CRG Discussion Forum
Camaro Research Group Discussion => Originality => Topic started by: latecode on November 03, 2012, 09:46:50 AM
-
Has anyone seen 9204brake booster on ebay,if so is it real?
-
This one?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1969-Camaro-Delco-Moraine-Power-Brake-Booster-9204-/281013722785?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item416db91ea1&vxp=mtr
-
The part number stamp looks okay but I don't see a delco stamp on the front. A photo of the date stamp may help.
-
I have a 9204 that was restored in the 80's in my shed collecting dust and the fonts on that one are much larger (1/8" height characters) than the ones in the picture latecode posted and the date is 334 (late 68), plus no Delco stamp. Interesting the one on eBay has a Julian date of 2 (early 69) and has such a small font. As for the Delco stamp, Steve at Brakeboosters said the '69's should have the Delco stamp on the front shell so the one I have may have had the front shell replaced when it was replated back then -or- two styles do exist. Mine looks like the eBay pic which has no Delco stamp either except larger fonts. The ad states 1/8" fonts but they look like 1/16" fonts. When I bought it in the 80's I didn't know or care about stampings and I traded an 8515 for it! If I had only known back then.....
Below are close up of the rear shell I have from a 9204.
Mike
-
I agree with Mike 100%......
-
My 05a 69 z-28 has the small font and no deco stamp on the front. I have owned the car since 1978, and the booster is orig to the car.
-
My 07A has the small font and it has the Delco stamp on the front. My Mfg. date is 148 which is May 28th.
-
I believe mine is dated 120
-
my 06A Nor has a delco stamp with small numbers -140
-
So based on the samples posted here it's looking like boosters made in 67 to sometime late 68 used 1/8" fonts and those stamped in 69 used 1/16" fonts.
I wonder when the Delco stamping appeared. The 1/8" font 9404 booster I have (made in late 68) has no Delco stampings. It would be interesting to see if 69 dated boosters using the 1/16" fonts is when the Delco stamp appeared.
Mike
-
So based on the samples posted here it's looking like boosters made in 67 to sometime late 68 used 1/8" fonts and those stamped in 69 used 1/16" fonts.
I wonder when the Delco stamping appeared. The 1/8" font 9404 booster I have (made in late 68) has no Delco stampings. It would be interesting to see if 69 dated boosters using the 1/16" fonts is when the Delco stamp appeared.
Mike
My 02D '69 has its original 9204 booster (small font) dated "55", and has the Delco Moraine stamp, inverted, below the check valve hole.
-
does anyone know if the booster on ebay is real?
-
This much seems certain so far based on the few samples posted here:
Boosters made to late 68 used larger 1/8" fonts and no Delco (based on my only sample I have since the 80's from a resto shop)
9204 boosters made in 69 used a smaller 1/16" font but the Delco appearance seems mixed:
1968
Julian date 332 - Delco stamp - no
1969
Tag date Julian date Delco Stamp?
02D 055 yes
05A 120 no
06A 140 yes
07A 148 yes
If x77-69z28's booster is indeed original to his car then that must mean the Delco stamping was not consistent. But this summary is based on a very small sample size so I would not draw any final conclusions. The one on eBay has the small fonts so that seems consistent, but the absence of the Delco can be correct if Delco was not stamped on every unit. However, the ad is wrong in that it states a 1/8" font when in fact that looks like 1/16" height. Also the front cover does not look like a reproduction. Those stand out and can be identified very easily due to them having very crisp pattern edges.
Give Steve at brakeboosters.com a call if you need a correct booster.
Mike
-
According to Jerry's book the The Definitive 1969 Camaro ... the small stamping started the first quester of 1969.
-
That's correct, 1/4" characters in '67, '68 and early '69 and then a change to the smaller 1/8" characters in mid 1969. All '69 boosters should have the Delco in the 8:00 position when looking at the car from the front.
Jerry
-
Hi Jerry,
Are you sure? Those can't be 1/4" fonts. The pad itself is about 1/4" in height. I took a caliper out and measured my 8515 and early 9204 numbers at approximately .125" (~ 1/8") in height. Looking at later model booster I measured those smaller fonts at approximately .0635 (~ 1/16") height.
Mike
-
You are correct, my mistake.
-
My 01C X77 booster (owned since 1973, removed from car in 1980) is dated "2" , 9204, small font, "Delco Morraine" upside down under the vacuum port , absolutely original to the car. Almost too good of shape to be sent out for replate - plating is faded but pretty decent (likely due to the fact it hasn't been on the car for 32 years).
Regards,
Steve
-
Another data point - My early '69 (10A) has the original master cylinder/cover and booster rebuilt by Steve Gregori. It does have the upside down Delco stamping but does not have the "9204" stamps - blank pads.
-Mark.
-
I received my original booster back today, after rebuild by Steve Grigori (Brake Boosters, Inc). he does a nice job for a very reasonable price.. I'm pleased. and the stamped codes are much easier to read now after the cleaning and replating.
My car is a late 09C car, with '9204' booster, date 199.
-
Another data point. Early 69 Nor 11A /Date stamp 310/Unit stamp 9204/Upside down Delco stamp. George
-
Gary & George,
What size font for the Julian date? 1/16" or 2/16" ?
Thanks,
Mike
-
I just went down and measured mine.. 4/32" or 1/8" ... the julian date '199' is inverted (when top is up).. '9204' is not inverted.
-
Mike, My stamp was a double strike but it measures 1/8" both date and unit stamp. George
-
Excellent! That fills in the gaps and starts to show a pattern from the sample size below.
Late 1968
Trim Tag Julian Date Delco Stamp Font size (1/8”)
date
shelf 334 no large
09C 199 yes large
10A none yes N/A
11A 310 yes large
1969 Julian Date Delco Stamp Font size (1/16”)
Trim Tag
date
01C 002 yes small
02D 055 yes small
05A 120 no small
06A 140 yes small
07A 148 yes small
This sample size is showing that late 68 used the larger 1/8” font and in 1969 it switched to the smaller 1/16” fonts.
In regards to the Delco stamp, the 2 deviations in the list are from the booster I have on the shelf and the 05A booster.
The one I have on the shelf may very well have had the front shell replaced when it was restored back in the 1980’s when looks were more important than keeping numbers intact.
The 05A booster *may* have had the shell replaced but I can’t comment on that being it’s not mine and I don’t know its history.
But the data here sure shows the smaller font began around the Jan 1969 period.
Thank you,
Mike
-
Mike, I wonder if it was lightly stamped and was cleaned up when the booster was restored? It is definitely original to the car.
-
Mike, I wonder if it was lightly stamped and was cleaned up when the booster was restored? It is definitely original to the car.
That could very well be the case. After I became more interested in this topic late last year I have looked at several original unrestored 69 boosters and many had such lightly stamped Delco markings that not all the characters were fully developed. So, if the metal is stripped down and polished during the restoration process then it's likely the remainder of the characters are removed.
Mike
-
Mike,
My car is a LATE 09C (Sept 1969).. I'm sorry if that throws a kink in your data.. :)
-
If you are certain that is original to your car then that does throw a deviation in this for sure. ???
Below is the updated list.
Late 1968
Trim Tag Julian Date Delco Stamp Font size (1/8”)
date
shelf 334 no large
10A none yes N/A
11A 310 yes large
1969 Julian Date Delco Stamp Font size (1/16”)
Trim Tag
date
01C 002 yes small
02D 055 yes small
05A 120 no small
06A 140 yes small
07A 148 yes small
09C 199 yes large
-
TO my knowledge it has never been changed. It was on the car when I bought it in 1976, and it's 'dated' appropriately for my 09C car?? but everything is speculation/educated guesswork after 44 yrs.. :)
-
Gary wasn't your booster painted black? If so it might have been changed therego the font and color. SWAG
-
I just commented that it *could* have been, but when I cleaned it, there was also a residue of the gold chromating... so I suspect it was 'spray bombed' before I bought it in '76, and then I do remember 'touching up all the black'.. hot rodder that I was.. :) I'm fairly certain this is the original booster; the two owners before me were not 'car people' (a teenage girl and an undercover policeman - who had it only a short time). The car had been kept washed/waxed and cleaned (appearance wise), but there had been little maintenance done in the '60K or so miles it had on it when I got it. Of course, there's no way of knowing 40+ yrs later, or even 7 yrs later, when I purchased it.
Note: The dates on the brake switch (9-199) exactly match the julian date on the booster; the master cylinder was dated 175... further making me believe all those parts are original to the car, as was 99-100% of the parts when I purchased it.