Messages

196

Restoration / Re: What's the correct paint procedure for the inside lower valance?

« on: June 07, 2006, 06:04:01 PM »

So John,

What explains the confusion and why some restored Camaros have the inside of the lower front valance painted body color?

What are your thoughts about the yellow '67 RS/SS mentioned in this thread?  Would there have been any way for the painter
to get "creative" and paint the inside of the front valance in question if they wanted to?  Based on your process description, I
can't see how that would be possible.  Still,there are questions.....................  

Steve

197

Restoration / Re: What's the correct paint procedure for the inside lower valance?

« on: June 07, 2006, 02:40:32 PM »

None of the exterior color-painted front sheet metal panels (hood, fenders, header, valance, fender extensions) had color on the inside; they were hung on a front end "buck" conveyor carrier in approximate car position with several inches between panels, and the valance panel outer surface faced upwards. Any color on the inside surfaces was overspray from spraying the edges. The inside surfaces were semi-gloss black flow-coat primer.

John,

Did anyone ever take pictures of any of these processes?  I personally would love to see how this, and many other processes were done. 
In lieu of pictures, think you could make a sketch or two showing how this arrangement was laid-out for painting?

Steve

198

Restoration / Re: What's the correct paint procedure for the inside lower valance?

« on: June 07, 2006, 04:46:37 AM »

John,

I believe right around your build date was the cut off point. Let me research it a little more.

Steve

John,

My research indicates that 11B ( +/- one week ) may have been the cut-off point for the extended stripe.

This is a famous image from back in the day.  You can clearly see the extended stripe details in this shot.
Notice how the forward most pin stripe stops at the bumper cutout.  This had been disputed in the past.



Steve

199

Restoration / Re: What's the correct paint procedure for the inside lower valance?

« on: June 06, 2006, 10:44:41 PM »

John,

I believe right around your build date was the cut off point.  Let me research it a little more.

Steve

200

Restoration / What's the correct paint procedure for the inside lower valance?

« on: June 03, 2006, 04:04:17 AM »

When I restored my 69 Camaro back in the early 1980's, we didn't spray in inside of the front lower valance panel hugger orange ( except over spray ).  More and more
I notice cars with the inside painted with varying degrees of coverage.  So, what is the correct procedure?  How was this operation performed at the factory?  How
far should the exterior color cover in inside areas?  How dense should the color actually be?

Would anyone have image(s) showing a good example of the correct coverage?  I am going to attempt to remove the grill, etc. in an effort to gain access to these
areas.  While I am at it, I am going to extend my D/90 striping the "correct" one inch or so below the split on the lower fender panel.  This was the way the early
build cars were done.  I missed that one as well in 1980....

I'm still hoping for a post of a good image of the correct way the early D/90 stripes were done on the lower fender area..

Steve

201

Originality / Re: 69 Camaro big block oil line for gauges

« on: June 03, 2006, 03:57:55 AM »

Brian,

Would it be the lower left most hole by chance?  Also, is the bracket cocked slightly?  I'm trying to picture this in my mind.

It ain't working for me here....................

Steve

202

Originality / Re: 69 Camaro big block oil line for gauges

« on: June 02, 2006, 03:14:19 AM »

One fast question for anyone with an original big block setup.

Where exactly does that little silver cad colored bracket mount on the engine?
Can anyone post an image of the line assembled in the car?

Steve

203

Originality / Re: 69 Camaro big block oil line for gauges

« on: June 02, 2006, 03:10:17 AM »

Here you go Guys!

As we were informed here, Rick's has the whole setup.....

Steve

204

Originality / Re: 69 Camaro big block oil line for gauges

« on: May 26, 2006, 10:32:53 PM »

Hey Camaro Cat!

Thanks for the post of the detailed images.  Just what I was after.  Now, can I ask you to take some close-up images of the
fittings and the short line so I can see exactly what I am after?  Also, is the longer line ( that runs through the firewall and
connects to the gauges ) copper, or plastic?

BTW, that bracket you are after in made in reproduction.  I believe Paragon makes it.  I have one here somewhere........

Steve

205

Originality / Re: 69 Camaro big block oil line for gauges

« on: May 20, 2006, 03:06:41 AM »

John,

I'm almost positive that the original image I posted of my oil fitting is original.  Do you agree? 

So, was the oil line for the 69 Camaro ( 396 ) copper, or plastic?  I'm still confused......

Steve

206

Originality / 69 Camaro big block oil line for gauges

« on: May 08, 2006, 02:42:34 AM »

I am currently looking for an original oil line setup ( for gauges ) for my SS Camaro.  I have the original brass fitting that screws into
the block ( above the oil filter ) and an additional piece screwed into that brass fitting ( SEE IMAGE ).  I need to know what the
remainder of the original components look like.  Is the oil line copper, or plastic? 



Can anyone post an image of an original BB oil line ( complete if posible )?

Thanks,
Steve

207

Restoration / Re: Multi leaf springs

« on: April 16, 2006, 12:33:13 AM »

Steve,

The "BK" Standard rear spring is P/N 3955740, the "BM" (F41) rear spring is P/N 3934894 and the "BL" (G31) rear spring is P/N 3955743. Unfortunately, my September, 1968 P&A 34 only shows one spring listing for 1969 rears (P/N 3934894). Luckily, it's your F41 option and is a 5 leaf. The other two aren't shown in my book since it's "new" for 1969. Hopefully someone with a later P&A will be able to give you the other two listings.

Ed

Hi Ed,

Thanks for the help.  I have to say that I am somewhat confused and need further clarification on the "fields" of the spring calculator.

For the rear springs, what do each of these fields signify:

Rear Spring Wt. = 84
RPO Spring Code = BK ( What does this tell me about my springs )
HD - F41 Spring Code = BM \____ Why two HD spring codes?
HD - G31 Spring Code = BL /

Steve

208

Restoration / Re: Multi leaf springs

« on: April 14, 2006, 09:49:39 PM »

Steve,

Nowadays I'm not sure how much you'll get out of it. It seems that there are really only a few options when it comes to rear springs on our cars. Places like Ricks, Ground Up, Classic Industries, etc... only sell one or two versions at most. Kind of a "one size fits all" mentality. That's probably why people experience problems when trying to fit these things onto their cars. Some folks complain that the car is too high, others complain of just the opposite! Since GM had hundreds of versions of the same basic spring for each car, we can immediately rule out the "one size fits all" spring.

However, there IS hope! Places like Eaton or Triangle appear to be the answer. (At least according to their ads!!) Therefore, if dealing with one of these type of companies, it's best if you know what you're talking about before contacting a salesman. IF you can give them a rear spring rate and/or a spring code to go by, there's a much better possibility that what you come away with will be much closer to what your car originally came with in the first place.

In some cases, I can look up original codes and/or Part Numbers in the P&A and give you an exact spring count and spring rate. I can't do that with all applications since the P&A doesn't list every spring that came on these cars, but I can probably get you in the ballpark. So in these cases, it would be benificial if you knew the code at the bottom of the calculation program.

If you can get me the code, I'll give it a shot!

Ed

Hi Ed,

Sorry it took me this long to get back to you on this.  Away too much on business to remember where I left my brain........

Here is the output from the spring calculator.



Thanks for any assistance you can lend.

Steve

209

Maintenance / Re: Low brake pedal after booster installation?

« on: April 03, 2006, 11:31:27 AM »

I had a spare 9204 booster that I sent to Jerry MacNeish for restoration and he discovered that the pushrod was also incorrect.  He supplied a correct one for me

Steve

210

Originality / Re: Original 1969 Camaro ZL/2 flapper valve assembly screws

« on: April 02, 2006, 01:04:12 AM »

Come on guys!  Someone pull a screw & take me a picture.  I'll send a 6-pack of

Steve