When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I am in the middle of a Muncie to TKX swap. My 64 is really a Frankenstein for a variety of reason including a 68 327 Vette motor and I was always curious about the transmission. It was really great the whole time, I just wanted the 5th gear.
I looked on line and there is a bunch of conflicting things that I read so I will ask you guys.....It seems to be an original 64, but what say you? The date code really throws me for a loop.
The serial number is really strange. I can't tell if it's a "D" or what. That seems consistent with the 67-68's from what I read. Is there anything else I should be looking at on the transmission casting/stamping-wise?
jkuzzy,
I have a 50" monitor on my home computer so I can really zoom in on this stuff. On high magnification the third digit looks quite clearly like a "7" (correct for July) that has either deliberately or accidentally been altered. I've tried to clean it up in this pic so you can see what I see. The font and size of the "7" look correct and it's much easier to see without the extra markings:
Trouble is the last digit looks like a "4" and no matter which Muncie format you use, the early or the later one, "84" just will not come up as a day of the month. My guess? Probably a genuine mis-stamp.
Cheers, Greg
The serial number is really strange. I can't tell if it's a "D" or what. That seems consistent with the 67-68's from what I read. Is there anything else I should be looking at on the transmission casting/stamping-wise?
Jeff,
That's not the serial number...that looks like a poor attempt at an assembly date and it makes no sense to me, either. Below is a pic of what an assembly date should look like. Look, also, for the partial VIN stamped on the driver's side of the case just aft of the side cover.
The serial number is really strange. I can't tell if it's a "D" or what. That seems consistent with the 67-68's from what I read. Is there anything else I should be looking at on the transmission casting/stamping-wise?
Jeff,
That's not the serial number...that looks like a poor attempt at an assembly date and it makes no sense to me, either. Below is a pic of what an assembly date should look like. Look, also, for the partial VIN stamped on the driver's side of the case just aft of the side access cover.
OK, got some more number and notes....I see two rings on the end of the transmission. According to my research, this is a 66-70 Muncie. All along I was curious about the VIN which it seems that I found. It doesn't match the VIN on the motor which wasn't original anyway.
The housing is not a 66, a 66 housing casting number ends in 010. Also as I understand it the partial VIN in 66 starts with 1S, in 65 it starts with S. The tail housing is a late 65 model year. The side cover is 64- 65. So I would say that this is a 1965 trans with a fair degree of confidence.
The housing is not a 66, a 66 housing casting number ends in 010. Also as I understand it the partial VIN in 66 starts with 1S, in 65 it starts with S. The tail housing is a late 65 model year. The side cover is 64- 65. So I would say that this is a 1965 trans with a fair degree of confidence.
My 64 is such a hodge podge of parts anyway. My frame consists of a 63 and a 64. It doesn't shock me that the transmission is made up of different parts. It sure has been a great unit so someone did it right.
The housing is not a 66, a 66 housing casting number ends in 010. Also as I understand it the partial VIN in 66 starts with 1S, in 65 it starts with S. The tail housing is a late 65 model year. The side cover is 64- 65. So I would say that this is a 1965 trans with a fair degree of confidence.
That is EXACTLY my assessment. As i mentioned above, a 325 case is 64-65 ONLY.
My 64 is such a hodge podge of parts anyway. My frame consists of a 63 and a 64. It doesn't shock me that the transmission is made up of different parts. It sure has been a great unit so someone did it right.
People who are very familiar with Muncies, and I've been rebuilding them over 50yrs, can easily mix and match parts and build an excellent transmission. There were some changes and variations through the Muncie years (63-74), but MANY, MANY parts are compatable and totally interchangeable. Thus, a Muncie, PROPERLY assembled from various year parts, will be a very dependable and durable transmission.
People who are very familiar with Muncies, and I've been rebuilding them over 50yrs, can easily mix and match parts and build an excellent transmission. There were some changes and variations through the Muncie years (63-74), but MANY, MANY parts are compatable and totally interchangeable. Thus, a Muncie, PROPERLY assembled from various year parts, will be a very dependable and durable transmission.
I completely believe it. I guess (in my mind) when I go to sell it, it would be great to show the "proper" numbers for a year. Maybe I am overthinking it.
Identifying a Muncie
