CRG Discussion Forum
Camaro Research Group Discussion => Restoration => Topic started by: Edgemontvillage on December 04, 2019, 11:21:35 PM
-
I attended MCACN this year and had the pleasure of exploring several restored and original Camaros. Among the restored cars was a Legends certified '69 Z (2B Norwood build) that I noticed had a hood striker assembly that was restored unlike what I've seen on most other cars. The hood striker had the (threaded) adjuster shaft finished as natural steel vs zinc phosphate. All other components of the assembly looked correctly restored to me. Is natural steel the correct finish for the adjuster shaft?
- Bolts - Manganese (dark) phosphate with captured washers
- Base - Zinc (medium grey) phosphate
- Spring - Full Gloss black paint
- Cup - Zinc phosphate
- Adjuster shaft - ?
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49170801032_abb47aeedf_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hV4d4A) (https://flic.kr/p/2hV4d4A) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156633854@N02/)
-
I'm not sure if it will help, but this is a shot of my striker. Obviously the finishes are tough to see, but it's never been touched. It looks to me like the adjuster shaft is the same as the base, not natural steel originally.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/5563/30558196453_430cf98a06_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/NyjKb6)IMG_20151223_132331 (https://flic.kr/p/NyjKb6) by Dave H (https://www.flickr.com/photos/146684464@N06/), on Flickr
-
The way I understood it, everything except the spring was phosphate. Spring is black.....Joe
-
I'm not sure if it will help, but this is a shot of my striker. Obviously the finishes are tough to see, but it's never been touched. It looks to me like the adjuster shaft is the same as the base, not natural steel originally.
Thanks Dave, helpful as always. A close look at the survivors during MCACN didn't allow me to distinguish between the aged phosphate finish and whatever finish was on (or not) the adjuster shaft - all looked the same to me.
-
The photo I posted of the striker assembly was from a Legends judge's car. I asked another Legends judge about the correct finish for the adjuster shaft and he replied that either zinc phosphate or natural steel would be acceptable.
-
Did you happen to look at Warren's striker? I did but failed to snag a photo. I wanna say it is similar to the one you posted
-
Did you happen to look at Warren's striker? I did but failed to snag a photo. I wanna say it is similar to the one you posted
I did get several photos of Warren's JL8 X77 Z however not specifically of the hood striker. I located a marginal quality iPhone photo of the hood, including the strikerI took during the show and the adjuster shaft does appear brighter than the surrounding finishes but I'd have to say its inconclusive.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49175765587_5f15299c66_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hVuDRn) (https://flic.kr/p/2hVuDRn) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156633854@N02/)
-
Lloyd, my 06A Z28 has the untouched hood striker/base/cup, I just went out to the shop and inspected it, the striker pin appears to be either aged plain steel or lighter colour zinc phosphate, very hard to tell, the base and cup are a little darker than the legends car, I’ve owned this car since 74, pretty unmolested and no oxidizing or rust etc, as it’s spent it’s entire time in heated storage since I’ve owned it, driven very little in last 25 yrs. Seems to me I have ( or had ) a nos striker pin and it was unplated steel. Hope this helps.
-
I was always surprised that pin would be the same phosphate as the base & cup. Mainly because there's some thickness to the plating and it's not a plating that conducive to threads.
Find me a part # for the pin and I may be able to find out more....
-
I was always surprised that pin would be the same phosphate as the base & cup. Mainly because there's some thickness to the plating and it's not a plating that conducive to threads.
Find me a part # for the pin and I may be able to find out more....
Legends judging as stated Lloyd accepts both and was aware of that but never really researched it. Kurt May have same ability but ncrs friend of mine has old gm book that gives finishes by part # so maybe with part number we can define it better. Agree it makes sense! I will try to check Skips 69 closely.
-
Az car with 12k miles. Norwood built 05A....Joe
-
Az car with 12k miles. Norwood built 05A....Joe
What's your take Joe? Its got patina but does the adjuster shaft appear to be phosphated or natural?
-
Wanted to comment on a few points made in the thread:
- There are many threaded fasteners used on our cars that receive phosphating
so that on its own doesn't default the finish to natural due to potential fitment issues.
- I have seen the adjuster shaft offered for sale on eBay as NOS however we know finishes on service replacement parts aren't necessarily the same as those installed at the factory.
- The adjuster shaft is exposed to some weather and seems to age much like the surrounding assembly which we know
received zinc phosphate. As it would normally have some amount of grease on it (the receiver assembly is lubed) and is
subjected to mechanical abrasion, a natural steel part would be less likely to show rusting.
-
A) - There are many threaded fasteners used on our cars that receive phosphating
so that on its own doesn't default the finish to natural due to potential fitment issues.
Correct: Type M, Manganese phosphate provided in the thickness 5 to 10 micrometer,
or Type Z, Zinc phosphate provided in the thickness 5 to 15 micrometer
Reference: MIL-DTL-16232G, 7 January 2000, Phosphate Coatings, Heavy, Manganese Or Zinc Base
-
I was always surprised that pin would be the same phosphate as the base & cup. Mainly because there's some thickness to the plating and it's not a plating that conducive to threads.
Find me a part # for the pin and I may be able to find out more....
The pin is actually called a bolt, probably because it’s threaded.
Kurt I will also email this to you but that threaded hood striker pin bolt was used for many years and many car lines. Starting in 1967 through the 70s on Camaros, but also used at least for Chevelles and full size. Probably others too.
Original number 3857883 is the bolt
Replaced by 3898717
Replaced by 3911214
Replaced by 3942197 in May 1969.
I don’t know why there were so many changes.
Judging may be accepting both finishes because of more than one parts supplier or changes made over time.
-
Not a Camaro but a 67 Chevelle I am working on that is a true survivor. The original owner had painted a few small items on the car under the hood and while removing the black spray bomb I was able to retain the original finishes on the hood striker. Notice it is natural where the bolts are phosphate. So I am willing to bet there were multiple suppliers and different standards sent out for said specs. Before and after photos.
-
Az car with 12k miles. Norwood built 05A....Joe
What's your take Joe? Its got patina but does the adjuster shaft appear to be phosphated or natural?
Lloyd. I don't have access to the one in the picture as a friend of mine bought the car. The one on my car looks a lot like Hawk's so I took it apart & cleaned the base with a wire wheel on the back side. It has a black color to the metal so I soaked it in carb cleaner. Rinsed it off & same black. I'm thinking phosphate. Paint would've peeled in carb cleaner. The pilot stud I wire wheeled in the thread area. Where the nut & jam nut are, black metal as was the base. All of it looked as hood hinges get after some time & they are phosphate. I haven't done the cup yet....Joe
-
I did the same with the cup this morning & same thing, it appears to be phosphate also.
The nice thing about cars from Tucson is they don't rust up to nothing so you can still get details even on a car that has 150k miles....Joe
-
Joe, I will try to check in with you the next time I fly into Tucson to see an old friend that lives down near Sierra Vista.
Here is the exploded parts view that includes the bolt with part number listed.
-
Please do. I'm retired these days & would love to visit....Joe
-
I just walked out and looked closely at mine and gave it a quick wipe down. In my 69's case it's black phosphate without question.
-
While these are nos parts from my collection and may differ from born with, I will let the viewer come to any conclusions that these may or may not offer.
The catch (pn # 3891606) looks like zinc phosphate and the adjuster shaft (pn#3857883) looks like same finish.
The catch is 67 standard by the way.
I believe the adjuster shaft is same for 67-69 but could be mistaken.
-
Here is the one on Warren's car.
-
Looks natural or very light phosphate to me. The cup is heeeeavy phosphate.
-
Good photo Jon, I’d say it looks natural steel.
Interesting
-
I's say phosphate and the reasoning is look at the portion of the shaft that tapers to the threads and is out of the way of the spring cup. It has a gray hue to it. The thicker portion you can see where the spring cup has created wear marks.
Mike
-
I's say phosphate and the reasoning is look at the portion of the shaft that tapers to the threads and is out of the way of the spring cup. It has a gray hue to it. The thicker portion you can see where the spring cup has created wear marks.
Mike
I totally agree, it’s the same as mine as I posted earlier in this thread. I’ll try to post a picture tonite of mine.
-
Once again here is a nos plate assembly purchased from a SYC member. Looks to be an early PN# 3891682
I am unsure what this finish is called it is a light grey almost bare steel looking.
-
that part seems to have an almost 'galvanized' finish, hogdaddy..
The early posted images appeared to be phosphated to me, and the phosphating can be varying shades depending on several variables, and of course it 'ages' depending on the conditions it's exposed to over the past 50 yrs...
-
Yes the more I look at it the more it looks to be galvanized. If that's the case I would assume it was done prior to stamping? There are not a lot of galvanized parts on Camaro's.
The only thing that comes to mind are the taillight inner brackets, rocker panel wiring covers and gas tanks.
-
Also the lower inner section of the tail panel where the frame rails meet the tail panel is galvanized...at least is is on my 67 convertible.
-
Also the lower inner section of the tail panel where the frame rails meet the tail panel is galvanized...at least is is on my 67 convertible.
Yes mine is also. I forgot about that.
-
None of the 4 bolt prints are available, so no info that way. :(
-
Pic of my Z11's striker. Looks like the other examples - light phosphate on the plate, maybe zinc on the bolt, definitely dark phosphate on the cup. I've probably got some NOS pieces ratholed, try and find them this weekend.
Regards,
Steve
-
Hey all, here are 2 pictures of before and 2 after i dipped it into EvapoRust for a couple of hours. My 69 Z RS is a VN built and production date of 12/19/68
Jon
-
Last picture still shows the bubbling of the WD40 I sprayed
-
06A Z28 , cleaned in evaporust and re oiled to avoid rusting, spring was repainted, but phosphate is original, owned the car since 74.
-
Many thanks for all the submissions. I dare not rule out exceptions however I've concluded the assembly, including the bolt (adjuster shaft), was very likely zinc phosphated originally and any appearance of a natural or galvanized finish on the bolt is due to burnishing or wear over time. Its generally accepted that gloss black is correct for the spring. Here is how I restored the assembly for my project:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49339533708_bc18ae9957_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iaY1pE) (https://flic.kr/p/2iaY1pE) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156633854@N02/)
-
Looks great Lloyd. I think your conclusion is right on the money.
-
Lioyd, was reviewing what I found on our 68 and reason for doing ours in phosphate. Post 256 dated 3/16/11
https://www.camaros.net/forums/133-build-projects/182584-time-another-68-z-28-restored-18.html
-
Lioyd, was reviewing what I found on our 68 and reason for doing ours in phosphate. Post 256 dated 3/16/11
https://www.camaros.net/forums/133-build-projects/182584-time-another-68-z-28-restored-18.html
How do you use that site with all the ads & pop ups? I stopped going there because of that fact....Joe
-
Lioyd, was reviewing what I found on our 68 and reason for doing ours in phosphate. Post 256 dated 3/16/11
https://www.camaros.net/forums/133-build-projects/182584-time-another-68-z-28-restored-18.html
How do you use that site with all the ads & pop ups? I stopped going there because of that fact....Joe
Joe, off topic, however if you want to turn off pop-ups for the Windows version of the Google Chrome web browser here's how. There is a lot of good information on TC.
Chrome (Windows)
Click the Customize and control Google Chrome menu (the three dots in the upper right corner of the window below the close window X)
Select Settings.
Click Advanced at the bottom of the page
Under Privacy and security, click the Site Settings button.
Select the Pop-ups and redirects arrow.
Click the Blocked (recommended) slider.
You're done.
To disable the pop-up blocker uncheck the Blocked (recommended) box.
-
Thank you Lloyd...Joe
-
While restoring some items that I planned in selling, I referenced this thread and hopefully came close to the intended result.
-
I am working on restoring these parts for my car the day and notice that after a thorough cleaning that the Striker pin has a finish that is almost identical to the phosphate coating on the clutch bell crank! much lighter in appearance than other items but definitely a light phosphate.
-
While restoring some items that I planned in selling, I referenced this thread and hopefully came close to the intended result.
I noticed your spring has more coils than others. Is that a reproduction or just one you painted?
-
Painted. I have seen several late build 69’s including a low mile mostly original paint copo that had the same amount of turns into it. I have another with the same type of spring that I finished yesterday. They look identical. I’ll post some before photos in another post.
-
Before photos.
-
The striker spring with additional coils was used on full size GM vehicles (Impala, Caprice, Belair etc) to compensate for the larger, heavier hoods.
-
Makes sense. Just not sure why a couple original Camaro’s would have them..