Topic: Marti Report specifics

[nham3407]

What do the Built Date and Released Date mean on the Marti Report?  My report shows a 01/05/72 build date and a 01/07/72 release date.  I would like to have her started again the same day she would have rolled off the assembly line some 42 years ago.  The engine and transmission should go back in this weekend.  I know this may sound a bit cheesy to some, but the car has not been driven since 1999 and has been disassembled since 2009.  Alot of money, time and effort, and did I say money have gone into this car.  After 28 years of owning it it will be nice to hear it run again.

[CharlesTurner]

The build date should be the day that assembly started on the car.  Not sure if we know exactly when it would have been completed though.  I have a Marti report for a '68 that shows the build date and release date as the same.

Might want to check with K. Marti and ask if he can provide more info to be sure.

[Rsanter]

I thought that the build date was the projected build date and the release date was the actual day it was released for production

Bob

[CharlesTurner]

I thought that the build date was the projected build date and the release date was the actual day it was released for production

Bob

No, on the Marti report, there is a scheduled for build date and an actually built date.  It's typical for those dates to be different.

[J_Speegle]

What do the Built Date and Released Date mean on the Marti Report?  My report shows a 01/05/72 build date and a 01/07/72 release date.  I would like to have her started again the same day she would have rolled off the assembly line some 42 years ago. ..................

My current understanding is that

the ACTUAL BUILD DATE  is the day the car was completed not the day the build was started.

The RELEASE DATE was the day it was either released to be shipped or shipping date.

SCHEDULED FOR BUILD (one earlier cars) was the same date that was placed on the door tag. The date they guessed/estimated/projected it would be completed when the order was received at that specific plant and VIN assigned.

[krelboyne]

Direct from the FAQ of www.martiauto.com

Scheduled for Build (Scheduled Date) At the time the General Office assigned the plant that would assemble the vehicle, it also projects a best estimate date that the vehicle would be constructed.

Actually Built (Build Date) Due to the fact events generally don’t go as planned, the Scheduled Date was not necessarily the actual date of manufacture. The actual build date is the date the vehicle begins to be assembled on the Trim and Chassis line. Generally, the vehicle is completed on this date.

Released (Release Date) This is the date the assembly plant released the vehicle to either a Convoy (trucking) company or Rail (road) company for delivery to the dealer.

[J_Speegle]

Direct from the FAQ of www.martiauto.com

Scheduled for Build (Scheduled Date) At the time the General Office assigned the plant that would assemble the vehicle, it also projects a best estimate date that the vehicle would be constructed.

Actually Built (Build Date) Due to the fact events generally don’t go as planned, the Scheduled Date was not necessarily the actual date of manufacture. The actual build date is the date the vehicle begins to be assembled on the Trim and Chassis line. Generally, the vehicle is completed on this date.

Released (Release Date) This is the date the assembly plant released the vehicle to either a Convoy (trucking) company or Rail (road) company for delivery to the dealer.

Thanks Scott almost got it 100% correct according to that but it leads to a few other questions if Kevin is correct (will have to ask him next time we see each other ) . If "The actual build date is the date the vehicle begins to be assembled on the Trim and Chassis line." then why the delay on many cars between the time the body was started and when it was placed on the line. Have examples with almost two weeks time between the Buck Date and the  "trim and Chassis line" date. Would make more sense if the Buck date was the start date and the Actually Built day were the completion date since you could explain according to the plant managers with delays happening during the holding area/time period - where things like vinyl and convertible tops were done during.

As usual one answer produces more questions

[Bob Gaines]

Direct from the FAQ of www.martiauto.com

Scheduled for Build (Scheduled Date) At the time the General Office assigned the plant that would assemble the vehicle, it also projects a best estimate date that the vehicle would be constructed.

Actually Built (Build Date) Due to the fact events generally don’t go as planned, the Scheduled Date was not necessarily the actual date of manufacture. The actual build date is the date the vehicle begins to be assembled on the Trim and Chassis line. Generally, the vehicle is completed on this date.
Released (Release Date) This is the date the assembly plant released the vehicle to either a Convoy (trucking) company or Rail (road) company for delivery to the dealer.

I agree with Jeff and am of the opinion that the build date was the completion date not the start date, besides the statement posted is somewhat contradictory that the cars were always finished on the same day/date. Were they all always started at 7AM and finished at 4pm? I don't think so . What if one was started late in the afternoon or 2nd shift (don't know if the always had one) which is another example of not being finished on the same day.   Build date = finish date is most logical . Ford many times used the build date as a reference for starts and stops of new or obsoleted parts and materials . The finish time theory would make the most sense being as the changes of parts as mentioned before would have had a chance to take place by the finish line more so then at the starting line (if build date = start date). If a start date (for the build date)was used and considering any delays or what not who knows what parts (because of any change) might end up on a car . With the build date = finish date it is more likely that any changes of parts and materials would be better represented .  I hope that makes sense. At least that is the logic the way I see it.   As always I try and keep a open mind and this is just my opinion until I see reasonable evidence to the contrary at which time I will change my point of view.   

[ruppstang]

I agree with Jeff and am of the opinion that the build date was the completion date not the start date, besides the statement posted is somewhat contradictory that the cars were always finished on the same day/date. Were they all always started at 7AM and finished at 4pm? I don't think so . What if one was started late in the afternoon or 2nd shift (don't know if the always had one) which is another example of not being finished on the same day.   Build date = finish date is most logical . Ford many times used the build date as a reference for starts and stops of new or obsoleted parts and materials . The finish time theory would make the most sense being as the changes of parts as mentioned before would have had a chance to take place by the finish line more so then at the starting line (if build date = start date). If a start date (for the build date)was used and considering any delays or what not who knows what parts (because of any change) might end up on a car . With the build date = finish date it is more likely that any changes of parts and materials would be better represented .  I hope that makes sense. At least that is the logic the way I see it.   As always I try and keep a open mind and this is just my opinion until I see reasonable evidence to the contrary at which time I will change my point of view.

Makes sense to me.

[nham3407]

Thank you all with the feedback.  I am going to shoot for a first start up on the build date.  Fingers crossed.  Need to place a Christam order into Marti for all of the Hoses & Belts so I will see if I can get further information at that time.

[rockhouse66]

besides the statement posted is somewhat contradictory that the cars were always finished on the same day/date.

Adding to the contradiction, Marti uses the "actual build date" to state when the car was "produced" - often stating  that it was 2 days late or on time or similar.  It doesn't make sense that this would be the start of production date if that same date is used to determine whether the car was "produced" early or late compared with the scheduled build date.