70-71 CAMARO BB 4SPD

[Rick H]

[ QUOTE ]



I had some time this Morning and took another look through the files and found this memo. While dated for mid '69 it does provide insight into engine carryover to '70.

The complicating issue with the memo and our topic is the Continuation of the '69 body well into '70 with Chevy calling it a '70 and then followed later by the "real" Chevrolet rollout of the new '70 Camaro in February.


Notabily both Colvin and Hooper agree on M-40 as an option on L-78 as follows:

Hooper in his book "The Illustrated Camaro Recogintion Guide 1970-1973" first on page 63 listing "CJL"- and later on page 129 - "Manual or automatic Transmission was available in any SS Camaro".

Also Colvin in his book "1970-75 Chevrolet by the numbers" (on page 58) actually lists two seperate three letter codes for L-78 Camaro and TH in 1970. CJL and CTY. Colvin however does not discuss the carryover engine issue which could mean that when the CJL carryover engines were all used then CTY could have been the later (post) February '70 Camaro L-78/M-40 engine.

Time will tell

Phil

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's a quote from an earlier post and it is not mine, "I do love when people quote selections from books written by experts that later prove to be incorrect."

Just because there is a list of proposed changeovers into the following year doesn't mean it happened. For example, using the list above has anyone ever seen a 1970 L89 Camaro?

Rick H.

[70 copo]

Rick,

Please read what the Memo says again. obviously there was no L-89 option on the new Second generation body style that we know of.

The memo simply provides additional insight into the inner workings of Chevrolet at that time, which I clearly state is 1969-and further provides some basis for what later authors have written about the optional power team combo's in what shaped up to be a pretty confusing year.

That is all I was pointing out with the memo post that you have quoted above. OK??

Phil

[CamarosRus]

I have only ever seen CKO used on 1960 Tonawanda L-78's.
Whose car has ANYBODY seen WHAT other code/designation stamped on an assy line installed 1970 L.A. or Norwood Camaro L-78 ???

[Rick H]

I did read it and I know exactly what it says. The memo clearly states at the time it was written that Chevy planned to carry over the 396-400 BB engine/tranny combinations into the 1970 model year when the new Camaro came out in January of 1970. Obviously not all of the combinations made it. Case in point the L89 combo.

Matter of fact as Chuck pointed out the L78/manual was designated CKO. Since the memo you have obviously exists, there must be a final or superseded memo or other documentation that clearly shows what engine/tranny combo's were finally delivered.

Rick H.

[70 copo]

[ QUOTE ]
I did read it and I know exactly what it says. The memo clearly states at the time it was written that Chevy planned to carry over the 396-400 BB engine/tranny combinations into the 1970 model year when the new Camaro came out in January of 1970. Obviously not all of the combinations made it. Case in point the L89 combo.

Matter of fact as Chuck pointed out the L78/manual was designated CKO. Since the memo you have obviously exists, there must be a final or superseded memo or other documentation that clearly shows what engine/tranny combo's were finally delivered.

Rick H.

[/ QUOTE ]


Rick,

You missed one detail from the memo. It states "effective August 1st 1969..." clearly this memo is referring to carryover engines into the new '70 model year - the intent was carryover of engines to the "1970 Camaro" that continued on as the 1969 body style.




The memo is what it is, and again simply provides insight into why some authors may have concluded the potential of RPO L-78 with a M-40 as reality within the entire '70 model year production run.

BTW..Colvin also lists CKO as a Manual trans w/375HP.


Phil

[Rick H]

[ QUOTE ]
You missed one detail from the memo

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the intent was carryover of engines to the "1970 Camaro" that continued on as the 1969 body style

[/ QUOTE ]

Show me one line in the above mentioned memo that states and proves that their "intent" was that the 1970 would be "continued on as a 1969 body style"!

Rick H.

[70 copo]

Simple! From the memo:

"effective August 1st 1969, at the manufacturing plant all engines built per this deviation will be identified with a "C" preceeding the engine suffix..."

The start of the '70 model year is when the three letter stamping for engine identification was used.

These engines were carryover to the '70 model year production and were identifed as such.

Second generation production started up at the plants in January '70

Phil

[Jeff H]

I think that memo is really just trying to explain why some of the late run 69 models had the 3 digit engine code beginning with 'C'. Those all look to be 69 model year engines codes and the new 1970 model got a different batch of codes. It's a great memo explaining what happened but doesn't really do anything to help prove/disprove the L78/TH400 option combination. Did they make any 1970 Novas with the L78/TH400 that are known to exist? If there are 1970 Chevelle L78/TH400 cars I would think it was available on the Camaro and Nova as well. They all shared the same engine codes.

[Rick H]

[ QUOTE ]
It's a great memo explaining what happened but doesn't really do anything to help prove/disprove the L78/TH400 option combination.

[/ QUOTE ]

BINGO!

Rick H.

[70 copo]