Numbers Mismatch?

[RT402]

Hi All,
Hope I'm posting this to the correct forum.
I am Looking for some input on what I think/hope is a production line error.

I have a 69 Charger R/T 440/4sp and I'm just really beginning to dig into it's documentation. I've owned it for over 35 years and always believed the drive-line was original. The car had a scheduled build of 3/20/69 and the castings seem to be from mid to late in 1968.

The other day I discovered that the VIN and stamps on the drive-line are one digit off.
Example:
Last 8 of VIN is like : 9B328111
Eng&Trans both have stamps: 9B338111
Body stamps match the VIN

I think it would be highly unlikely that the number is only one digit off after an engine/Trans/Axle swap or other replacement.

My question to the group is: What is the likelihood that this is a factory error?
How often did this sort of thing happen?

The car is not super rare but I like things to be right or at least have the inaccuracies explained.

Thanks for any helpful input on this.

 

[R/T Boy 67]

I would think it is a factory mistake. I have seen things like that before. You could post pictures of the numbers, to see if they look like factory stampings to the members that have seen a lot of them.

 

[69L48Z27]

If you’ve owned the car for 35 years and it’s got all the same stuff then it’s plausible it’s an error. You also have a couple other things to look at. You have 10k day stamps on the oil pan rail and on the side of the trans. If the VIN were truly later your 10k day dates would be off. Casting dates also help.
Numbers on these cars come as a compilation. One set of number typically won’t define it alone. Your body stamps, broadcast sheet and fender tag help tell the story too.
Post some pics of the VIN, we can tell you if it looks legit too.

 

[33 IMP]

Clearly a stamping error. More common than you might think. These things were put together by humans who were not perfect (unlyke me).
If there were 50,000 assembly's on that line, the chance that the engine and trans you got being exactly 10,000 away from the body is.......?

 

[RT402]

I'll get the images together and post them in a bit. Thanks for the responses. The broadcast, VIN and Rad support all match and the Eng-Trans match each other.

 

[RT402]

I have full images but wasn't sure if that was totally safe. Couldn't think of any problems but, these days... Also, I don't understand the "10k" reference from 69L48Z27. Hope these help. I'll put a pic of the car that I now know is the wrong color up here too.

 

[WP29440SE]

interesting. I'd say the probably is 99.99% that is an error.

 

[4mulas]

I’ve seen lots of errors like that and also transposing numbers too. In the future if you ever sell the car either the buyer will believe you or not. I believe....

 

[64BEL]

They made mistakes, as the others have said. My '66 Satellite is a white car - without a doubt it's always been white. But the fender tag, Certicard, and even the window sticker show turquoise (LL1). The IBM punch card has it correctly listed as white (WW1), though. I don't know which of the 3 incorrect items were first (maybe the fender tag?), but clearly the other two were just incorrectly copied off the first.

 

[Runner 68]

Man, of all the dumb @ssed questions I have seen on this site, it's refreshing to see a really genuine damn good question asked. I'm proud to give you your first "like" ....for what it is worth.
I can't answer it but I know the fella's on here will.
Following and learning here.

 

[RT402]

Thanks for the input. Until I found the broadcast a few weeks ago I was pretty blah about the car. Then I found the number oddity and it was just JEEZ, really! My brother and I (both pretty much life long Mopar lovers) had come to a similar conclusion. This almost has to be a line error.

 

[Jerry Hall]

What about the casting date on the block. If it lines up with the build date of the car then I would say it is an error. At 10,000 off the casting date should be nowhere close.

 

[69L48Z27]

I have full images but wasn't sure if that was totally safe. Couldn't think of any problems but, these days... Also, I don't understand the "10k" reference from 69L48Z27. Hope these help. I'll put a pic of the car that I now know is the wrong color up here too.

View attachment 930549 View attachment 930550 View attachment 930551 View attachment 930552

There are stamped date codes that follow a 10 thousand day calendar.
https://maxwedge.com/articles/10k.php

 

[monaco66coupe]

I agree it was very likely an error. In 2003 I owned a 1970 Challenger slant six with the three speed manual on the floor. a totally original car. The very last digit on the VIN was one number off all the body numbers on the car. Radiator support, cowling stamp drip rail on trunk.
I eventually sold it to a guy in New Jersey, and guess what he did not want the title. I wonder why? I Insisted That I sign it over to him, made a copy of the Title, and handed it to the trucking company.
I should have kept that car. it was fun to drive and go to car shows

 

[1 Wild R/T]

Like Chrysler would make a misteak.....

 

[Big D A12]

You are good. I would not worry about it.

I probably have a dozen examples of human error within the stamping process. We are after all, "Only Human", and mistakes were made.

D

 

[68Moparmaniac]

moke break at lunch will do that...

 

[RT402]

Thanks for the

There are stamped date codes that follow a 10 thousand day calendar.
https://maxwedge.com/articles/10k.php

Thanks for clearing that up. I had never heard the term before.

 

[RT402]

moke break at lunch will do that...

In '69, you think?

 

[RT402]

So, an update, according to the Transmission stamping (PP8332747) It is a PP-New Process 833-A833 10k Date 2747 (Day 2747 is Monday, February 3, 1969)
Found info on: https://www.e-bodies.org/resources/...endar-date-code/1969-model-year-engine-trans/ (Not sure what this 1969 was doing on an E-Body Site)

Looking up the engine casting date stamp later. It's looking good, thanks for the help so far.