old truck history?

[CUDA8U]

I have always loved 60-72 muscle cars and chevy trucks,I have a few fords I like ,65-70 mustang fast backs,68-71 mopars,chevy but I do own a 70 challenger and have studied mopars extensively and their history,a VIN or fender tag will break down every detail of the car in question,a simple search will tell ya how many cars were built with great detail of options and production numbers.I have seen many posts on here "including mine" asking about production numbers,color options, specifics yr to yr etc but the info doesn't seem to be as well documented for chevy/gmc trucks....am I wrong on this?

[dan42]

You’re probably right. They are trucks, and their lineage was never a priority since they were always considered utilitarian vehicles. Even when they were new, muscle cars were sought after and had big followings, but pickups not so much.

[stsalvage]

Mopar to me sense i did a lot with them as well But more for NASCAR.The 1965 dodge coronet 500 with the 318 or the 361 wedge or the 426 wedge.Good dam motors.

But the dodge crowd think there Prima Donna's.I've dealt with some real rich ASS holes when it comes to these car's.I'm so Glade i don't deal with the number matching crowd any longer you people Drain all the fun out of restoring a car.

The Chevy truck like the Dodge trucks are about the same way.I had a 1971 Dodge fire chief truck i bought for 300.00 had a 383 with a 727 auto trans Posi rear end But a small ass rear end had the real small bolt pattern.Harder then hell to find used wheels for.But found a set.

Back in 1993 you could not Buy krap for any dodge car or truck Cus mopar would not release the rights for any one to re pop parts.Complete nightmare.

Now the Chevy trucks has a good following But only for the 1967-72 Before 1996 the 1960--66 trucks No re pop parts offered.

the 1960-66 trucks where the forgotten trucks.Every one hated how they looked and Don't look at ford or dodge they looked worse.Ford and dodge had no body lines they where work trucks beat them to death and scrap them.

Now the 1960--63 forget about them truck during the 1970's--95.

One reason the curve Glass only one place made them was Berzille.

To buy the glass was 1000.00 plus shipping another 350.400.00.

You just bought the truck for 50.00 and now you have to sink 1500.00 in to it just for the Glass.

That's why you don't see many of the 1956--63 out there.The front glass would set you back 2 months worth of paychecks.

Re pop parts did not start showing up for are 1960--66 truck until 1996-or 1997

Most of the collectors that i dealt with did not want trucks suburbans Blazers Nothing.

Until 1997-8 I had a few guys showing interest in the 1968-72 trucks mostly short beds big blocks with AC and 4X4 then the blazers took off like mad.

That when the Bronco 2 started getting massive people looking for them an the 1967 Toyota land cruiser an then the scouts.Big money for them in 1995-99 died off a little then it came back as a passion for anything short wheel base 4X4

[northerngmc]

Have you tried the GM Heritage Center? https://www.gmheritagecenter.com/gm-...tion-kits.html

I was able to get a package for my 59 GMC that was built in Canada.

If I remember correctly the Canadian records are much better.

[jocko]

Originally Posted by northerngmc

If I remember correctly the Canadian records are much better.

You are indeed remembering correctly, true statement.

As for me, I'm perfectly happy with them documented the way they are. It's enough for a truck, and I'm about as SPID-picky as they come...

[special-K]

I disagree the trucks were only for utilitarian in this time. How do we explain a shrtbed Cheyenne Super big block with a/c, cruise, tilt wheel, bucket seats, trim, 2-tone paint, herringbone seats, and on? I agree emphasis on specific VIN was not a concern as with cars. But I feel that's because trucks had just reached the level of cars, or were in the process of getting them there, and they just hadn't focused on that yet. Plus, although there was special interest, it was with far fewer buyers compared to special cars, which had been developing since day one. Tons of info is there along with verifications. The only difference with trucks is the VIN was not included in engine codes and no trim tag.

[Bigdav160]

I disagree the trucks were only for utilitarian in this time. How do we explain a shrtbed Cheyenne Super big block with a/c, cruise, tilt wheel, bucket seats, trim, 2-tone paint, herringbone seats, and on?

The personal truck started with the Cameo. Then immediately Dodge came out with the Sweptside. I know some will argue that the Hudson Terraplane "Big Boy" was the first personal truck but none of these trucks sold very well. Ford Uni's same thing.

For most people, trucks were meant for work

[special-K]

And that perception had begun to change during the 67-72 era was my point, shown by the widespread availability of broadened offerings in comfort and convenience features. I'd say it all began with the Advance Designs after WWII with a deluxe cab and the Cameo was a progression, along with the El Camino, and all the progressions leading up to the New Breed.

[GASoline71]

What would have even been cooler is if engine options would have been along the same options as muscle cars. Imagine a 1970 CST10 with the same LS6 and M21 that the 1970 Chevelle SS had in it.

Gary

[Bigdav160]

I am sure GM designers were thinking about it but the bean counters wouldn't have it.

[special-K]

I agree. I think the bean counters came to realize by now there'd be more beans to count by marketing beyond work trucks. And since '72, even with the more comfortable trucks, it was still a gradual climb up to the '88s when the ext cab shortbed came out. Then it exploded and totally blew up in '92 with the introduction of the new Suburban and four door Blazer/Jimmy/Tahoe/Yukon. That is when they took over mini-vans as family vehicle across the board, even urban/suburban types. The social stigmas on those who drove trucks melted away and here we are.

[factorystock]

Originally Posted by CUDA8U

the info doesn't seem to be as well documented for chevy/gmc trucks....am I wrong on this?

You're right, and what makes matters worse, GM didn't do a very good job documenting important vehicle info to the vehicle when assembled. The most important info on a vehicle was the build sheet ( piece of paper stuck to back of seat springs), needless to say, most crumble into 100 pieces and disappear. In addition, you had a protecto plate ( piece of metal stamped with some data) glued on to back page of warranty booklet, again, needless to say, most booklets disappear out of the glove box. 1966, first SPIDs ( service parts indentification decal) glued to glove box door, not found on '66 GMC, rare on '67 GMC's). Some SPIDS peel off and disappear. SPIDS are basically option lists, not a vehicle equipment lists. You have to assume what you have by what you do not have optionally on the SPID. These decals can be replaced with reproduction decals and rewritten by some clever folks.

[TKCR]

A lot of the info can be found here:
https://www.gmheritagecenter.com/gm-...tion-kits.html
And as far as the build sheet, that wasn't important info that just gets stuck in the seat springs. Build sheets were only meant for the factory line workers. It was more of a cheat sheet, so to speak. It tells the line worker what parts and/or color of the parts that go into the vehicle. Trust me, I work in an auto factory and we use build sheets, that's all they are. All the important info is kept by the manufacturer and filed. I got all the info for my truck from the website above.

[factorystock]

Originally Posted by TKCR

Trust me, I work in an auto factory and we use build sheets, that's all they are. All the important info is kept by the manufacturer and filed. I got all the info for my truck from the website above.

What year truck do you have? Please inlighten me, what can I learn from the heritage center about a '65 and a '70 Chevy pickup? Build records seem to be available for Cadillac only? Don't have a Cadillac. How do I get a build record for my trucks? I am on the wrong page of the heritage site? Vehicle invoice are available for '77 newer Chevy and '76 newer GMC. Doesn't help me, don't have '76 or '77 and newer. Sales literature and Data books tell me specs and options, not a specific paper trail document on how my '65 and '70 were sold. As far as I know, a build sheet is the only item that gives me the whole story on my trucks.

[TKCR]

Sorry, I didn't realize that the records at the Heritage Center only went back so far. I never had a reason to look back that far, as you guessed, my truck is an 86. My Dad always had old Vettes, so I just assumed that records were kept for all the vehicles that old. Again my apologies.
Maybe this is something that Keith Seymore would be able to offer up knowledge on if there is a place to get this type of info.

[special-K]

I don't think you need to apologize for trying to shed light on this thread. I think the reaction was a bit uncalled for. Some people are more about the technical aspects of what is what with these trucks than the people who drive them. And some, not saying here, about the trucks more than the people and/or just hopping in the sumbugger and driving it! I'm into rubber on the road and exhaust out the pipes. Everything else falls in line behind. And people are part of that.

[Bigdav160]

How do I get a build record for my trucks?

You can't. It's that simple.
IIRC, in Canada they might have different rules.

But even for cars, very little records were kept. The "build sheets" were suppose to be discarded at the factory but it was common for the workmen to hide them in the vehicle.

[TKCR]

Found that a few things have been added:
https://www.gmheritagecenter.com/gm-...ml#ChevyTrucks
https://www.gmheritagecenter.com/gm-...tion-kits.html

[Keith Seymore]

You guys are pretty close, but there are a few nuances I'd like to address:

a) Specific build records by VIN are available for US built trucks starting in '76/'77. Unless you can find a build sheet for your '67-'72 pickup you are out of luck. Canadian records are better: if you have a vehicle that was built in Canada, or built in the US for Canadian consumption then all of the records are available.

b) The records were never kept as Easter eggs for future historians. They had some contemporaneous use; for example - all of the build records for Pontiac models were kept as financial records (ie, vehicle invoices and billing history). They were accidentally discovered by an enthusiast researching his own vehicle and that activity birthed this aspect of the hobby.

c) Similarly - build sheets were not "hidden" in various parts of the vehicle. They were intended to be thrown away at the end of the line just like extra fasteners, coffee cups and other misc papers. The fact is that it was just easier to leave them in place and build the vehicle up around them, which is why you find them in the seat springs, under the carpet (with tar sprayed over half of them, or a screw shot through the middle) or stuffed in obscure corners of body panels. By the way - in addition to defining the option content that needed to be added they also helped keep the build in sequence. As a result, any area where components were built up remotely and then conveyed to the main line in sequence are fair game for build sheets and build sequence number notations: front and rear axle, engines, transmissions, seats, front end sheetmetal, etc.

d) The issue with Chevrolet was that it is so big and far reaching that the records were not gathered in one place. In the aforementioned Pontiac example - all the records were kept in the same room in a (somewhat) abandoned floor of the headquarters building. Once they were re-discovered in this context they were protected and shuttled to various off site locations by invested individuals to keep them safe and (mostly) intact.

K

[factorystock]

Originally Posted by factorystock

the build sheet ( piece of paper stuck to back of seat springs), needless to say, most crumble into 100 pieces and disappear.

Crumbled into 100 pieces, but kept in a zip lock bag. Actually pieced it mostly together and figured out all the factory options, schedule build date and dealer that sold the truck. Yes, some garaged kept lower mileage trucks have very nice intact build sheets and some even have original sales invoices from dealer, but they are the exception to the rule. Hypothetical, a completely stripped out 67-72 Chevy truck is sitting in a wrecking yard, no engine, motor mounts, steering column, no glove box door, no transmission hump cover and no rear axle. What do you know about from the vin? Where it was built, production number, wheelbase and model ( 1/2 3/4 step fleet chassis cab etc). We know if its a 6 or 8 by CE or CS, but is the 6 a 250 or 292? Is the V8 a 307, 350, 396-402? There are clues if it was a manual or automatic, but what manual? 3 spd, heavy duty 3 speed, 3 spd OD ( some years) 4 speed , 4 speed CR? What auto was installed, powerglide, T 350 T 400? Trim level on a stripped out vehicle? Hmmm, have to think about that one. A period Ford truck has a data warranty plate riveted to door with all info GM puts on their trucks, plus codes for engine, transmission, trim level, rear axle type and ratio installed in vehicle as a permanent record ( as long as metal plate stays riveted to door).Yeah, Chevy could have done a better job!

[Keith Seymore]

...

Originally Posted by factorystock

Yeah, Chevy could have done a better job!

Originally Posted by Keith Seymore

b) The records were never kept as Easter eggs for future historians. They had some contemporaneous use...etc

[silvertonguedevil]

This was in the glovebox of the '72 I just bought.

[KQQL IT]

Not to mention all of the minor and major modifications in the last 50 years.
When about every piece of the generation of the 67-72 will interchange alot is going to get changed around over time

[Canuckvetter]

If you are fortunate the previous owners kept all the documents with the truck. As for paint daubs, chaulk marks, and paint finishes I’m sure it varied from plant to plant and from person to person. George Zapora has been very helpful to the hobby on the Canadian side. I have had chevys documented by him and his team at GM vintage vehicle services for the last 15 yrs. Great guy to deal with.
This only works with Oshawa built vehicles or vehicles imported to Canada when new I believe.
Not to say they don’t exist but personally have yet to see an Oshawa build sheet for these trucks.
http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/a...1&d=1538528177
http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/a...1&d=1538528177

[68 TT]

Originally Posted by special-K

I disagree the trucks were only for utilitarian in this time. How do we explain a shrtbed Cheyenne Super big block with a/c, cruise, tilt wheel, bucket seats, trim, 2-tone paint, herringbone seats, and on? I agree emphasis on specific VIN was not a concern as with cars. But I feel that's because trucks had just reached the level of cars, or were in the process of getting them there, and they just hadn't focused on that yet. Plus, although there was special interest, it was with far fewer buyers compared to special cars, which had been developing since day one. Tons of info is there along with verifications. The only difference with trucks is the VIN was not included in engine codes and no trim tag.

Even the highly sought after cars were documented very poorly by GM in the US during the 60's. They don't even know how many first gen Camaro's were equipped with both the SS and RS option just the number of SS optioned cars sold and the number of RS options that were sold over the entire model line so they could be on base 6-cylinder cars or base V-8 cars or SS cars. They just don't know. The first gen Camaro doesn't even have a SPID label but there are some clues on some model years on some production line built cars cowl panel tags but not all.

I wish GM was like Chrysler with their records for the same time period. They can tell you how many cars came with a specific set of options, exterior color, interior color and configuration, engine, trans and differential for each model line and production year.