Mixed info on December 69 L71 alternator
#2
Team Owner
Member Since: Sep 2006
Location: Westminster Maryland
Posts: 30,173
Likes: 0
Received 2,878 Likes
on
2,515 Posts
Hi S,
I took a look at the NCRS 68-69 TIM&JG 4th Edition and in the Mechanical Section see this note for the 1100900 alternator: "1970 alternator is seen sporadically on original 1969 cars from July 1969 to the end of 1969 production."
So?
Regards,
Alan
The TIM&JG also indicates the ….900 is seen on 350, 390, and 400hp engines.
I took a look at the NCRS 68-69 TIM&JG 4th Edition and in the Mechanical Section see this note for the 1100900 alternator: "1970 alternator is seen sporadically on original 1969 cars from July 1969 to the end of 1969 production."
So?
Regards,
Alan
The TIM&JG also indicates the ….900 is seen on 350, 390, and 400hp engines.
#4
Team Owner
Member Since: Sep 2006
Location: Westminster Maryland
Posts: 30,173
Likes: 0
Received 2,878 Likes
on
2,515 Posts
Hi CK,
The way I read the TIM&JG makes me think a 1969 model year car with T.I., (K66), had a 61 amp alternator…. so the ….900 wouldn't be appropriate.
It appears an ….825 or ….884 would have been typically used.
This is an area I'm not too familiar with so I'm just passing on what I have read in the info I have available.
Regards,
Alan
Perhaps someone more familiar with 69 cars will come along with some definitive info.!
The way I read the TIM&JG makes me think a 1969 model year car with T.I., (K66), had a 61 amp alternator…. so the ….900 wouldn't be appropriate.
It appears an ….825 or ….884 would have been typically used.
This is an area I'm not too familiar with so I'm just passing on what I have read in the info I have available.
Regards,
Alan
Perhaps someone more familiar with 69 cars will come along with some definitive info.!
Last edited by Alan 71; 09-02-2015 at 05:07 PM.
#5
My 69 was built Nov 12, 1969. The assembly manual calls for the 1100825 alternator, but I also understand that late production cars sometimes had parts from 70 or whatever was available. I will be glad to take a look and see what mine has but not sure that would tell you much since production continued until mid to late Dec 1969.
#6
Burning Brakes
If you want "correct" you have to go with the NCRS judging guide. I only have the 70-72. As far as the one David Crane lists on ebay; I think the application (based on the date) is only for a 1970 L46 or LS5. The front case is correct; open face/thin wall large open front segments and correct back case for a 1970; square cast boss below Delco-Remy ('69 no square) and raised cooling fins. That front case is hard to find and that back half is very hard to find. I believe the pulley should be cut from solid steel not a pressed out one. I think it should be 3 3/16" in diameter.? What size is your pulley?
I would say a 1969 L71 should have a 1100882. Hopefully I am mostly correct and don't get publicly "yelled at".
I would say a 1969 L71 should have a 1100882. Hopefully I am mostly correct and don't get publicly "yelled at".
This 1100900 is listed on ebay... I have heard yes it is correct and no it is not...Thoughts please.. Condition???? But I believe I have the correct pulley on my current alternator but wrong number.. I am also unfamiliar with correct halves and such... Help me become and educated buyer.. I know there are restamps available, what are your thoughts on re stamps...
Thanks.. R
1970 Corvette Alternator Delco Remy Dated 9L21 | eBay
Thanks.. R
1970 Corvette Alternator Delco Remy Dated 9L21 | eBay
#8
Melting Slicks
All 1969 L-71 Corvettes required K-66 transistorized ignition which used a 61 amp alternator.
An alternator for a 1969 L-71 (or any Corvette that used a 61 amp alternator from that year, i.e., K-66 or C-60 equipped Corvettes)... The 1100825 is generally the "early" alternator, the 1100882 is used sporadically over a period of many months during the late 1968/early 1969 calendar year, and the 1100884 alternator phased in during early 1969 (and carried through the end of the 1970 model year).
For a November 1969 car, I would expect the 884. While it is possible that an 825 and 882 could have been found in inventory and used in production, it is unlikely as they both had been phased out many months prior to the date of your car's build date.
The 900 is not correct for your application.
I can tell you this about a correct reproduction for your car:
The 884 is definitely being reproduced by someone.
At least one of the reproductions (or a version thereof) is very good.
It is still possible to identify the reproductions.
Not many people are able to identify one version of the reproductions.
The reproduction is much easier to find and about half the price of a real one.
Good luck with your search!
Regards,
Stan Falenski
An alternator for a 1969 L-71 (or any Corvette that used a 61 amp alternator from that year, i.e., K-66 or C-60 equipped Corvettes)... The 1100825 is generally the "early" alternator, the 1100882 is used sporadically over a period of many months during the late 1968/early 1969 calendar year, and the 1100884 alternator phased in during early 1969 (and carried through the end of the 1970 model year).
For a November 1969 car, I would expect the 884. While it is possible that an 825 and 882 could have been found in inventory and used in production, it is unlikely as they both had been phased out many months prior to the date of your car's build date.
The 900 is not correct for your application.
I can tell you this about a correct reproduction for your car:
The 884 is definitely being reproduced by someone.
At least one of the reproductions (or a version thereof) is very good.
It is still possible to identify the reproductions.
Not many people are able to identify one version of the reproductions.
The reproduction is much easier to find and about half the price of a real one.
Good luck with your search!
Regards,
Stan Falenski
#9
Melting Slicks
#10
Melting Slicks
I can tell you this about a correct reproduction for your car:
The 884 is definitely being reproduced by someone.
At least one of the reproductions (or a version thereof) is very good.
It is still possible to identify the reproductions.
Not many people are able to identify one version of the reproductions.
The reproduction is much easier to find and about half the price of a real one.
Good luck with your search!
Regards,
Stan Falenski
The 884 is definitely being reproduced by someone.
At least one of the reproductions (or a version thereof) is very good.
It is still possible to identify the reproductions.
Not many people are able to identify one version of the reproductions.
The reproduction is much easier to find and about half the price of a real one.
Good luck with your search!
Regards,
Stan Falenski
I know the front cases have been reproed where the numbers are stamped but they are very easy to spot as the repro castings have all the flash removed and the original casting are rough in that area.
I would like to find a back half if its being reproduced but if they are I am unaware of that and I've been looking everywhere. I have an original 70 back but need a 69.
Also as was mentioned the 70 is different as it has the square block under the delco-remy but the other difference is where the holes to mount it are located. There are a few early 69 dated ones on eBay but they have the 70 back on them. You have to be careful if you buy one to make sure its correct. The sellers seem to not know the difference and some are corvette parts people......
Last edited by ed427vette; 09-02-2015 at 08:19 PM.