64 Riv

[jframe]

Found this 64 in town today and was able to decipher that it had a KT engine code, which is a 401 out of a LeSabre or Electra instead of the 425. Can't decipher this 700 trim code for the life of me tho. Anyone got any ideas?

[1965rivgs]

Mark,

  That`s the Fisher Body number...very, very early `64. Notice the trim tag is using the `63 and earlier type wholesale car order form characters to designate the Fisher Body installed options.

Tom Mooney

[Jim Cannon]

Tom is correct. This is a very early '64. See the 07D in the upper left hand corner? That says the body was made during the 4th week of July, 1963.

 

FB 700 is the 700th body built at Fisher Body for that model year.  In 1963, they incremented that number just for the Rivieras (up to 40,000).

 

I'm the '63 Riv guy, so I don't know about the '64s. 

 

While the 425 CI engine (the KW) was standard on the Riv in '64, I think that the 401 (KT) was an option. A '64 expert will have to chime in. The VIN stamped on the engine block should be compared to the VIN on the stainless steel plate (inside the driver's doorjamb, I think) to see if they match.

 

 

[jframe]

2 minutes ago, Jim Cannon said:

Tom is correct. This is a very early '64. See the 07D in the upper left hand corner? That says the body was made during the 4th week of July, 1963.

 

FB 700 is the 700th body built at Fisher Body for that model year.  In 1963, they incremented that number just for the Rivieras (up to 40,000).

 

I'm the '63 Riv guy, so I don't know about the '64s. 

 

While the 425 CI engine (the KW) was standard on the Riv in '64, I think that the 401 (KT) was an option. A '64 expert will have to chime in. The VIN stamped on the engine block should be compared to the VIN on the stainless steel plate (inside the driver's doorjamb, I think) to see if they match.

 

 

I compared them; they don't match. Interior done in all white including dash pad. Custom Interior pattern like a 65. Buttons and piping done in blue, so it's aftermarket. Wood redone with some sort of glossy wood looking stuff. Just thought it was neat, cause my 65 is the only 1st Gen Riv that I know of in this area. And that trim tag threw me as to how to decode it.

[awk409ak]

So, that would say at that time they were building only ~100 Riviera a week?  I have a 64 Riviera and the FB #1106, build date 08D 4 weeks later. 

 

The 613 is custom trim Fawn Cloth & Vinyl, exterior Bronze Mist.  Don't know too much about 63's, but appears to have remote side mirror, Soft-Ray glass-all, AC, Power Windows, and remote truck release.  The J2 next to the 613 must be the power driver's seat.  Like I said, I don't know 63's, and my 64 has the Fisher Body option in groups 1 - 5.  

Hope this helps.

 

Art

[RivNut]

J2 next to the trim code is correct for the power seat. 

[1965rivgs]

13 hours ago, awk409ak said:

So, that would say at that time they were building only ~100 Riviera a week?  I have a 64 Riviera and the FB #1106, build date 08D 4 weeks later. 

 

Art

  Not necessarily.... but good automotive archeology! If his car was built at the end of week 7D, say on Friday...and your car was built at the beginning of week 8D, say Monday, then the time frame between builds is closer to 2 weeks and not 4 which almost doubles the calculated build rate, so approximately 200 bodies per week, which, in my opinion, is probably more likely. Because our only reference for build date (assuming we dont have access to build sheets) is weekly and not daily, its hard to draw accurate conclusions about production rate. This is especially problematic in short time frames...but its fun to speculate.

Tom

[awk409ak]

11 minutes ago, 1965rivgs said:

  Not necessarily.... but good automotive archeology! If his car was built at the end of week 7D, say on Friday...and your car was built at the beginning of week 8D, say Monday, then the time frame between builds is closer to 2 weeks and not 4 which almost doubles the calculated build rate, so approximately 200 bodies per week, which, in my opinion, is probably more likely. Because our only reference for build date (assuming we dont have access to build sheets) is weekly and not daily, its hard to draw accurate conclusions about production rate. This is especially problematic in short time frames...but its fun to speculate.

Tom

 Tom,

That could be true too.  Anywhere between 100 and 200 per week.  It would be interest if we could compile what build dates members have for each year.

 

Art

[RivNut]

Jim Cannon has a 63 Riviera registry and one of the things he asks for is build dates. I think he uses them to try to narrow down when mid-year changes were made - 120 to 140 mph speedometer, plain dash to aluminum veneer, spare tire from trunk floor, etc.  He might be able to give you an idea of weekly production.

 

Now for a question.  In 1966, February 28, fell on a Monday, which started the 5th week of February that year. Any car built that day would have an 02E build date.  The next day would have been Tuesday, March 1. Would a car built that very next day have a build date of 03A?

[awk409ak]

Ed,

We'll never know unless someone started to collect data.  Very interesting.  If we get forced into another lock down, it's something to work on.😁

 

Art

[1965rivgs]

11 hours ago, awk409ak said:

 Tom,

That could be true too.  Anywhere between 100 and 200 per week.  It would be interest if we could compile what build dates members have for each year.

 

Art

  The yearly calculation as a rough estimate is simple and doesnt require much data...assuming 5 weeks between model years for refitting the factory and a week for Christmas/New Years and perhaps another week for various holidays leaves 45 weeks of actual production for 37,658 Rivieras which is AN AVERAGE of 836 cars per week. I would consider it a reasonable assumption that at the very beginning of the build year the pace of production is slower until the factory and personnel improve efficiency as the build year progresses...so I would expect the very beginning of the build year to be below the average and the later weeks in the year to be above, perhaps even well above the overall  year`s average.  This is the reason I would expect the first build weeks of the year to be well below average at about 200 but not as low as 100 cars per week...but who knows?

  And keep in mind we are actually batting about BODY build dates and not necessarily complete car builds. Did Fisher Body slow the pace of initial body builds with the goal of supplying an initial loading of the body bank at Flint Assembly before actual production began on the assembly lines?  The above body build dates are VERY early....

Tom

Edited November 15, 2020 by 1965rivgs (see edit history)

[RivNut]

I have also heard that once the 40,000 limited production number was reached that production was shut down for the '63 model.  Anyone have any 07 or 08 build dates on a '63?

[Jim Cannon]

6 hours ago, RivNut said:

I have also heard that once the 40,000 limited production number was reached that production was shut down for the '63 model.  Anyone have any 07 or 08 build dates on a '63?

 

FB39931 was built 07C.

 

I know of no 08 job for a '63 in 1963.

 

FB89 was built 07B of 1962.

 

Edited November 15, 2020 by Jim Cannon (see edit history)

[Chasander]

I worked at “The Buick” in 1965 and we didn’t get a week off between the Holidays. Looking at old pay stub period ending 1/3/65 l had 24 straight time hours. So 3 days of production that week. 

Edited November 15, 2020 by Chasander (see edit history)

[msdminc]

In preparing for any automotive production year there are a few steps that are taken to prepare.  The first is prototype, generally a hand build of the projected model, typically years before the model year.  In carry over models (models with small changes, think 1963 to 1964 Riviera, there isn't really any prototype activity per se.  Prototype doesn't involve the plants to a great extent if any. 

 

There are then some pre-production processes, this includes the projected plant production site.  The most important is the pilot, and most model years include a pilot even if it is a carryover model.  If there are zero changes a pilot is not necessary, but most have some changes in parts, option content, production procedures or the like.  The pilot comes while the prior year model, if it exists, basically dispersing the new model year cars with the current model year production.  These cars are not sold, and used as a way to train the plant in the new build.  This can be lots of cars (100's) or not many say 15-20.  This proves out the production process, the design intent is nailed down by this point.

 

Then the plants build out the prior year and change over to the new year.  This can be many weeks for large model changes, or several days for minor model changes.  It can also be many months for new introductions.  When the new model year starts production it typically starts slowly.  It is to iron out bugs in the process, or maybe the design.  In essence it is slow to provide the plant to get a rhythm in building the new model.  Other variables like the economic environment, competition, labor relations, and other variables can also dictate how fast the production goes from slow to full tilt.  

 

It has changed a bit over the years, but it is roughly the same as when I worked for GM in GM Assembly Plants from the 70's to late 90's.  In the past the new model was introduced in September so the pilots would be in June.  Depending on sales and the size of the change over the last current model year would probably end in July sometime, although it could be earlier or later.  The last one would be driven off final line and destined for shipping to the last customer, and typically for small changes the next model year may be close behind it.  The new model year would start at a crawl and pick up speed as everything was worked out.  It was hoped to get to full speed in late August or September, but that too was not hard and fast.  I would say everyone of the 20+ change overs, big and small wanted to be full tilt no later than October 1.  This would go until the next model year, and so on.

 

There were always exceptions, bad sales, oil crisis of the 70s, hot sales for a new introduction, extending the model year, mid year introductions, etc.  Generally August and September, had lower numbers.  Most plants built 45 to 60 jobs/cars an hour at full speed.  There were some faster, and in bad economic times or craft type builds (think Corvette) there were slower.  The numbers Tom cites are within reason, I just wanted to give a little more flavor to the analysis.  I can't speak great knowledge about Flint, I was there, but not until the 70's.  But frankly things haven't changed all that much.  I went on a tour of the GM Fairfax Assembly Plant a couple years ago at the ROA event in Overland Park, KS and they had new model year pilots running with the current model in June of that year.  Heck some of the folks I knew when I worked there in the early 90s were still there.

 

I hope this helps a little.

 

Rock On

 

gord

[1965rivgs]

2 hours ago, Chasander said:

I worked at “The Buick” in 1965 and we didn’t get a week off between the Holidays. Looking at old pay stub period ending 1/3/65 l had 24 straight time hours. So 3 days of production that week. 

  When I ballparked a rough estimate in my post I was liberal regarding "absent" weeks of production. Reason I did that is because there are always forces at work to knock back the perfect production schedule, ie, the month long strike in `65. I was sure being a union work environment you guys would have guaranteed holidays off but I`m not aware of the actual contractual language/specifics. I was a union member for over 40 years and depending on contract and what days of the week our Holidays fell on we either had each Holiday "off" or actually worked and had the paid Holiday added to our paychecks. So, from year to year, the actual time off would vary. The time frame in question in this thread is from `63 into `64 so your example is a year later.

  I spoke with Gordon Wolfgang yesterday after I posted and realized my interpretation of the assembly lines being "shutdown" was inaccurate. Apparently the lines were not completely idle as long as I proposed...but the new model build proceeded at a snails pace initially so the net effect is nearly the same.

  Regarding the above examples of how many bodies Fisher was producing at the start of the 64 model year production, being on the low end estimate of 100 or high end, as in closer to the yearly average, I would assume because the `63 and `64 bodies are so alike the changeover went pretty smoothly and quickly but as I stated above "who knows?". Also a consideration..... Fisher was making many different Buick model bodies so another changeover, ie the change from the `64 big car bodies to `65, which is a dramatic change, could have been a factor relating to production at Fisher. Again, I dont "know", just tossing around some possibilities based on my limited knowledge base.

 

Tom

 

P.S. If you were around during the `65 strike maybe you can supply a first hand answer...was there any deliberate sabotage of the cars before or after the strike? I was told by a worker from that time frame who I met at a Buick meet that it did indeed happen. I distinctly remember him telling me about workers punching holes in the cowl area in hopes of promoting water leaks in the final product.

[awk409ak]

10 hours ago, Jim Cannon said:

 

FB39931 was built 07C.

 

I know of no 08 job for a '63 in 1963.

 

FB89 was built 07B of 1962.

 

Wow!  Interesting,  So If I'm correct just looking at numbers, FB 39931 was built week 07C and they still had to build 69 more to reach the limit of 40K.  That 64 car above was FB 700, date 07D, 63, so that is a pretty significant number of cars ( ~769) being built in just a week.  Mine being FB1106, Date 08D, 63 is only 400 cars

 

Art.

[1965rivgs]

3 hours ago, msdminc said:

In preparing for any automotive production year there are a few steps that are taken to prepare.  The first is prototype, generally a hand build of the projected model, typically years before the model year.  In carry over models (models with small changes, think 1963 to 1964 Riviera, there isn't really any prototype activity per se.  Prototype doesn't involve the plants to a great extent if any. 

 

There are then some pre-production processes, this includes the projected plant production site.  The most important is the pilot, and most model years include a pilot even if it is a carryover model.  If there are zero changes a pilot is not necessary, but most have some changes in parts, option content, production procedures or the like.  The pilot comes while the prior year model, if it exists, basically dispersing the new model year cars with the current model year production.  These cars are not sold, and used as a way to train the plant in the new build.  This can be lots of cars (100's) or not many say 15-20.  This proves out the production process, the design intent is nailed down by this point.

 

Then the plants build out the prior year and change over to the new year.  This can be many weeks for large model changes, or several days for minor model changes.  It can also be many months for new introductions.  When the new model year starts production it typically starts slowly.  It is to iron out bugs in the process, or maybe the design.  In essence it is slow to provide the plant to get a rhythm in building the new model.  Other variables like the economic environment, competition, labor relations, and other variables can also dictate how fast the production goes from slow to full tilt.  

 

It has changed a bit over the years, but it is roughly the same as when I worked for GM in GM Assembly Plants from the 70's to late 90's.  In the past the new model was introduced in September so the pilots would be in June.  Depending on sales and the size of the change over the last current model year would probably end in July sometime, although it could be earlier or later.  The last one would be driven off final line and destined for shipping to the last customer, and typically for small changes the next model year may be close behind it.  The new model year would start at a crawl and pick up speed as everything was worked out.  It was hoped to get to full speed in late August or September, but that too was not hard and fast.  I would say everyone of the 20+ change overs, big and small wanted to be full tilt no later than October 1.  This would go until the next model year, and so on.

 

There were always exceptions, bad sales, oil crisis of the 70s, hot sales for a new introduction, extending the model year, mid year introductions, etc.  Generally August and September, had lower numbers.  Most plants built 45 to 60 jobs/cars an hour at full speed.  There were some faster, and in bad economic times or craft type builds (think Corvette) there were slower.  The numbers Tom cites are within reason, I just wanted to give a little more flavor to the analysis.  I can't speak great knowledge about Flint, I was there, but not until the 70's.  But frankly things haven't changed all that much.  I went on a tour of the GM Fairfax Assembly Plant a couple years ago at the ROA event in Overland Park, KS and they had new model year pilots running with the current model in June of that year.  Heck some of the folks I knew when I worked there in the early 90s were still there.

 

I hope this helps a little.

 

Rock On

 

gord

Hi Gordon,

 

  I never thought of pilot cars running through in June...but I suppose that makes perfect sense if the model year is basically wrapped up in July. When viewing monthly production figures I was always unsure whether the extremely low number of cars produced in August was the end of the previous year`s model with down time for the changeover or the beginning of the new model year...but I assume from your descriptions that could vary with each year?

 

Tom

Edited November 15, 2020 by 1965rivgs (see edit history)

[1965rivgs]

7 minutes ago, awk409ak said:

Wow!  Interesting,  So If I'm correct just looking at numbers, FB 39931 was built week 07C and they still had to build 69 more to reach the limit of 40K.  That 64 car above was FB 700, date 07D, 63, so that is a pretty significant number of cars ( ~769) being built in just a week.  Mine being FB1106, Date 08D, 63 is only 400 cars

 

Art.

  Great observation Art...again, we are using a weekly date reference in a short time frame so hard to nail down exactly how many days of production we are looking at. If the last `63 or the first `64 was built on Monday of 07C and the 700th `64 built on Friday of 07D that could equate to almost 2 full weeks of production. Even in that extreme interpretation that seems like an unusually high number of builds for that time frame...and especially at the changeover from `63 to `64. And then they slowed down production from 07D to 08D to approximately 400 car bodies??

  Maybe the assumption that Fisher completed the `63 bodies before starting the `64 bodies is the problem with this scenario. Perhaps Fisher was making `64 bodies before the end of `63 body production...in other words, they were making both bodies simultaneously. I would think if Buick assembly was making `64 pilot cars while still building the `63 production cars in June then it is not a stretch of the imagination, maybe even a dictated fact, that Fisher had already begun `64 body production well before the dates we are using for our estimates.

Gordon?

Tom

 

[awk409ak]

3 minutes ago, 1965rivgs said:

  Great observation Art...again, we are using a weekly date reference in a short time frame so hard to nail down exactly how many days of production we are looking at. If the last `63 or the first `64 was built on Monday of 07C and the 700th `64 built on Friday of 07D that could equate to almost 2 full weeks of production. Even in that extreme interpretation that seems like an unusually high number of builds for that time frame...and especially at the changeover from `63 to `64. And then they slowed down production from 07D to 08D to approximately 400 car bodies??

  Maybe the assumption that Fisher completed the `63 bodies before starting the `64 bodies is the problem with this scenario. Perhaps Fisher was making `64 bodies before the end of `63 body production...in other words, they were making both bodies simultaneously. I would think if Buick assembly was making `64 pilot cars while still building the `63 production cars in June then it is not a stretch of the imagination, maybe even a dictated fact, that Fisher had already begun `64 body production well before the dates we are using for our estimates.

Gordon?

Tom

 

Tom,

You are probably right.  Being that the bodies are the same, they could have just kept building bodies and not finish them with cowl tags.  Who really knows!

 

Art

[msdminc]

Art,

Bodies were typically built to order, and a body plate/cowl tag were always put on a body when it was built in the beginning of the Body Shop process in the underbody area. Bodies-In-White (BIW) were expensive so we didn't build them without a specific order or reason. Pilot cars even had body plates. 

 

The one exception I remember when an underbody didn't get a body plate/cowl tag because we were testing a new underbody welding fixture and used the underbody for destructive test of the welds.

 

Rock On

 

gord

[msdminc]

Tom,

 

Yes 64 non saleable pilot cars would be built earlier than 63 build out. There could've been some saleable 64s built before 63 build out (less likely), but they would not have been recognized as built until they were "shipped" from the assembly plant. There are several production pay points where different work in progress inventory relief was made (refer to my articles in the Riview from a few years ago for more detail).

 

The production counts that were in industry reports were only counting units shipped from the final assembly plant, and not still in the plants Work In Progress. That will slide some of the numbers into the future from "Real or Actual" or what logically seems correct. 

 

Steady state production usually gets closer to Actual, because the rhythm of the production process is smooth. 

 

Hope this helps. 

 

Rock On

 

gord

[awk409ak]

1 hour ago, msdminc said:

Art,

Bodies were typically built to order, and a body plate/cowl tag were always put on a body when it was built in the beginning of the Body Shop process in the underbody area. Bodies-In-White (BIW) were expensive so we didn't build them without a specific order or reason. Pilot cars even had body plates. 

 

Rock On

 

gord

gord,

I ready didn't think they would build body ahead like I said.  We or I was just trying to understand how there is just a large number of car built(769 cars, 69 63 model and 700 64 models) between 07C, 63 and 07D, 63, then only 400 64 model cars from 07D to 08D.

 

Just interesting looking at the number and to hear what other opinions there may be.

 

Art  

[telriv]

ALL, I remember at one meet in Pa. where a lady bought a '63, Linda Hall (Wall) as I remember as a parts car for the '63 she was restoring.  I think in the end she did restore this car over the one she was doing. It came with a TH400 with an "OO" coded trans. NEVER found that code listed antwhere. The engine VIN matched the cowl plate/VIN.  Properly dated coded 2x4's.  ALSO IF I remember correctly the build date was April/May of '63. The carbs. were properly date coded, as was the distributor. It had left hand threads on the left wheels. Had a '64 driveshaft.  A '63/partial '64 console among other things.  I ALSO remember Dennis Manner saying it was probably a "Mule" car, BUT he didn't remember it.

LOTS of things happened we all will never know about.  There was quite a few of us that poured over this vehicle trying to put something together with little or no answers.  EVEN saying someone may have been trying to fake something.  My reply was who was going to go to that extreme when in fact reality at the time the Rivs. were worth a lot less. We aren't talking Corvette, GTO or other likely suspects.

 

Tom T.

[1965rivgs]

1 hour ago, awk409ak said:

gord,

I ready didn't think they would build body ahead like I said.  We or I was just trying to understand how there is just a large number of car built(769 cars, 69 63 model and 700 64 models) between 07C, 63 and 07D, 63, then only 400 64 model cars from 07D to 08D.

 

Just interesting looking at the number and to hear what other opinions there may be.

 

Art  

Gordon,

  As Art points out that is why the speculation that some `64 bodies may have been built before the end of `63 body builds. The question is focused specifically on body builds (Fisher) and not complete shipped units or industry reports.

  Why so many bodies in the first week or two of `64 body production and then body production slowing to half the pace for the next 4 weeks? I previously speculated that Fisher may have needed to "load" the body bank to be ready for Flint assembly but you and I discussed this and the conclusion was that Fisher was an independent operation and wouldnt have adjusted production to suit Buick assembly. As you noted when we discussed increased initial production of `66 Rivs as compared to previous years, in spite of a thorough model change, it appears to have been enabled by Euclid being a "greenfield" plant and thus ready with an increased body supply as opposed to the expected body supply as a result of model changeover at Flint Fisher. So is it possible that Fisher body supply was a choking point for overall production and `63 and `64 bodies were built simultaneously at Fisher to remedy this?

Always appreciate your experience and insight,

 

Tom

[msdminc]

Tom, as we discussed, whenever there was a rule, exceptions were abundant. I am with you, there are tons of alternatives that could have happened. I think the bank fill alternative is plausible, but may not explain everything like we discussed last night. Heck I would even bet that folks that were there may not know the whole story. The speculation is the fun part. Its archeology. And we can't really be wrong, and we can change our model when new data comes in, to make our understanding better

 

This is great stuff and I like to contribute where I can. 

 

Rock On 

 

gord

Edited November 15, 2020 by msdminc
Fix (see edit history)

[1965rivgs]

2 hours ago, msdminc said:

Tom, as we discussed, whenever there was a rule, exceptions were abundant. I am with you, there are tons of alternatives that could have happened. I think the bank fill alternative is plausible, but may not explain everything like we discussed last night. Heck I would even bet that folks that were there may not know the whole story. The speculation is the fun part. Its archeology. And we can't really be wrong, and we can change our model when new data comes in, to make our understanding better

 

This is great stuff and I like to contribute where I can. 

 

Rock On 

 

gord

Hi Gordon,

  Thanks as always for sharing...so any ideas that might explain the strange variance in production pace?

Tom

[RivNut]

At the ROA meet in Overland Park, KS in 2018, we took a tour of the GM Fairfax assembly plant.  The line was building Chevy Malibu, but every so often along the line would be a new Cadillac XT4. I think that we saw 2 the entire time we were there.  The one particular one that I saw was being followed closely by a big group of white collar workers with iPads and note books.  When we went in, the UAW gentleman that was our guide told us about the new Cadillac.  It was yet to be introduced to the public.  I wonder now what happened to those first couple of "mules' that went down the line.  I never did see one at the point where GM handed the cars off to the transport teams.

[awk409ak]

3 hours ago, 1965rivgs said:

Hi Gordon,

  Thanks as always for sharing...so any ideas that might explain the strange variance in production pace?

Tom

Tom,

 

Maybe a very hot summer week.😁  Been fun discussing this, maybe someday with more data, we will figure it out.  It is great stuff!

 

Art