Those do look like factory stampings & agree they're probably re-worked.
Somewhere here I have a main case w/2 stampings as well.

Chevy was not well run in those days; one problem area was Materials. John De Lorean noted that after taking over as General Manager in 1969:

"As a result of poor coordination of materials, Chevrolet every year led the company in costs for interplant shipments, premium [mostly air carrier] freight shipments and inventories of obsolete parts at the end of each model run."

We see it in late production Z/28s-not unusual to see a May or June Muncie trans. Came from another assembly plant.

The vin numbers are consecutive. I think that the stamper forgot to change his stamp for the next car, seen his error and stamped it correctly.

That happens - except the official repair is supposed to be to “X” out the offending digit(s) and restamp only those.

At least that was the policy when I ran the area that stamped the VIN on the frames in a truck plant.

K

Keith,

That’s correct. As a matter of fact I have the actual “X” stamp that was used (if there was time that is):biggthumpup:

So what thoughts regarding the assembly stamp, first letter 'B' or modified from 'E' - given that the Norwood partial is February and the Baltimore partial June? Someone's definitely added the E at the end, but the rework theory is plausible if the trans was assembled February and was destined for a Camaro, but had to be reworked and finished up in a June Chevelle/Elky.

Maybe the “E” is a factory serviced stamp?

Jason

Maybe the E meant exchange...

It looks like they forgot to advance the number on the one transmission and corrected that with the second stamp.

Here's the transmission stamp on my very early 1967 Corvette #350. This was the first year they used the letter S in the transmission on Corvettes. Of course, they forgot to advance the numbers for the transmission to 350. The Warranty Plate date of manufacture for the transmission matches the date on the transmission and the unit has never been out of the car. I'm sure this was not at all uncommon. Thank goodness they got the pad stamp correct.

Interesting that they did not use the same stamp for the engine and trans.

I believe that after 1969 they stamped (with the same stamp)the engine and trans after bolted together.

I had a muncie trans that had the same VIN stamped 5-6 times !!