396 'JO' Code Block w/o VIN

E

EWJ

· Registered

Joined May 17, 2006

·

83 Posts

Discussion starter · #1 · May 1, 2007

Only show this user

I'm starting to de-code my 68 RS/SS. It has a numbers matching M22, and all the engine components other than the block are correct 375/396 items for 68 and their dates codes correspond with the car's build date.

My question is about the block: it's a 'JO' code block with no VIN. The numbers on the pad are 'J073ICJK' Does this sound like a service replacement item? What would have been used by a dealer in 1969/70?

The rest of the motor is date code, casting number correct for a 68 375/396. Correct intake/heads/accessories/radiator/etc. Would a dealer have used a 'JO' short block as a warranty replacement? Would a 'JO' be available as just a short block?

Thanks in advance!

 

E

Eric Kammerer

· Registered

Joined May 11, 2004

·

8,304 Posts

#2 · May 1, 2007

Only show this user

I think you are looking at the wrong end of the assembly stamp, and reading a character wrong.

The first character of the stamp is the engine assembly plant, which is probably a T and not a J.

The 0731 is July 31.

The suffix, which denotes application, is CJK. When I search CJK, I get this application:

CJK 69 402 Chevelle 325 L-35 TH-400 4-Brl

Kind of odd, because the three character suffix was supposed to have started in the 1970 MY, but I checked two sources and came up the same.

It's going to be hard to see, but I bet it has a partial VIN stamp down by the oil filter.

 

E

EWJ

· Registered

Joined May 17, 2006

·

83 Posts

Discussion starter · #3 · May 1, 2007

Only show this user

Thanks Eric for the info. :thumbsup:

I was expecting a VIN on the deck surface pad: didn't even think of the oil filter area. Is this a Camaro thing? When looking at Corvettes in the past, the VIN would be located on the deck surface pad: did they do things different for Camaros, perhaps something that varied by assembly plant? Just curious.

 

E

Eric Kammerer

· Registered

Joined May 11, 2004

·

8,304 Posts

#4 · May 1, 2007

Only show this user

When the alternator got moved to the passenger side in 69, there were issues stamping the VINs (remove alt, stamp VIN, replace alt), so they tried stamping on the flange by the filter.

I have seen this explanation for the Norwood F-bodies for all of MY 69. LA went back to the pad sometime in MY 69. I'm not sure how the other GM assembly plants for other models handled the issue.