From the Reference Section:
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: 1968 PP Code Engine Questions

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Northwest
    Posts
    7
    My Feedback

    (0% Positive Feedback)
    Rep Power
    0

    1968 PP Code Engine Questions

    Hey All,

    Researching a Buick V8 that's was retrofitted into a '66 Jeep Super Wagoneer (would have had an AMC 327 4-barrel OE) in the very distant past. The engine Code is PP-322 and the engine number is 187111695. I know from your references here that PP is a '68 350 4-barrel. I don't know what the "322" suffix means. There was a faint hope that this was an experimental installation done by Kaiser Jeep (it's a VERY early production '66 Super) but that engine code kinda discounts that idea, as you would thing it would be an earlier engine, perhaps with experimental or KJ markings. Is there anything to be learned from that "325" or the 18711695? That 350 looks to be a pretty potent engine and it fits in the Wagoneer engine compartment very nicely.. as did the 2-barrel 350s that were installed for a couple of years starting in 1968. Many thanks and apologies for the Jeep subject matter.
    .
    Jim Allen

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    4,672
    My Feedback

    (0% Positive Feedback)
    Rep Power
    0
    nah, we like finding out about weird Buick history.

    1968 is the first year of Buick 350ci production. the most potent Buick 350 ever was the 'SP' code from 1970 which was rated at 315hp. compression and hp numbers fall off quickly after that.

    the '322' is probably the date code for the engine production date, which would be the 322nd day of the year or late November production.

    agreed that it would be pretty tough for Kaiser to be using a 1968 engine for development in a 1966 model production vehicle.
    The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation.
    Vladimir Lenin

    Government schooling is about "the perfect organization of the hive."
    H.H. Goddard, Human Efficiency (1920)

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Northwest
    Posts
    7
    My Feedback

    (0% Positive Feedback)
    Rep Power
    0
    Bob- Many thanks for the info.

    FYI, by the end of '68, KJ had already developed the Buick V8 installation for introduction into the SJ line (Wagoneers and Gladiators) in '68 as stocks of AMC 327 engines ran out. The Super Wagoneer in question is the 7th built (in '65 for the '66 MY) so it's doubtful KJ was even dreaming about Buick 350 V8s then... because at that point, those engines did not yet exist (except as prototype/test engines at Buick). The fanciful theory was that, perhaps, this #7 Super was retained at KJ as a test mule and the installation was done later as a test. My goal was to test that theory and given the evidence of the engine and production date, there is zero evidence to support it. Still, it apparently makes for a nice and STRONG running Super Wagoneer, though, regrettably, not an original one. KJ never opted to use the four barrel version of the 350 in any Jeep, though the AMC 327 used ONLY in the Super Wagoneer only was a four-barrel (the rest were two barrel).

    Anyway, glad you Buick guys were here to help answer the question!

    Fully Buick story: It would seem that you can't be a rural mail carrier in Putnam County, Ohio, unless you drive a Buick. An inordinate number of the rural carriers around here drive Buicks from the late '90s and early '00s.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Dbl Oak,TX
    Posts
    633
    My Feedback

    (0% Positive Feedback)
    Rep Power
    19
    That engine looks like it has had an interesting history. Buick would have stamped the last 8 characters of the car's VIN on a machined pad on the left front face of the block, near the head. The 187111695 does not relate to any Buick VIN though.

    Could not relate it to any Jeep VINs of the era by using old NADA Used Car Value Guides from the late '60s. Jeepsters with 8701 and 8705 model nos looked to be close. Nothing popped up for a model 8711.

    According to old Chilton repair manuals, Buick 350s used in Jeeps had a three-letter engine production code such as KPO for '68 2-bbl models. By that logic, one would expect this unit to have a KPP code.

    As expected the Buick part number for the 2-bbl intake manifold 1231379 shows up in the '72 Jeep parts price list. The 4-bbl manifold 1231380 does not appear.

    So maybe it was a regular replacement engine as sold by the dealerships. The '68 Buick Master Parts list printed 12/67 (near the time this one was built) shows complete 350 engines with carb in 2-bbl/4-bbl and manual/automatic transmission configurations. The 4-bbl auto part no was 1395914. While the 4-bbl manual was 1395913.

    Still these part nos do not resemble the number found on the block. A Buick service bulletin to dealers that year indicates replacement engines have their own serial numbers for tracking purposes. But the numbering system is not explained. Don't think a replacement engine of this era has turned up on this site yet.

    Does the transmission look like it came with the 350? By '68 Buick was stamping partial VINs on the transmissions. We can examine those numbers to see if anything else comes to light. Similarly, the carb and distributor part numbers, if original, may prove interesting.

    The idea of a 2-year old test mule running around with a new engine seems plausible. With few annual model changes around then, a new vehicle every year may not have been necessary. It would have saved money for the smaller manufacturers. It would also throw off snoopers trying to get the scoop on possible future models. Maybe it's been an Ohio car for its entire life since being built there?

    The very low serial number adds to the possibility of being a test vehicle. Up to 1965, Buick and some other GM divisions started off their regular vehicle production serial numbers at 1001. A few experimental cars that had serial numbers and have survived show numbers like 0993 etc.

    P.S.: Would you be the famous Jim Allen, author of numerous books and articles on Jeeps and 4-Wheeling?
    What has been, can be again. (Bob Wills, 1942)

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    4,672
    My Feedback

    (0% Positive Feedback)
    Rep Power
    0
    Fully Buick story: It would seem that you can't be a rural mail carrier in Putnam County, Ohio, unless you drive a Buick. An inordinate number of the rural carriers around here drive Buicks from the late '90s and early '00s.


    the Buick Series II v6. good fuel mileage, decent power and a zillion of them produced by GM. which means excellent parts availability.

    also, what part of Putnam County is *not* rural?
    The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation.
    Vladimir Lenin

    Government schooling is about "the perfect organization of the hive."
    H.H. Goddard, Human Efficiency (1920)

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Northwest
    Posts
    7
    My Feedback

    (0% Positive Feedback)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by TODD View Post
    That engine looks like it has had an interesting history. Buick would have stamped the last 8 characters of the car's VIN on a machined pad on the left front face of the block, near the head. The 187111695 does not relate to any Buick VIN though.

    Could not relate it to any Jeep VINs of the era by using old NADA Used Car Value Guides from the late '60s. Jeepsters with 8701 and 8705 model nos looked to be close. Nothing popped up for a model 8711.

    According to old Chilton repair manuals, Buick 350s used in Jeeps had a three-letter engine production code such as KPO for '68 2-bbl models. By that logic, one would expect this unit to have a KPP code.

    As expected the Buick part number for the 2-bbl intake manifold 1231379 shows up in the '72 Jeep parts price list. The 4-bbl manifold 1231380 does not appear.

    So maybe it was a regular replacement engine as sold by the dealerships. The '68 Buick Master Parts list printed 12/67 (near the time this one was built) shows complete 350 engines with carb in 2-bbl/4-bbl and manual/automatic transmission configurations. The 4-bbl auto part no was 1395914. While the 4-bbl manual was 1395913.

    Still these part nos do not resemble the number found on the block. A Buick service bulletin to dealers that year indicates replacement engines have their own serial numbers for tracking purposes. But the numbering system is not explained. Don't think a replacement engine of this era has turned up on this site yet.

    Does the transmission look like it came with the 350? By '68 Buick was stamping partial VINs on the transmissions. We can examine those numbers to see if anything else comes to light. Similarly, the carb and distributor part numbers, if original, may prove interesting.

    The idea of a 2-year old test mule running around with a new engine seems plausible. With few annual model changes around then, a new vehicle every year may not have been necessary. It would have saved money for the smaller manufacturers. It would also throw off snoopers trying to get the scoop on possible future models. Maybe it's been an Ohio car for its entire life since being built there?

    The very low serial number adds to the possibility of being a test vehicle. Up to 1965, Buick and some other GM divisions started off their regular vehicle production serial numbers at 1001. A few experimental cars that had serial numbers and have survived show numbers like 0993 etc.

    P.S.: Would you be the famous Jim Allen, author of numerous books and articles on Jeeps and 4-Wheeling?
    What you stated about the KJ vs Buick serial numbers is true, though the Jeep manual indicates only two letter, a "K" an one of these four "PRST" for the year, followed by the day of the year. I am most interested in your interpretation of the other number, 187111695. I don't have any Buick specific manuals and my generic Motors or Chiltons (from many eras) do not indicate anything. MY Jeep books form the era do not indicate anything regarding a number in that spot on the block. That number does not relate to anything Jeep either as far as I can tell, but I will look into it more since it seems to make no sense in the Buick world either.

    While there is a remote possibility #7 was kept as a test mule for two years, I do not give the possibility much weight given what I know about how they generally operated in that era. Plus there are absolutely no indications of it being a mule. Unless there are strong indications of something like that, I don't operate on any assumptions. The Jeep is not mine and resides in Texas. It's history is unclear. This is research for a story because I am the Jim Allen you mention. Thank God I am NOT famous!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Northwest
    Posts
    7
    My Feedback

    (0% Positive Feedback)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bob k. mando View Post
    Fully Buick story: It would seem that you can't be a rural mail carrier in Putnam County, Ohio, unless you drive a Buick. An inordinate number of the rural carriers around here drive Buicks from the late '90s and early '00s.


    the Buick Series II v6. good fuel mileage, decent power and a zillion of them produced by GM. which means excellent parts availability.

    also, what part of Putnam County is *not* rural?
    You must know this place!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Tukwila WA
    Posts
    575
    My Feedback

    (0% Positive Feedback)
    Rep Power
    0
    Any chance you can post a picture of the engine serial number? I suspect it might be 48Z111695, which would make sense from a Buick perspective. I've attached a picture of a similar engine number stamp from another 1968 Fremont car (48Z101820).

    48Z111695
    4 = Buick
    8 = 1968 model year
    Z = built at Fremont, Ca
    111695 = sequential number, range for Fremont was 100001 to 120752 for V8 cars


    I don't have a picture of a 1968 replacement engine, but I've attached one from a 1969 car, decodes as follows:

    B9E61802
    B = Buick
    9 = 1969 model year
    E = Engine plant
    61802 = sequential number


    I've also attached a couple pictures from 1970-1971 replacement engines as well.

    http://www.v8buick.com/index.php?thr...-block.167034/
    http://www.v8buick.com/index.php?thr...nd-etc.317301/
    Sean Smith
    BCA# 42746
    MBCC# 2122
    SAH# 4186
    Buickman Award 2015

    1957 Special 4-door Riviera (hardtop) model 43

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    4,672
    My Feedback

    (0% Positive Feedback)
    Rep Power
    0
    when Van Wert is your metropolitan area ... you're rural.
    The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation.
    Vladimir Lenin

    Government schooling is about "the perfect organization of the hive."
    H.H. Goddard, Human Efficiency (1920)

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Northwest
    Posts
    7
    My Feedback

    (0% Positive Feedback)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Buford26 View Post
    Any chance you can post a picture of the engine serial number? I suspect it might be 48Z111695, which would make sense from a Buick perspective. I've attached a picture of a similar engine number stamp from another 1968 Fremont car (48Z101820).

    48Z111695
    4 = Buick
    8 = 1968 model year
    Z = built at Fremont, Ca
    111695 = sequential number, range for Fremont was 100001 to 120752 for V8 cars


    I don't have a picture of a 1968 replacement engine, but I've attached one from a 1969 car, decodes as follows:

    B9E61802
    B = Buick
    9 = 1969 model year
    E = Engine plant
    61802 = sequential number


    I've also attached a couple pictures from 1970-1971 replacement engines as well.

    http://www.v8buick.com/index.php?thr...-block.167034/
    http://www.v8buick.com/index.php?thr...nd-etc.317301/
    Thank you Professor for that great Buick Engine Number 101 lesson!

    I'll see about an engine # pic and it's entirely possible the owner of the Jeep in question misread the numbers. I will ask him to have a second look, if not take a pic. This information is really adding to my understanding of these engines and this era when Jeep used them.

    Do you think this board may have some help on the Buick 225 V6 that KJC used? I have conflicting information on whether Jeep actually took the tooling and built the engine or just let GM/Buick continue to built the engines.

    IMG_7650.jpg

    Here is an overall shot I was given at the start of this research.

Similar Threads

  1. 215 casting code questions
    By NewSpin in forum Small Block 215, 300, 340 (and Rover V-8)
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-31-2014, 01:38 PM
  2. Engine Code
    By gtopite1 in forum Straight Eights!
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-03-2013, 08:44 PM
  3. 1968 GS400 engine?
    By walrusmangrove in forum Buick Identification and Decoding
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-10-2010, 06:43 AM
  4. 1968 Yellow COPO Paint Code
    By jvanho01 in forum Body and Paint Shop
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-06-2009, 07:29 PM
  5. engine code
    By bombcru in forum Buick Identification and Decoding
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-01-2002, 03:30 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Featured Items

TeamBuick.com Privacy Policy