|
|
|
numbers game |
Post Reply 
|
Page 12> |
| Author | |
lowenuf 
Member 
Sponsor Member x 2 Joined: 29 Aug. 2006 Location: Ohio Status: Offline Points: 9122 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Topic: numbers gamePosted: 30 Sep. 2006 at 10:34am |
|
ok guys, after an extensive "go over", here is what i have came up with...
Serial # 195769
Body Tag # 183386
Engine # J209509
No ACM number on the toe board, nor the tailgate, i use stripper and removed all layers of paint, no indentations of numbers having been stamped on either location.
cleaned underside of tub, and it confirms Potomac Gray, as was the color i removed from the toe board.
outside of wheels have been repainted, but you can see a "bump" where the original stripe may be, on all 5 wheels, here is the great thing, on the back side of all 5, they show an unmolested red, so i am thinking this one was Potomac gray w/Harvard red wheels and a black stripe, i am going to try to remove an outer layer of paint, and research the stripe color.
can my assumptions on no ACM numbers be correct? thx..low Edited by lowenuf - 30 Sep. 2006 at 10:35am |
|
|
45 #10012
45 #10033 ACM #47 45 #10163 ACM #188 57 CJ5 Dauntless V6, T-18 4-speed, D-44 rear/D-30 front, D-20 twin stick |
|
 |
|
|
GaryArf
Member
Sponsor Member Joined: 21 July 2005 Location: Baxter MN Status: Offline Points: 3905 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 Sep. 2006 at 12:43pm |
|
lowenuf,
I'm going to make some "assumptions" here;
#1 Willys made 74122 CJ2a's in '48. Ser#'s starting 148459 thru 222581.
Your is the 47310th one made in '48
#2 If you divide the total units by 12 (months) you get approx. 6177 units per month. Divide your # and you get yours made at approx 7.7 mo. (middle July).
#3 It's my understanding that when Willys started making their own bodys the "ACM" was not issued.
Bill N. Thinks that the takeover of the body manufacture was in Oct..????
Everyone follow my thinking? Does this sound correct?
|
|
|
CJ2A #10021 #34692 #58500
|
|
|
|
|
dclear
Member
Joined: 12 July 2006 Location: Milwaukee, wi Status: Offline Points: 927 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 Sep. 2006 at 4:19pm |
|
Wow! whatta bunch of detectives--Heads up! the CIA needs you [or someone who can add 2 & 2 and get plus or minus four.
[Aw cmon-!-I dont want to start any fights here--just a weird thought. I'll take it back if you wish.]
del clear
|
|
|
del clear
Together we can figure it out, after all, it's only a machine, if a man can build it, a man can fix it. {Author: bkruetz} |
|
|
|
|
Mike Gardner
Member
Joined: 20 July 2005 Location: Lewes Beach Del Status: Offline Points: 3550 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 Sep. 2006 at 9:21pm |
|
ok. so if the jeep was maybe made in the middle of july what is the axle stamp? my stamp is 09-12-45, i think?
|
|
|
1945 CJ-2A 11713
1995 YJ 4.0 |
|
|
|
|
lowenuf
Member
Sponsor Member x 2 Joined: 29 Aug. 2006 Location: Ohio Status: Offline Points: 9122 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 01 Oct. 2006 at 9:59am |
|
i shall investigate the axles later in the week, when i can get it back out into the driveway, and give it a good power washing/degreasing :)
|
|
|
45 #10012
45 #10033 ACM #47 45 #10163 ACM #188 57 CJ5 Dauntless V6, T-18 4-speed, D-44 rear/D-30 front, D-20 twin stick |
|
|
|
|
sean
Moderator Group 
Sponsor Member Joined: 20 July 2005 Location: North Idaho Status: Offline Points: 7388 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 01 Oct. 2006 at 12:23pm |
|
Guys, have to re-evaluate the numbers a bit.
No CJ2As were actually produced in '49. Last one rolled off the line in Oct. '48. The last 2182 produced were titled as '49s, but produced in Oct. '48. So for date of manufacture purposes, take the '48 production number (74123 units) and divide by 9, giving an average 8236 units per month through September. Then add the 2182 "49s" produded in Oct. Assuming monthly production was consistent, #195769 would be approx 3rd week of June '48. Sean
Edited by sean - 01 Oct. 2006 at 12:26pm |
|
|
|
|
Mike Gardner
Member
Joined: 20 July 2005 Location: Lewes Beach Del Status: Offline Points: 3550 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 02 Oct. 2006 at 5:43pm |
|
sort of like a 1996 jeep wrangler. yj's ended production in 1995 but sold through 1996. tj's began production in 1996 released in 1997
 .
|
|
|
1945 CJ-2A 11713
1995 YJ 4.0 |
|
|
|
|
Bob W
Member
Sponsor Member x 4 Joined: 08 Aug. 2005 Location: Monticello, NY Status: Offline Points: 1693 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 Dec. 2006 at 8:39pm |
That makes sense but where does this information come from?
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
AlaskaCJ2A
Member
Joined: 12 Aug. 2006 Location: Anchorage, AK Status: Offline Points: 1131 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 Dec. 2006 at 9:38pm |
|
If it's of any help in this numbers game, my titled '48 s/n 212561, body tag #201889, has a T90-A1 transmission stamp dated 6-29-48.
|
|
|
|
|
rocnroll
Member
Sponsor Member Joined: 20 July 2005 Location: Tuscumbia, AL Status: Offline Points: 13611 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 Dec. 2006 at 10:12pm |
|
Not to throw a blanket over this 'detective work' (there ARE some fine thought processes going on here) but I would have to say that at best it is pure speculation. How can you "assume" production numbers were consistant enough month to month to make this information valid?
I work in a production/plant environment and know how things vary on a day to day week to week basis and without actual production figures, I can't see that it's any more than speculation........Useful to compare to your buddy's jeep but not enough to say "o.K. this is the way it was."
Sorry, guess I need to just keep my mouth shut......not trying to hinder your efforts, just playing 'devils advocate'......(makes you work harder, ya know)  Edited by rocnroll - 12 Dec. 2006 at 10:16pm |
|
|
'47 CJ2A PU
'48 CJ2A Lefty "Common sense is not that common" |
|
|
|
|
AlaskaCJ2A
Member
Joined: 12 Aug. 2006 Location: Anchorage, AK Status: Offline Points: 1131 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 Dec. 2006 at 10:21pm |
|
No blanket thrown rocnroll, just another interesting twist to this numbers game - and you are right, at best we can only speculate as to month to month production numbers, but I believe all that was ever intended was to "narrow" the bandwidth so to speak, so as to establish a base for comparison.
|
|
|
|
|
GaryArf
Member
Sponsor Member Joined: 21 July 2005 Location: Baxter MN Status: Offline Points: 3905 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 Dec. 2006 at 10:34pm |
|
That's half the fun. without some type of documented history, we have nothing but a guess. I yearn for someone to give me THE RIGHT ANSWER.
That is the "Jeek squad" here. I hope to learn from others with consenses that gives more than just conjecture and assumptions. I want to be part of that...and still not be quite a "jeek". Still want to see how big a hill my little friend can take...and still fix it at the bottom without being "frankien Jeep"
|
|
|
CJ2A #10021 #34692 #58500
|
|
|
|
|
rocnroll
Member
Sponsor Member Joined: 20 July 2005 Location: Tuscumbia, AL Status: Offline Points: 13611 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 Dec. 2006 at 11:52pm |
|
Wouldn't it be neat if Willys Overland would be more interested in going through all those old drawers of blueprints and paperwork they were so apt to brag about having? ....... Seems like you would rather have a handful of 'production figures' or a handful of seemingly useless 'documentation' than spend all your energy touting the virtues of how great you can punch holes in an M.D. Juan tub and call it a... TA! DA! 'Repli-Tub'...........THEN they would actually gain some respect as being 'Jeep buffs' and not just somebody wanting to make a buck.......Oh, I'm sorry, didn't realize I was standing on this soapbox, better get down now.
Edited by rocnroll - 12 Dec. 2006 at 11:55pm |
|
|
'47 CJ2A PU
'48 CJ2A Lefty "Common sense is not that common" |
|
|
|
|
mccjdj
Member
Joined: 16 Sep. 2006 Location: IA Status: Offline Points: 54 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 13 Dec. 2006 at 12:14am |
|
Hey Low yours is real close to my 48 registered 49 2a W/ serial number 222564, body #194291, Eng J257023. kind of interesting the differences between the 3 numbers, sorry to input off subject. Edited by mccjdj - 13 Dec. 2006 at 12:14am |
|
|
|
|
Jonesy
Member
Joined: 28 July 2005 Location: North Ogden, UT Status: Offline Points: 613 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 13 Dec. 2006 at 3:27am |
|
Even closer sn 194422 body 203750 eng j213509 thought it was late 48 but haven't checked the ring gear date. CJAlaska
|
|
|
|
|
mccjdj
Member
Joined: 16 Sep. 2006 Location: IA Status: Offline Points: 54 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 13 Dec. 2006 at 9:02am |
|
Interesting.....
My 48/49 S# - 222514 B# - 194291 Eng # - J257023
Low's 48/49 S# - 195769 B# - 183386 Eng# - J209509
CJ'A's 48/49 S# - 194422 B# - 203750 Eng# - J213509
Somthing looks out of Order,
any other close ones to help sort out what/up.....
|
|
|
|
|
sean
Moderator Group
Sponsor Member Joined: 20 July 2005 Location: North Idaho Status: Offline Points: 7388 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 13 Dec. 2006 at 12:13pm |
|
Bob:
The yearly production numbers have been online for some time: CJ2A History As for the specific dates, a while back I got an email from someone who has an extensive collections of Willys memos, service bulletins & production orders. One of them states that as of Oct. 4, 1948, production vehicles were to be titled as 1949 models. This was quoted. I did not see the official Willys letter, so it may be considered hearsay. Sean |
|
|
|
|
sean
Moderator Group
Sponsor Member Joined: 20 July 2005 Location: North Idaho Status: Offline Points: 7388 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 13 Dec. 2006 at 1:05pm |
|
Geez Chad, poke a stick in the hornets nest!
ie. if the premise is wrong, then the conclusion is wrong, but the argument is still valid. Without weekly or daily production numbers, or other factual data, assumption is all we have for a first approximation. If and when more data surfaces, then adjustments can be made. Reconsidering #195769:
 Sean |
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
Page 12> |
| Tweet |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Topic Options
sean wrote: