The 'additional' 2002 engine number: production model code

[quant]

2 hours ago, Conserv said:

And I’m guessing your ti was built somewhere around September 1970?

 

 

The photo I shared at the start of this topic was from a 2002ti sold on BaT (production date 31 Aug 1970), as this one had both the engine no. and the 'second engine number' (in this case - production model code) so clearly visible.

 

My own 2002ti (#1687812, production in March 1970) also showed the "2554" opposite the engine no. and got me wondering what this was - which is why I started this topic - as I couldn't find an ongoing logic, when searching for other examples

Edited July 16, 2021 by quant

[quant]

While reading through the "Engine Block Casting Date" thread from 2016 I stumbled upon some quite interesting insights (relevant to this topic), which I'll quote below (incl. a source link to avoid plagiarism ? )

 

 

Source: https://www.bmw2002faq.com/forums/topic/182406-engine-block-casting-date/?do=findComment&comment=1309439

 

 

 

 

Which shows that per approx June 1971*, the 'new' nomenclature (e.g. "2.0") started appearing, and prior to this the Production Model Code was used. 

* source: date of letter in top right corner and https://www.bmw2002faq.com/forums/topic/182406-engine-block-casting-date/?do=findComment&comment=1309516

 

Interestingly - also for a 'standard' 2002, they also included the Production Model Code next to the engine no. - or at least with the US model - as shown in the photo below:

 

Source: https://www.bmw2002faq.com/forums/topic/182406-engine-block-casting-date/?do=findComment&comment=1309735

 

Interesting to see more examples of:

• pre-June 71 engine blocks with the Production Model Code stamped onto the engine number boss (or "starter fixation flange" as BMW had so eloquently formulated it) - e.g. Euro 2002 with 2551 on it, as opposed to the 2552 US engine above
• post-June 71 models with "1.6" or "1.8" on it

 

Edited July 23, 2021 by quant

[Conserv]

This is great! Of course, it also illustrates that in three years I forgot everything I originally learned from that thread! 
 

I believe the 1602 was withdrawn from the U.S. market at the time of the Modell 71 introduction (April 1971), and the U.S. never got the 1802, so I can’t even say that I’ve seen a stamped “1,6” or “1,8”.

 

Thank you for finding this and reminding us of the verifiable facts! And I do like that “starter fixation flange” language!

 

Regards,

 

Steve

 

[dlacey]

I've never seen an engine number stamped this badly...must be a friday car...

BMW 2002 Tii E10 2.0 engine Kugelfischer Injection COLLECTION ONLY N IRELAND

WWW.EBAY.CO.UK

---

<p>BMW 2002tii E10 complete engine Kugelfischer Injection COLLECTION ONLY N IRELAND. </p><br /><p>Sold as seen, removed from a car many years ago and current condition not know. Does turn over. </p><br /><p>For further details 07702793711 </p><br /><p>Can aid...

 

 

[Conserv]

42 minutes ago, dlacey said:

I've never seen an engine number stamped this badly...must be a friday car...

BMW 2002 Tii E10 2.0 engine Kugelfischer Injection COLLECTION ONLY N IRELAND

WWW.EBAY.CO.UK

---

<p>BMW 2002tii E10 complete engine Kugelfischer Injection COLLECTION ONLY N IRELAND. </p><br /><p>Sold as seen, removed from a car many years ago and current condition not know. Does turn over. </p><br /><p>For further details 07702793711 </p><br /><p>Can aid...

 

 

Not only that, Dave — and I agree that it’s the most sloppy one I’ve seen — but the 2-liter stamp (should be “2 , 0”) is upside down.

 

The displacement stamp should be viewable from the rear (transmission side) of the block while the engine number should be viewable from the front (radiator side) of the block.

 

I’m not certain what to make of it. Faking a random tii block, given how few people have even cared about ‘02 matching numbers until very recently, seems like a real stretch to add value. Adding the displacement stamp — something of which few people are even aware — but in the wrong direction, seems even more odd.

Since the displacement and engine number were stamped at different times in different fonts, what are the chances of screwing up both on a single block.

 

All I can say is, “I’m glad it’s not my engine”… ?

 

Best regards,

 

Steve

 

 

 

[TobyB]

Friday after lunch.  

 

Things like this weren't uncommon when people actually assembled things and got really

really

really

really

bored doing it.

 

t

easily distra

[NickVyse]

Earlier blocks had a different casting and not as much space around where the VIN's stamped. Here's a couple of mine that were easy to access;

 

1968 1600-2

 

 

 

1966 2000C

 

 

[Conserv]

19 hours ago, NickVyse said:

Earlier blocks had a different casting and not as much space around where the VIN's stamped. Here's a couple of mine that were easy to access;

 

1968 1600-2

 

 

 

1966 2000C

 

 

And that’s interesting, too, Nick. These examples pre-date the stamping of the boss with the 4-digit chassis type — but the bosses are also too small to readily accommodate additional numbers.

 

Given that the engine number boss in later ‘02’s — later than these examples — extends rearward to the rear face of the block, where the block contacts the bellhousing, it does appear that the later bosses were ground down further, which enlarged the area available for stamping — plus, the basic block casting changed somewhat.

 

Uh-oh: are we in a chicken-or-the-egg scenario? Did they enlarge the boss to facilitate additional stamped data, or did the enlarged boss simply provide an opportunity?

 

Thanks for these photos!

 

Below, the first photo is Nick’s June 21, 1966 block. The second and third photos are of my ‘76’s March 26, 1976 block.

 

Best regards,

 

Steve

 

[NickVyse]

Thought you'd like that Steve. Another fact to add to our collective nerdbase is the font went up in size, from 4 to 5mm I think from memory.

 

Just because there's no 1602 represented here (Sept 1971)

 

 

 

 

And answers on a postcard for this one ? ...

 

 

 

[Conserv]

Thanks, Nick,

 

Finally I can say I’ve seen a “1,6” liter block with the displacement stamp! ?

 

I’m still trying to decipher the first line on the replacement engine. Is it an M42, or something akin to that?

 

The second line, “9908 N 050”, decodes to:

 

1. Engine serial number 9908 (restarts every month),

2. A new (“N”) engine (i.e., not remanufactured), and 

3. Manufactured May (“05”) in a year ending in “0” (the use of two digits for month but only a single digit for year certainly suggests that BMW did not envision production sufficiently long to warrant a two-digit year signifier)

 

The second photo below is a glimpse of the BMW document decoding new and remanufactured replacement engines. The entire document appears in my article (under Engines) entitled Engine Identification.

 

Regards,

 

Steve

 

 

 

 

[NickVyse]

It's from my EvoII s14, so presumably made in May 1990. First line could be 2.3litre/4 valves per cylinder, 3rd iteration of the type??? That's a complete guess. The s14's didn't carry the chassis VIN, strangely. May be they just run out of space and couldn't grind the area any larger ?

 

Can't find the email from BMW archives, will have another look later as it's been a long while.

[Conserv]

1 hour ago, NickVyse said:

… It's from my EvoII s14, so presumably made in May 1990. First line could be 2.3litre/4 valves per cylinder, 3rd iteration of the type??? That's a complete guess. The s14's didn't carry the chassis VIN, strangely. May be they just run out of space and couldn't grind the area any larger ?

…

That makes sense, Nick. Attached is the closest code I could find on the BMW engine identification document I referred to — and reproduced in part — earlier.

 

I really appreciate your input and contributions!

 

Best regards,

 

Steve

 

 

[jimk]

NT

YMMV

BMW Engine Identification Codes.pdf

[NickVyse]

Right back at you Steve. Just looked back on my records. 23 4S 02 is the EvoII, and mine's 23 4S 03 as it's the Cecotto/Ravaglia version, so I was right in guessing the 3rd variant.

 

BTW the early VIN stamps had BMW logos either end instead of + signs, or has that been discussed before? This is my '65 NK - they're only faint beneath the years. You can also JUST make them out on the '66 coupe VIN I posted.

 

 

[Conserv]

6 hours ago, NickVyse said:

Right back at you Steve. Just looked back on my records. 23 4S 02 is the EvoII, and mine's 23 4S 03 as it's the Cecotto/Ravaglia version, so I was right in guessing the 3rd variant.

 

BTW the early VIN stamps had BMW logos either end instead of + signs, or has that been discussed before? This is my '65 NK - they're only faint beneath the years. You can also JUST make them out on the '66 coupe VIN I posted.

 

 

I’ve seen the roundels previously, Nick, but I don’t recall ever (a.) discussing it, or (b.) determining when it began and ended.

 

The roundel, of course, made a re-appearance later, on many (not all) replacement engines.

You appear to have no shortage of engines … ?

 

Thanks and regards,

 

Steve