Messages

2251

Restoration / Re: Door panel water shield questions ???

« on: October 31, 2017, 09:35:53 PM »

Dave when you find a current supplier for correct material, please post. Thanks

2252

General Discussion / Re: 1969 Z28 Oil Question

« on: October 31, 2017, 09:27:39 PM »

My Z28 had a broken tip Oil dip stick I did a lot of research & bought a nos green tip I changed the oil & Put a long Gm Filter & 5 Qts of oil! Question Oil just shows at tip didn't these come come stock with a short oil filter so should it take 5 1/2 qts when you use the long filter? Tks Bill

Post a pic of the dipstick you have.

2253

1969 - Orphans / Re: DZ Engine

« on: October 24, 2017, 12:32:06 AM »

Ron, it’s the other way around when a problem typically develops.

Posting the VIN of a car and saying you need the Z28 or L78 or whatever engine, then someone can make up an engine, restamp it and then it’s a problem.

If you post the VIN on the engine, there is only one match. No problem. 

Usually what happened when there is an orphan engine is the car was wrecked. But there are cases where car and engine have been reunited. 

2254

Originality / Re: Help with Z/28 proof?

« on: October 21, 2017, 06:49:04 PM »

Each state is different and there are wide variations in what they can give you. 

2255

General Discussion / Re: Quality Chevrolet - Wichita, KS

« on: October 19, 2017, 01:09:21 PM »

I know of at least one other car from that dealership but I don’t have any information.

2256

Originality / Re: Help with Z/28 proof?

« on: October 19, 2017, 12:56:31 AM »

It COULD be the car.

There were a lot of British Green Z28s built late in the 68 model year.

Yes unfortunate the stock number wasn’t part of the VIN. Some dealerships did that. 

2257

Decoding/Numbers / Re: '67 TH400 partial VIN

« on: October 18, 2017, 07:15:30 PM »

Black tags were used in more than just 1967.

My gut feeling is that both are original but no proof at this point.

2258

Decoding/Numbers / Re: '67 TH400 partial VIN

« on: October 18, 2017, 06:33:46 PM »

Mike those are production sequence numbers. I don’t know if a way to connect them back to a particular car.

2259

Decoding/Numbers / Re: '67 TH400 partial VIN

« on: October 18, 2017, 03:43:58 PM »

Here is my TH400 tag:
The 445 date puts it approximately at March 20th 1967 and my cars built date is April 17th.

Mike

Mike if this is your tag, yes the date and year are in an acceptable range for your car. 

Partial VIN would prove it for sure, but if you don't have it, then that's the way it is.  Not all received partial VINs.

2260

Decoding/Numbers / Re: '67 TH400 partial VIN

« on: October 18, 2017, 03:39:19 PM »

Thanks for the replies.

Here is a pic of the tag. The paint is gone from the tag and all that is left are the stamped numbers.

Car was built the first week of April. Julian date on trans tag indicates March 2nd....is that an acceptable date range for an 04A build date?

The second digit of the year on the tag is obscured by scuff marks that's why I really wanted to find the VIN for proof of originality. Based on the other info on the tag it looks like the original trans. It's a '67 SS/RS L35 convertible. I plan to sell the car soon and I need proof that it is a numbers matching car.

So far it's a numbers matching car except for the engine block. The trans is the only remaining question left. I cant see if the stamped VIN is somewhere on top of the bellhousing. I plan on buying one of those inexpensive borescopes to get a better look.

You can try to find the partial VIN with a mirror or one of those small borescope type cameras.

The transmission, is an acceptable date for the car, BUT with the last digit of the year missing, there will always be questions.  Can't say for sure that it is the original.  Sorry.

2261

Decoding/Numbers / Re: '67 TH400 partial VIN

« on: October 18, 2017, 02:51:03 PM »

Not all 1967 TH400s received partial VINs.

2262

Decoding/Numbers / Re: '67 TH400 partial VIN

« on: October 18, 2017, 12:52:05 PM »

Check the areas where Paul said. 

If you still can’t find one, post a pic of the tag on the passenger side. We may be able to determine if it’s the original one for your car via that tag. For an example, go to this link and scroll down a bit.
http://www.camaros.org/drivetrain.shtml#trans

Partial VINs were mainly only on SS and Z28 Camaros in 1967. They were required by 1968. See this link.
http://www.camaros.org/drivetrain.shtml#PartialVINs

2263

Research Topics & Reports / Re: Original 67-69 Camaro driveshafts - information requested about your car

« on: October 18, 2017, 02:48:34 AM »

Some of the Firebird Turbo 400 driveshafts also had inline yokes. I have one in my garage.

2264

Research Topics & Reports / Re: Original 67-69 Camaro driveshafts - information requested about your car

« on: October 17, 2017, 02:45:47 AM »

The question is why are the U-joints out-of-phase?

The answer is for reducing vibrations.
Graph the power through a single U-joint and a sine wave is drawn. The joint speeds up, positive arc, and slows down, negative arc.
Add another U-joint and its power graph will have the same sine wave.
Add the two sine waves, if they are in-phase on the same shaft, and amplitude doubles, meaning the resultant twist is noticeable.
By offsetting one joint by 30°, decreases the amplitude of the associated twist, less vibration.
Now, driveshaft's having been built forever, and 1st Gen driveshaft's are different from typical design, may be due to the extreme angularity of drivetrain design on Camaro, i.e., wheelbase, length of shaft, OD and wall thickness, and critical speed of driveshaft.

Critical speed is important - it is rocket science. JMT's

The aren’t all “clocked” or out if phase.

2265

Research Topics & Reports / Re: Original 67-69 Camaro driveshafts - information requested about your car

« on: October 17, 2017, 02:44:46 AM »

Does anyone have any info on the driveshaft for a 1967 L78 4K Camaro?  Trying to verify mine.

What are the specs on the one you have?