Hopefully bringing closure to questions re engine crossbar & rear engine cover tin

[mshaver51]

As previously posted, I was/am having trouble getting the correct combination of rear engine cover/tin, chain box covers, and engine crossbar "console." I was not aware of the number of possible configurations and how the console, chain box covers and rear engine cover interacted with one another. Hopefully, this thread will move us closer to a full answer. I am especially interested in hearing from Jon B and Frank Beck, who offered great information in the original post.

First, it appears that there are at least 3 versions of the "console" which fastens the engine to the crossbar, as was discovered in the original post. The earliest version of the console (the actual dates are not clear to me) is narrow at the point where the engine tin fits (~6 1/4"). The later version of the console (alleged to be ~MY67) is ~7 1/4" where the tin fits. According to sources, there is a later version (suggested to be ~SC) which is wider, still. Since the rear engine cover/tin has to fit around the console, the width of the console it pretty important.

The photos below show three versions of the rear engine cover (I am told that there are more versions of the engine cover, if that matters): a very early version with an indentation for the pierburg fuel pump on the driver side; a '68 version to accommodate the smog pump pulley on the driver side; and a later version (of unknown provenance). When placed side by side, it is easy to see that the very early (pierburg) rear engine cover has a substantially narrower opening for the engine console (~6 1/4"), while the '68 and later engine covers have wider (~7 1/4") openings. Clearly, the size of the center opening of the engine cover has a direct relationship to the correct rear engine cover.

Unless there is another configuration of a SWB engine cover with a wider opening to accept a wider console, the (pierburg) engine cover will only fit around the narrower (very early) console. Since my engine has the wider, MY'67 console, only the two engine covers with the wider opening can fit around the console. Can anyone provide photos of a SWB rear engine cover with a wider console opening? Does such a beast exist?

What is less obvious is the cut-outs along the leading edge of the rear engine cover. Those cut-outs are obviously configured to fit over the engine castings at the point of interface, including chain box covers. If you look carefully, you will see a semi-circular cut-out on the passenger side of the early/pierburg engine cover. (A similar cut-out was made (by me) in the later cover, in an attempt to achieve a quick fix for the fitment problem.) You can see that the semi-circular cut-out does not exist in the '68 version of the engine cover, and therefore will not fit correctly to the rear of my engine.

As the next photo shows, the passenger side chain cover has a bump in the casting, and my engine cover needs to accommodate that bump in order to fit correctly.

What is not clear to me is whether the chain box cover in the photo is correct for a SWB car? I fully intended that I was not going to use the '68 smog equipment, but I did not consider the details related to fitting the engine cover, especially at the level of detail of potentially different chain cover castings. I am 100% certain that the engine is fully functional and prepared to perform. But at this stage of the project, we are into tertiary-level issues that might be cosmetic only.

There are two new questions for this post. First, do any of you (especially Frank Beck and Jon B) have photos of other versions of rear engine covers that might accommodate the chain cover AND the wider console?

Second, do any of you have additional information related to the chain box covers? I'm interested in provenance for chain box covers related to the SWB engines? Photos showing changes in chain box covers for SWB engines would be most welcomed. Also, photos showing the differences between normal, 'S' and 'T' engine chain box covers would be appreciated.

Thanks, as always for educating me/us.

[Frank Beck]

Lol
You're WAY over-complicating this.

You have a 65-66 pan.

You need a 67 (one year only) pan.


That's it.

[Jon B]

You need a 67 (one year only) pan.

Yes, if your LH chainbox (not shown) has the Pierburg dip, and your console (not shown) is the post-66 version, then you need a 67-only rear pan/tray/cover.

Mike, if your engine is the original, early 68 US version to the car with an aluminum crankcase, it was equipped with magnesium chainboxes, the LH box configured for the US-only EECS (Exhaust Emission Control System).
The RH chainbox in your photo is an aluminum 67 version, and not correct for a 68 engine. If the LH chainbox (not shown) has a cover with the Pierburg dip, it's also not correct for a 68 engine, US or ROW.

Jon B.
Vista, CA

[mshaver51]

Frank is right. Jon B is right, too. I am gradually becoming educated.

I have been doing far more research than I intended, but I am now beginning to understand. PET shows 4 different part #s for the rear engine cover, but only one drawing, so I can't compare them to see differences. As I said in the original thread, I had no idea how many different versions of the engine cover there were, and it seemed that the console might be wrong. I am sure that a scholar of Frank's experience finds this tedious, but I had no idea of the complications, so it was necessary to learn the differences.

Jon B. is also right. I do not have the original engine, and I deliberately chose to have an engine built with '67 attachments, rather than the smog equipment. The photo below shows the rear of the engine, and (I think) it shows '67 chain covers.

I am also adding the only photo I could find that seems to have the proper-width opening for the console AND the semi-circular cut-out for the passenger chain cover.

So, Frank and Jon B. ... Is that the one I need?

[Frank Beck]

Yahtzee!


..

[Jon B]

Yes Mike, that's the rear cover/pan/tray that you need for your engine, which has 67 chainboxes.
It has the Pierburg dip, and the center opening is deeper for the post-66 console. Notice that the screw holes on either side of the opening are not parallel, as they are on the earlier cover/pan/tray.

Does your console still have the horizontal sheetmetal pieces attached to it? I don't see those pieces in your photos...



Jon B.
Vista, CA

[mshaver51]

Despite all of the time I have spent in research, reviewing parts manuals, PET, Registry Q&A, and other resources, I am always surprised about how minute some of the details become. What is doubly surprising for me is that I often find that even the top dollar restoration shops get many of those details wrong, despite the advertising.

Jon B., thanks again, for helping me through this little piece of educational minutia.

The answer to your question about the sheet metal fixtures on the sides of the console is "no." it turns out that my console does NOT have the sheet metal pieces mounted to the sides, as shown in your photo.

The console in your photo is clearly the larger of the SWB versions, and it is also interesting that the console in your photo has different sheet metal pieces than the ones I have seen. Your photo shows sheet metal that is much larger, plus I have never seen console sheet metal that has a weld nut.

It seems that most consoles offered for sale are missing one or more pieces of the sheet metal fixtures, and the consoles that have any sheet metal fixtures left intact have smaller sheet metal pieces where the engine tin 'rests,' rather than 'fastens.'

So, I learn yet more minutia, and marvel at the fact that this level of detail always manifests itself toward the end of a restoration project.

I might have found a 'correct' rear engine cover for my engine configuration, but I am not yet sure. Regardless, in the words of Jerry Garcia, "What a long, strange trip it's been" ... and it ain't over, yet.

[Jon B]

The console in your photo is clearly the larger of the SWB versions, and it is also interesting that the console in your photo has different sheet metal pieces than the ones I have seen.
Your photo shows sheet metal that is much larger, plus I have never seen console sheet metal that has a weld nut.

It seems that most consoles offered for sale are missing one or more pieces of the sheet metal fixtures, and the consoles that have any sheet metal fixtures left intact have smaller sheet metal pieces where the engine tin 'rests,' rather than 'fastens.'

Mike, the sheetmetal pieces on the console I pictured are original, and are the standard sizes I've seen post-66. There should be nuts on both sides, but the LH nut on this example is missing.
If someone has a different version, I'd be interested to see it. The original pieces had tabs that were spot-welded in place, not MIG or TIG welded as repairs usually are.

Yes, many consoles are now missing these pieces.

Jon B.
Vista, CA

[mshaver51]

this has been an intense learning exercise for me, but i genuinely respect and appreciate the exchange of intellectual capital that is embedded in the Early S Registry. this problem morphed several times, but now i understand how easy it was to make the mistakes i made.