I am not certain of, possibly they shipped frames elsewhere too. Either way, I would be very surprised if AO Smith produced all the convert frames but none of the non-boxed frames for the home plant.

I wonder if Parish was the primary or only supplier to Baltimore in part because their frame fab plant was closest to Baltimore?

Still, I'd be surprised if each plant had a single supplier of non-boxed frames.

Just to be clear, the same non-boxed frame (you refer to the hardtop frame) was used on '64 Tempest wagons, 4 dr. sedans, 2 dr. post coupes, and 2 dr. hardtop coupes.

Doesn't seem like all that many of us have paid attention to the frame p/ns and vendor's ID mark on the '64 frames. Small sample size may not yield good data.

But hopefully a few folks will post info and maybe we'll be able to see a pattern for the vendor's.