[dld]

just to show evidence the car lines shared components. a move to one GM

[dld]

i'm thinkin its the length. 64 65 may have upper mounts different location. there have been post af 442 having different frame mounting holes to adjust pinion angle ??

['ol Pinion head]

The "normal" sized bushings are very close to 1 7/8" in diam (I don't have my dial caliper). The "small" '64 diam upper control arm bushings are closer to 1 1/2" in diam, that's from memory

Believe the upper arms for the '64's have a little less clearance in them around where they slide over the bushing. Its been a while since I've had any & am having a hard time remembering why I've sold a few pair of upper arms out of '65's & 66's to '64 owners.

From what I can remember, there are 3 different '64-67 A-body upper arms.
-the '64's
-the unboxed, late '64-67's
-the partially boxed '65?-66 442 versions, not sure if 4 spd only or auto application, have a pair of the '66 442 boxed uppers & they were out of a 4 spd car. The later style upper armss in my HO GT-37, have near identical boxing, but i determined after much comparing, the original owner did that himself.

['ol Pinion head]

Originally Posted by dld

i'm thinkin its the length. 64 65 may have upper mounts different location. there have been post af 442 having different frame mounting holes to adjust pinion angle ??

An old friend into Chevelles told me those were also chevelle piece, but not sure on that. He did tune me into how the lower boxed arms were only partially boxed on the '64 & '65 442 lower arms. Due to only boxing them partially, these arms were prone to cracking on the sides where the reinforcement stopped & were replaced by the fully boxed lower arms that were used through '72.

['ol Pinion head]

Originally Posted by dld

just to show evidence the car lines shared components. a move to one GM

B series Olds used the Pontiac (big Pontiac '65-70) P series rearend internals for a few years, believe '65, 66, part of '67. Olds also built a JetStar which had an 8.2 Pontiac carrier & gears in it from '65-66. years ago chased low ratio gears & have pulled several sets from these.

The loose axle 385259 is the narrow 28 spline 8.2 Buick axle with 3 access holes in the flange area

[remy30006]

okay no v ribs on the 369 but the casting number on the 722 in the picture where is that located cant tell don't see the ribs.

This all is very helpful cant afford to waist money buying the wrong thing.

Thank you all

[John V.]

The 9773722 p/n and the date code tag are on the BOTTOM of the Housing. Looking at dld's pic of the p/n you are seeing the pinion yoke "nose" to the left.

The ribs are only on the TOP half of the Housing, above the triangular "flanges" that divide the top half of the housing from the bottom half. You can just make out these triangular "flanges" in the pic of the p/n, where they angle in to terminate by the "nose".

OPH, that usage chart is specific for the '65 F-85.

The series of Pontiac p/ns that are called Axle Sub Assy on the Chart, Pontiac calls Carrier & Tubes Assembly in the MPC, same p/ns for same gear sets. It isn't clear to me what these parts included, but they definitely included the Diff Carrier and the gear set. Since they refer to the Tubes, I believe this sub-assembly must have also included the Housing & Tubes Assembly. Possibly did not include the axles or the brakes (pretty obvious since same sub assy was used with std brake lining and metallic brake lining (J56). And since they were supplied as sub-assemblies, they did not get stamped with the same axle ratio codes as the assembled '65 Tempest rears were.

So now I am back to believing Olds must have used the 9779822 Housing in '65 on at least some F-85s since only some gear ratios listed a Buick alternate (2.78 & 3.08 open diffs). But curiously, no Pontiac alternate for the locking differential option at all.

And even if they used some 9779822 Housings in '65, doesn't mean they used any Pontiac Housing in '64.

But still an interesting bit of info.

[remy30006]

would the 9773369 number be in the same place as the 722?

[dld]

JV.. as to the 822 housing. 442 were only built in lansing. as i understand.

Olds had a short life in baltimore 1/2 year in 64. most likely weak demand.currently could not have been quietly issues.
don't think 442 was ever built there even 1/2 year.

[Dick Boneske]

My KC '64 GTO was built in June. It has the 9779822 housing but it's dated k 21 4. That means the original owner broke the rearend and replaced it with whatever he could find---or the dealer installed the later complete assy. as a warranty item.

PHS says it was built with a 3.23 rearend.

It's a 3.23 open.

[John V.]

Originally Posted by remy30006

would the 9773369 number be in the same place as the 722?

No, see earlier post where I tried to describe the location. It is debossed (almost like it was stamped) not raised. The digits are much smaller. For years I didn't think it had a p/n on it until somebody here told me about it. With a grease caked Housiing, you would likely overlook it unless you knew it was there.

Imagine the nose pointing straight up in the air. If you looked down on it, a few inches behind the nose, the casting forms kinda a ring that you are staring straight down on. The 9773369 will be on the face of that ring at about the 8 o'clock position (with the top of the Housing being 12 o'clock), this would be below the triangular "flange" on the bottom half RH side of the Housing with the Housing in the "normal" position. The date tag will be above the "flange, so on the top half of the Housing at about the 10 o'clock position on the face of the ring.

Dick, I have told the story of how the original Safe-T-Track rear in my first '64 GTO convert was "lost". Around 1975, a bearing started to howl, I believe it was an axle bearing. Being a college student living on a shoestring, rather than get it fixed, I went to a local j'yard, bought a salvage rear supposedly out of a '64 Tempest and swapped it in. I then dumped the original rear on their door step (didn't know what else to do with it). What an idiot I was. That GTO is probably long gone (another sad story), but if anybody had found it and wanted to restore it, they might wonder about how the rear in it was not "correct" for the car even if the Housing was a "correct" '64 Housing (assuming that it really was, for all I know the j'yard sold me a '65 Tempest rear instead), but likely 2.56 Tempest gears and open diff for sure instead of the likely 3.23 and definitely locking rear it was built with.

Don, don't know much about the early 4-4-2. But in '65, they built them in Lansing and Fremont.

http://www.ultra-high-compression.com/page17.html

Fremont definitely built the Olds A body in '64. The '64 4-4-2 was a very late intro so if Balt stopped building the Olds A body in the 2nd half of the '64 year, chances are the 4-4-2 was not even in production when Balt stopped F-85 production.

The 4-4-2 Wikipedia page says there is documentation to show Fremont did build some 4-4-2s in '64.

These forum posts seem to confirm that:

http://www.oldsmobileforums.com/foru...p/t-13101.html

http://classicoldsmobile.com/forums/...on-plants.html

But I still think regardless of what Olds or Buick were doing, the more interesting question for us is the '64 usage of the 9773369, 9773722, and 9779822. When were each of these used, were there specific application usages, etc.

[dld]

yes your correct. not built in kas or bal

[John V.]

Okay, I have been studying the physical differences such as OPH pointed to and also has been discussed in places on the web between what is referred to as the Buick Housing and the Pontiac Housing.

What I'm finding calls some of the descriptions and conclusions into question.

Unless and until others have evidence to the contrary, the most common original Housing typically found under '64 Tempests (including GTO) has been the 9773369.

OPH, I hope you and everybody else interested in this will take the time to review what I present to follow.

9773369 does NOT have the so-called converging ribs on the side of the Housing, just a singular rib at the center of the Housing, one on each side, splitting the Housing in two halves (top & bottom halves).

It includes a rather thick gusset rib (1.5" wide) that starts at the top of the yoke (12 o'clock) and then bends off a tad to the LH (driver side) where it terminates at the pumpkin, slightly left of center. When viewed from the side, it looks kinda like a ski jump originating at the pumpkin and terminating at the top of the yoke, cast sorta concave, not a straight line. It is on top of this gusset rib just behind the yoke where the identifying paint splotch can be found (if any remnant of it remains).

It has the small ear holes. In addition, what I will call the ear post towers are cast thin, look very flimsy, relatively fragile.

9773722 also does not have converging ribs on the side of the Housing. It has the same singular triangular ribs at the center of the Housing splitting it in half.

Instead of the ski jump looking 1.5" thick gusset rib, it has a V shaped rib on the TOP of the Housing and an additional rib that parallels the left (driver side) leg of the V (refer to dld's pic showing these top ribs). It looks like the combination of the left leg of the V and the rib parallel to it replace the single gusset rib of the 9773369. However, it does not originate at the 12 o'clock position at the yoke end, rather it is slightly offset to the left at the yoke end, maybe 1 o'clock. Rather than being "ski jump" shape in cross section like the gusset rib, the space between the two legs is more or less filled with cast iron in a straight line, however the parallel rib leaves a distinct ridge, giving the appearance of a separate rib.

It has the same small ear holes for the smaller dia. '64 bushing but the post towers are much more substantial than on 9773369.

9779822 does not have the converging ribs on the side of the Housing. It has the same triangular ribs at the center of the Housing splitting it in half.

It appears to be virtually identical to 9773722 except that the left leg of the rib & the parallel rib with the distinct ridge is eliminated. The right side leg of the V appears to be unchanged, but the left side leg of the V is now a single 1.25" wide leg, the ridges seen on this leg on 9773722 are gone, the top of the rib leg is smooth across, forming a solid 1.25" wide gusset. But it remains on top of the Housing, no additional rib on the side of the Housing.

It has the large ear holes for the larger dia. '65 bushing. The post towers appear to be identical to 9773722.


I have viewed pix of a later Pontiac 10 bolt Housing and the converging ribs on the SIDE of the Housing are distinct. The upper side converging rib does NOT appear on any of the '64/'65 Pontiac p/n Housings I've just described. The top ribs of the later Pontiac Housing also differ from the '64 & '65 Pontiac Housings.

Since the '65 F-85 axle chart indicates a Buick alternate, I suspect Buick did produce their own cast Housing with a Buick p/n to ID it (maybe a different one for '64 as well). Have had no luck finding a p/n for any Buick Housing nor what it might look like compared to the '64/'65 Pontiac p/n Housings.

I missed a couple things looking at the chart excerpt that dld posted. Looking at the complete chart, it says the Axle Sub Assemblies supplied by Buick or Pontiac were ONLY purchased by the Lansing Plant where the complete rear axle was built up by Olds for installation at that Plant. But for the B-O-P Plants, complete Olds rear axles were supplied by the vendor (Pontiac or Buick) direct to the Plant (such as Fremont) for installation in the F-85. In other words, the axle sub assemblies were as indicated by the Chart but the B-O-P Plants did not complete the assembly, they arrived complete.

Also, I posted that it was curious that Olds didn't list the locking differential rear axle p/ns from Pontiac. I see I was mistaken. Olds used both open and locking units from Pontiac. The ones where only a Buick choice was listed, open & locking, were for the various Vista Cruiser station wagon models, not sure why, looks like because Pontiac did not offer an equivalent model. Buick probably did.

The 9773369 remains the most commonly found Pontiac Housing for the '64 Tempests. I still would like to know more about where/when Pontiac might have used 9773722 in a '64 Tempest and whether it can be confirmed that Pontiac used the 9779822 in late built '64 Tempests.

[johnta1]

Not sure yet why the '65 control arm p/n is different from '64 though, so still wondering.

This excerpt isn't for the 'top' control arm, but for the lower arm.
Not sure if any help/relevancy.

[John V.]

John, 9777332 was for the '65 big Pontiacs only. The '65 Tempest lower control arm was not affected, not revised.

[johnta1]

Whoops, you are probably right.

[remy30006]

Thank you again everybody this very hard to figure out, but I think I can go and make a good purchase or not. Will keep you posted. Might be a week or so

[remy30006]

Went out to the salvage yard this week. I was able to get the build date of the car which was 06e off the body code and was able to see the rear of the pumpkin, but due to flat tires and sinking in the mud could not see the front or part numbers. It looked like the small ears on top and it had a stepped drive shaft (original?) so it appeared to be original 64. They are going to pull it this week for further inspection. Found a place that has 2 more cars though so should be able to find one. Will keep posted and thank you again.

[remy30006]

I actually ended up acquired two rear housings to make one good one. Both turned out to be 9773369. The first was in a lemans with a 06E build date and the other was a 02A build date in a GTO. Does anybody know what the stampings on the tube would be for a posi and non?

Thank you everybody for the help!

[The Champ]

Originally Posted by remy30006

I actually ended up acquired two rear housings to make one good one. Both turned out to be 9773369. The first was in a lemans with a 06E build date and the other was a 02A build date in a GTO. Does anybody know what the stampings on the tube would be for a posi and non?

Thank you everybody for the help!

From my earlier post:

REAR AXLE CODES:
Pontiac used three forms of identification on the 1964 rear axles. The first is a letter stamped on the back passenger side of the axle tube. The second is a sticker containing a two-letter code. The third is a color code painted on the top of the differential and the ends of the axles.

Standard rear end:

D,2D,yellow = 3.08, E,2E,white = 3.36, F,2F,blue = 3.55, K,2K,brown = 3.23, L,2L,brown = 3.23, M,2M,white = 3.36, N,2N,blue = 3.55

Safe-T-Track rear end:

D,3D,green/yellow = 3.08, E,3E,green/white = 3.36, F,3F,green/blue = 3.55, H,3H,green = 3.90, K,3K,green/brown = 3.23, L,3L,green/brown = 3.23, M,3M,green/white = 3.36, N,3N,green/blue = 3.55, P,3P,green = 3.90