Messages

1

General Discussion / Re: Master Cylinder Rust Prevention

« on: August 13, 2024, 07:02:16 PM »

Hmmm, now I'll have to reconsider.  I always thought that they were natural finish from the factory, but I see now that Jerry M's book says Semi Gloss black, natural acceptable.  So I guess they did come both ways.  Always liked the natural, but unrusted look, but I guess that's not practical.  Perhaps I'll try the baked finish then. 

Thanks for clarifying.

2

General Discussion / Master Cylinder Rust Prevention

« on: August 13, 2024, 01:22:57 AM »

I'm changing out my power brake master cylinder as part of a long needed cleanup for my 69 Camaro. I am trying to keep everything as original looking as possible without breaking the bank .  I've had the new master cylinder laying around for months and of course it's already showing rust.  I've read about every possible way that people are dealing with obtaining a non-rusted finish.  Most paint options eventually succumb to brake fluid that eventually hits the finish.  I tested a baked caliper paint finish on another surface and it only held up a little better against brake fluid.  I don't like the way that black, clear, or even cast iron paint or epoxy looks, and I don't want to switch to silicone fluid.  I considered maintaining the surface with a rust preventative but I think that would encourage dirt to stick to it. 

I'm just discovering guys that have used Calyx manifold dressing on master cylinders.  It too needs to be maintained to a degree and since it really doesn't dry, it will scuff off a little if touched, which I'm ok with.  Then I read a post that someone just uses anti-seize paste since apparently the manifold dressing is basically a graphite paste.  I rubbed a tiny bit of Never Seize (not the high temperature nickel stuff) on my slightly rusted master cylinder and the rust disappears and the final color is indistiguishable from the bare cast iron.

So has anyone else tried this technique, and is this an effective enough finish that might only need minor occaisional touchups?

3

General Discussion / Re: Downloadable AIM's and some service manuals

« on: November 06, 2023, 05:48:29 AM »

I noticed there is no link to the 1969 Fisher Body Manual.

So here it is:  https://archmagev.com/Chevelle/1969FisherBody.pdf

4

General Discussion / Re: Late '69 3/8 Fuel line

« on: October 24, 2023, 04:30:45 AM »

Thanks for clarifying.  I wanted to be sure they were the correct assembly for the 350 motor in case the car was originally a 307 and someone wasn't paying attention to details during the engine change.

5

General Discussion / Re: Late '69 3/8 Fuel line

« on: October 21, 2023, 05:30:13 AM »

Don't forget the ever-popular L14, 307 cubic inch V8.
[/quote]

Yes, more probable that it was a 307, which brings up an interesting point since the 307 and 350 use slightly different height motor mounts.  I'll need to check what I have.

6

General Discussion / Re: Late '69 3/8 Fuel line

« on: October 18, 2023, 04:42:55 PM »

I think you are both right.  Looks like it had to originally be the L65 as it is the only late 69 V8 with a single fuel line.  I didn't realize that the 2 bbl Rochesters did not need the vent line.  Would have thought that all Rochesters then had the float valve leakage issue.

When I bought the car, Tranny is M21 # 3925661 ('70-'74).  Rear is BV Code 12 bolt posi (69) with multileaf springs - but the gears are no longer 4.10.    14 x 7 Rally wheels. Cowl Induction hood.  So lots of changes.  Somebody must have crashed another Camaro and pulled the parts (duh).  I subsequently put in a rebuilt engine from another crashed Camaro - Heads and intake manifold are from a '70 Z28 on a HA code block.

Also telling is that the speedo cable is left of steering wheel, so originally non-Muncie tranny.

Thanks for the guidance!

7

General Discussion / Late '69 3/8 Fuel line

« on: October 18, 2023, 06:38:29 AM »

First post here on CRG (but longtime stalker of great information here-Thank You!)

I am trying to nail down how my car was fitted out when born.  I have a late 69 X11 coupe with SS350 badging, 350 4 spd non-original power train.  Dash VIN and Cowl Tag VIN is 12437 Norwood, so car was originally a V8.  I have all the things associated with Z21 Body Style trim except no wheel pinstripes.  Car has been repainted.  So far it is possible that it could be a real SS but maybe not.

What I don't understand is that I have a single 3/8 fuel line with NO vent line - this all looks to me to be original all the way back to the presumably original tank sending unit.  I thought all V8s had Rochester carbs and all 69 Rochester carbs used the vent line.  Only Holleys didn't require the vent line.

How do I reconcile this?  Were later V8 cars equipped with a carb that didn't need the vent line?