UPDATED 6/9/22: Ever think one thing for the longest time and then realize it was BS?

[69hurstolds]

It happened today. And verified.

For the longest time, I've always thought that regardless of whether or not your G-body Olds Hurst/Olds had an aluminum rear bumper support, I was under the impression that the fronts were steel. I got this impression because of a single bracket I had to replace one time because it cracked. I guess I didn't have to, but I decided to do it anyway. When I finally got the original steel rivets out of the bumper support, which was a pita as those were some tough sumbeeches, I had to clean the rust dust off the bumper support. It appeared to me at the time the rust was from the bumper support, thus it must be steel. Made sense since it had to support the air dam and all, and using steel rivets on aluminum would be dumb, galvanic corrosion-wise...

So for whatever reason, it got stuck in my head the front supports were steel. My rear was aluminum. And some H/O owners I had talked to said they had steel front supports. Big scheme of things, so what? But it's always some detail that's good to know if you're searching for aluminum junk for your car.

But after having a discussion with 84 W40 about his SPID with VD6 (aluminum front bumper support RPO) and VD7 (aluminum rear bumper support) on it, I got to thinking I better double check mine. TBH, I haven't given those RPOs much thought at all. Hey, my SPIDs for the 84 H/O and the 85 442 both have VD6 and 7 on them. The 87 442 doesn't. I did a magnet verification today and it didn't stick on the 84 or 85, but did the the 87 supports. I can't believe I never did that.

I went back and looked at the plethora of SPID pics I have for 84 H/Os and was amazed to find several with VD6 and VD7, but a few with VD7 only. Thus it can only be surmised they came with both aluminum bumper supports and steel bumper supports. Why? What was the criteria for which car got what? Who friggin' knows.

Sometimes, what you think you knew, isn't what you should have known. Had I done proper and complete research on this all those years ago, I wouldn't be believing my own old wives' tale. But, now I know what I thought I knew was pure BS.

Check for VD6 and 7s on your SPIDs, folks.

 

[84 W40]

A/gbody from 78-83 dont have a SPID in the trunk to check the codes but you can still check your front and rear bumper brace with a magnet.
Curious to know how many gbodys owners have the aluminum bumper brace and dont know about it.

 

[565bbchevy]

Before I joined here I thought half vinyl tops were installed over finished body and paint work since that is how my Monte was when I removed it.
And then the sad discovery of seeing really nice cars on here that had a vinyl and they removed it and the roof was basically gone underneath on an otherwise rust free car.

 

[84 W40]

Before I joined here I thought half vinyl tops were installed over finished body and paint work since that is how my Monte was when I removed it.
And then the sad discovery of seeing really nice cars on here that had a vinyl and they removed it and the roof was basically gone underneath on an otherwise rust free car.

Those vinyl tops are like a sponge, never drys out under it.

 

[ck80]

It happened today. And verified.

For the longest time, I've always thought that regardless of whether or not your G-body Olds Hurst/Olds had an aluminum rear bumper support, I was under the impression that the fronts were steel. I got this impression because of a single bracket I had to replace one time because it cracked. I guess I didn't have to, but I decided to do it anyway. When I finally got the original steel rivets out of the bumper support, which was a pita as those were some tough sumbeeches, I had to clean the rust dust off the bumper support. It appeared to me at the time the rust was from the bumper support, thus it must be steel. Made sense since it had to support the air dam and all, and using steel rivets on aluminum would be dumb, galvanic corrosion-wise...

So for whatever reason, it got stuck in my head the front supports were steel. My rear was aluminum. And some H/O owners I had talked to said they had steel front supports. Big scheme of things, so what? But it's always some detail that's good to know if you're searching for aluminum junk for your car.

But after having a discussion with 84 W40 about his SPID with VD6 (aluminum front bumper support RPO) and VD7 (aluminum rear bumper support) on it, I got to thinking I better double check mine. TBH, I haven't given those RPOs much thought at all. Hey, my SPIDs for the 84 H/O and the 85 442 both have VD6 and 7 on them. The 87 442 doesn't. I did a magnet verification today and it didn't stick on the 84 or 85, but did the the 87 supports. I can't believe I never did that.

I went back and looked at the plethora of SPID pics I have for 84 H/Os and was amazed to find several with VD6 and VD7, but a few with VD7 only. Thus it can only be surmised they came with both aluminum bumper supports and steel bumper supports. Why? What was the criteria for which car got what? Who friggin' knows.

Sometimes, what you think you knew, isn't what you should have known. Had I done proper and complete research on this all those years ago, I wouldn't be believing my own old wives' tale. But, now I know what I thought I knew was pure BS.

Check for VD6 and 7s on your SPIDs, folks.

I'm giving gm too much credit, but I honestly expect what you got came down to one of 3 things:

1) there was something related to options and weight distribution, and it was auto selected based on it. (Or gross front/rear weight ratings)

2) there was something related to overall vehicle weight and cafe considerations, and it was auto selected based on it.

And much less likely:

3) there were periodic shortages in aluminum supports for the front, and rather than hold the order, they slipped through the few with a substituted front steel support.

 

[64nailhead]

I remember being a younger guy and believing alot of misinformation about women (girls back then), only to learn that they really wanted the same thing that I did.

And I remember when i discovered the misinformation - I was pissed, disappointed, and then happy.

 

[84 W40]

I'm giving gm too much credit, but I honestly expect what you got came down to one of 3 things:

1) there was something related to options and weight distribution, and it was auto selected based on it. (Or gross front/rear weight ratings)

2) there was something related to overall vehicle weight and cafe considerations, and it was auto selected based on it.

And much less likely:

3) there were periodic shortages in aluminum supports for the front, and rather than hold the order, they slipped through the few with a substituted front steel support.

I would agree with number 1
number 3 I can see that happen

 

[Wraith]

Only gospel if you lay hands on it, everything else I treat like the internet.

 

[L92 OLDS]

What did GM do to prevent galvanic corrosion on the cars that had the front and rear aluminum bumper supports? My car has both and I replaced the bumper mounts with aluminum. I’ll have to check for signs of corrosion 😳

 

[69hurstolds]

I'm giving gm too much credit, but I honestly expect what you got came down to one of 3 things:

1) there was something related to options and weight distribution, and it was auto selected based on it. (Or gross front/rear weight ratings)

2) there was something related to overall vehicle weight and cafe considerations, and it was auto selected based on it.

And much less likely:

3) there were periodic shortages in aluminum supports for the front, and rather than hold the order, they slipped through the few with a substituted front steel support.

Very plausible, and although I thought about the fact of material availability, #3 could have been a reason for some being steel. But you would think it would be on the build sheet. We all know that every now and again you can get a mistake or planned deviation. Material shortages definitely could affect production choices. Could have been a foreman on the line saying "fugg it, use a steel one. It fits." Every VIN 9 Oldsmobile should automatically have VK3 on the SPID as well (front plate holder), but there's at least one 442 SPID out there that doesn't have it on there. Was that a mistake? or...

#1 makes the most sense, and we were thinking in that line as well, but figured out that it has absolutely nothing to do with top options. That would be, at least in my thinking, the most significant weight changing option. A CC1 or CF5 or a solid top car all had VD6 and VD7 on their SPIDs. It didn't seem to make any difference. So not sure what criteria was used. Was it a Calais/Salon thing? Could have been just whatever was available? And it wasn't specifically the plant. I mean, Lansing used them, Arlington, and Pontiac (86 442s had cars with VD6 and VD7 as well)

Real world example of not holding up the line- I've been to the Oshawa assembly plant where they used to build 5th gen Camaros. The place was an amazing choreography of assembly. Even better than the Corvette plant in some ways. But the 2012 Camaro ZL1 had two options on the carbon-fiber hood inserts for underhood air extraction. You could get the painted carbon or the "exposed" carbon, showing the fiber layers with heavy clear-coating to show off the matting layers underneath. The exposed was a $600 option! But obviously looked better. They were hand laid. They had some issues getting the exposed ones because the manufacturer got behind on delivery because they had to be perfectly aligned or they looked like azz. So...even though the build sheets said exposed, some of those early cars got painted ones rather than hold up production. Can't recall exactly how they resolved it, but I believe the affected customers got a $600 refund and a replacement insert swapped out later at the dealer if they wanted, effectively getting the option free.

Again, I never gave VD6 and VD7 too much thought before, so it never occurred to me to even bother to really check. As long as it holds up the bumper, I guess...