Messages

1

Site Comments/Discussion / Re: Quesiton to site moderator or managers

« on: July 09, 2011, 09:35:31 PM »

Thanks, 69pace....I tried it over here to respond to you and I added one picture, it did not accept and as you stated an error occured, more than likely the picture size and upload. I will try to reply to the topic and send anyone wanting to view over to PhotoBucket. This has worked for me at other forums, I just have to get the album ready. Thanks again, Gino

2

Site Comments/Discussion / Quesiton to site moderator or managers

« on: July 09, 2011, 09:14:03 PM »

Is there a time frame before a reply is put up after I post it because of it being reviewed for content or other. Twice now I have replied to a topic and after previewing it and posting it never appeared, I had added some pictures and then come to find out at this area of the forum that you guys wanted pictures cropped or downsized a bit. I do not think that was so much of a problem but it has been well over 15 minutes and it has not been posted. Anyhow I was just wondering as to maybe a reason for a delay. If no answer, I will write back to the topic and try to post again and see if it is a problem on my end.... Thanks Gino,

3

Originality / Re: 1967 Simulated Mag Five Spoke Hub Cap

« on: July 06, 2011, 09:39:21 PM »

To have a different part number, there must be at least some subtle differences, I am trying to figure out what the differences were between the early 65-66 and those that followed. The first two pictures appear similar.

4

Originality / Re: 1967 Simulated Mag Five Spoke Hub Cap

« on: July 05, 2011, 10:39:53 PM »

Thanks Ed,

 I cannot seem to find a part number anywhere except on the back of the bow tie center cap. It is casted into the part but is not anywhere near to the numbers you gave out. It is obvious that the hub cap was made of a few parts and this was just a casting number for the cast spokes. I looked around the edges of the rolled and formed steel and no numbers appear.

5

Originality / Re: 1967 Simulated Mag Five Spoke Hub Cap

« on: July 05, 2011, 01:12:05 AM »

Ed,

Thanks for your response and pictures.   So would you say that early produced 67 Camaros  from Aug. 66, Sept. 66, Oct. 66, and Nov. 66  would be outfitted with the 65-66 version. This being that this part (PN 3872861 was on hand before there was a second variation PN. 3903086 of the hub cap.

6

Originality / 1967 Simulated Mag Five Spoke Hub Cap

« on: July 04, 2011, 05:47:41 PM »

Sorry to all, I did not proof my topic before I submitted it, I made a typo in the listing regarding the SUBJECT. It did not make much sense without having the word "Simulated" included, it was well after it was posted that I reviewed it for content. Anyhow that better defines what specifically I am asking about. Sorry to double post on this same subject. I believe by clarifying now, I will be better able to get some valid responses. In the first post, it appeared a little vague as to what type of hub cap I was referring to..  Thanks

7

Originality / Re: 67-68 Front Bumper @Ebay

« on: October 27, 2009, 10:40:12 PM »

And I want to thank you 1968RSZ8, gene

8

Originality / 67-68 Front Bumper @Ebay

« on: October 27, 2009, 10:03:51 PM »

Ebay    Item# 160341730322  67-68 Camaro Rechromed front bumper
A guy is asking questions as to how many holes in the bottom bumper center and at the outboard ends top and bottom, he makes a statement about mounting differences of the different years. So how many holes would be correct for the 67 year and which one would be for the 68 year. THe AIM manual does not show the bottoms, and of course it is hand drawn, I have seen the descrepancies from the drawings in other areas.

9

Originality / Re: Rear bumper guard placement

« on: October 26, 2009, 04:08:36 AM »

Sorry to all, I am referring to the delux bumper guard option for the rear 1967 car

10

Originality / Rear bumper guard placement

« on: October 26, 2009, 04:06:49 AM »

Can someone post pictures of rear bumper guard placement, at least the drilled holes. Would like to see some examples of finished pictures also. Yes I have the manual but would like to see a few pictures, some I have seen are placed differently, I would like to know if the holes were field drilled for cars that got the option and how they were placed behind the tail light. I am curious as to the existing holes in the lower pan as mine does not have any.... any help will do as to pictures and after viewing I will reply with any other questions,,,,,thanks

11

Decoding/Numbers / Steering Column, coded as a component?

« on: July 15, 2009, 02:37:50 PM »

I was looking at the gas tank post and thought about other components, it is obvious when it came to parts made by other vendors that they got coded or when they came from other GM plants and had to get shipped to the assembly plant. How about an item component like the steering column. Are there date codes on them and if so where can they be found?

12

Restoration / 67-68 Bumper guard inserts

« on: May 27, 2009, 12:11:35 AM »

A guy I noticed on ebay is selling a set of inserts for rear bumper guards, yes they are OEM GM stock, at least in the pictures. Are these things really going for this kind of money or if you shop it around will some more come up for cheaper. Is there a lot of GM stock available on these rubber pieces. I have seen them as reproduced items but have never seen the quality. Mine are 43 years and showing signs of age. If the quality is good on the cheaper repros, please advise. The OEM NOS ones are a lot of money for 2 1/2 cents of molded rubber.

13

Originality / Re: ? California Plates - 1967 corresponding letters ?

« on: May 21, 2009, 08:06:26 PM »

Thanks GaryL   Veteran,,    Yes that is true that In July 2009 it will be legal to apply black plates to any car that was built between 1962 and 1970, correct me if I am wrong on the years. No problem, a lot of people are going to do it. My point is, that getting a set of plates being close to the date of build is a task if you want to be "Correct" or "Near Correct". And some purist out there will snicker knowing all the facts and criteria. He may belittle you at the next place you show up with the car. It just happens that for at least twenty plus years now, through, Hemmings, (where I first noticed), auto traders magazines, Barret-Jackson Auction and on e-bay, people are relying heavily on advertising these vehicles as "California Black Plate Cars".  I guy will drop down an extra few dollars just to have this. Years back a guy I know was dealing on a car in Oaklahoma . When he run those plates through DMV, they told him they were from another vehicle. Bottom line is, some people will want to be spot on, when trying to put a black plate on. This by being close to letter order and build date. Others do not care, they just want a "California Black Plate Car". And then there is the scalper who will take advantage of the upcoming  law and put the plates on a vehicle he buys in Minnesota and then resell it as a bonafied "California Black Plate Car" and get the big bucks and the new owner will have to find out sooner or later he got Boned!  Anyhow it will become a hot topic after July rolls around,  good luck!    genminmar

14

Originality / Re: ? California Plates - 1967 corresponding letters ?

« on: May 21, 2009, 01:25:34 AM »

Backing up  CNorton "The Veteran" on his comment and an explanation as to why. And this goes for any research you may be doing if you are going to try and apply the older black plates to a car between 1962 and 1970. You have to get it in the right window. CNorton was saying that an ECSxxx for a 67 year car is a real stretch for the sequential order. This will answer his reasoning. #1 There were a lot of cars in California in 1962. In this year they changed from yellow plates to black plates and in order for all the non commercial cars to be outfitted with black plates. For what ever was on the road plus all the new ones being sold, they had to start at AAA 001 and it ate up a lot of letters and numbers in the sequential format. #2 They then had to continue each year 63", 64", 65", 66", and to 67" with all the new cars and whatever was transferred into the state from elsewhere.  As for some of the few that have been presented in this topic we can see that a 67" car could possibly be in the area of maybe RAAxxx and forward. It appears that the earliest car in the topic is a 66 build with the SWUxxx plate. We could use more input from others with 64", 65", 66", cars, they do not have to be Camaro's.......Do not put the plates on and pay the big money unless you have got the letters and numbers close enough to work. There are hounds out there that will gladly take the money! And there will always be the wiseacre that will spot it and let you know you have egg on your face.

15

Decoding/Numbers / Re: Another 69 RS question

« on: May 20, 2009, 12:56:15 AM »

Of course responding to richs69rs, there was the badging on the steering wheel, front fenders, the grille and the panel below the rear deck. If it is bonafied all these clues and like richs69rs had mentioned will begin to ring true how real it might be. If all these little subtle items are there, then it is coming closer to being a true RS car. Event the best of fake cars do not go to this extent to change one to a correct RS car. And if they did then start looking for all the reproduction parts and this should make you wonder about it's validity. Then see if the guy that is claiming it is so correct has a sweaty brow!   No suits, No boots, No ties, No lies    You can always smell BS