1
Decoding/Numbers / Re: Caveat Emptor...beware the carefully worded ad
« on: June 21, 2018, 05:35:38 AM »
Seems to me his spelling of "Origanal" in the second line of the heading tells us exactly what will be happening.
News:
Welcome to the CRG Discussion Forum!
Classified ads are not allowed on the forum.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
2
General Discussion / Re: Crossram Package
« on: May 26, 2018, 07:06:18 AM »
Curious why the shield did not go with the intake when you sold it years earlier?
3
General Discussion / Re: Crossram Package
« on: May 19, 2018, 09:07:09 PM »
Hello Mr. Hanson. THANK YOU for jumping in and letting us learn from your experiences with the Camaro Cross ram.
I’m always amazed at how history seems to change when it gets written in a book or magazine. The last few words of text on page 86 of Guinn’s book clearly states “ It was not released as part of the cross ram package….”. Yet here we have someone who was there doing it in the day sharing experiences that are contrary to the book written decades later.
Seems quite clear that he received the shield from you. Why wouldn’t he just say in his book that it was indeed a part of the first couple of cross ram packages as you stated? I guess saying they were scrapped yet clearly showing one in the obviously later pictures on page 89 of his book shows he is the authority.
Does any of your information show the 3941134 number? CRG is known for having genuine and reliable information. We love hearing from those that were there in the day doing what we are struggling with today. I hope you feel comfortable sharing your experiences and information that you have.
Robert
I’m always amazed at how history seems to change when it gets written in a book or magazine. The last few words of text on page 86 of Guinn’s book clearly states “ It was not released as part of the cross ram package….”. Yet here we have someone who was there doing it in the day sharing experiences that are contrary to the book written decades later.
Seems quite clear that he received the shield from you. Why wouldn’t he just say in his book that it was indeed a part of the first couple of cross ram packages as you stated? I guess saying they were scrapped yet clearly showing one in the obviously later pictures on page 89 of his book shows he is the authority.
Does any of your information show the 3941134 number? CRG is known for having genuine and reliable information. We love hearing from those that were there in the day doing what we are struggling with today. I hope you feel comfortable sharing your experiences and information that you have.
Robert
4
Trans-Am Camaros / Re: For All of You That Want to Own A Trans Am Race Car
« on: November 01, 2013, 12:40:06 AM »
The floors don't appear very rusty 
5
Trans-Am Camaros / Re: 1969 Laguna Seca Trans-Am photos
« on: August 29, 2013, 07:44:05 AM »You've got a better eye than eye do, Robert. Took me awhile to find it.
Actually, I can't see anything either.
Dana, the better half of the current owners found it and made me aware of it.
Photo by Delmar Evans
6
Trans-Am Camaros / Re: 1969 Laguna Seca Trans-Am photos
« on: August 28, 2013, 06:06:29 AM »
Thank you again Mr. Evans for supplying these pictures for all of us to enjoy
Looks like the Tom Lynch Camaro in the first picture on the far left with the black hood raised.
Robert
Looks like the Tom Lynch Camaro in the first picture on the far left with the black hood raised.
Robert
7
Trans-Am Camaros / Re: 2013 Monterey motorsports reunion: Who's going?
« on: August 21, 2013, 06:26:46 AM »
At least they had Camaro spelled correctly 
9
Trans-Am Camaros / Re: Heavy duty GM 12-bolt axles
« on: May 03, 2013, 06:43:18 AM »Hello 1969Z28-RS
YES, I was using the term “JL8” in the broadest of definitions because I'm answering a question in a drum brake forum section that the answer applies to both the RPO JL8 units as well as the service package rear ends equipped with rear disc. I was attempting to answer just the question without a complete history of the topic. Sorry for the confusion.
I suppose I should have first asked about his term Kit since that is a new term to me. I have no desire to completely hijack this section and tern it into a JL8/rear disc brake discussion that would be covered up to others looking because of the title.
If you or someone wants to start a discussion about disc brake rears I will gladly contribute. Indeed there are numerous differences between the two assemblies. I will state that I'm quite hesitant to show pictures of stampings because of the individuals out there that seek to defraud others in our hobby.
You are correct; the term RPO JL- 8 should only apply to units installed in a specific car at the factory. My understanding is that only the small axle bearing units were installed. That differs from what was just posted as appears in a well known book. My experience is that both small axle bearing housings as well as large axle bearing housings were available over the counter since I have a small one. I will admit that I have owned that item for probably 30+ years, the last 25+ of which it has been installed in a car that I pay no attention to. Thus I should probably look at it again before I say much more. I seem to recall the lack of stamped codes being a major concern when I first inspected it. That was before books and information were generally available on such pieces, at least to me.
This hobby certainly has MANY variants in terminology that will probably never be cleared up. The term "cowl Hood' was never used to define the super scoop hood on a 69 Camaro is just one example. Do you think if you had walked into a Chevrolet parts department in 1990 and asked for a “special ducted hood” for your 69 pace car the guys would know what you wanted? Ask for a cowl hood and then you would get it. Which brings up a question; if you install an NOS (service item) special ducted hood on that pace car does it still qualify as a “ZL-2” option?
Not sure what you mean by “original Power Book” I assume you are referring to the “Chevrolet Special Equipment” book that seems to also go by the name “Green Sheet”. Since the pages were green in the original books I suspect that is where that term/name came from. The 3-9-72 edition does indeed list a part number for an axle assembly—or not.” # 3945131 Axle (rear) (3.73:1 Ratio) ( w/Disc Brakes)” is listed at the top of page 40. That seems to be the only complete unit. Not clear if that includes ALL the brake items or not. Earlier editions may provide more options. I do own a complete 69 counter parts book that may shed more light if you want me to dig it out later.
10
Trans-Am Camaros / Re: Smokey Yunick
« on: May 02, 2013, 07:49:26 PM »With reference to reply #51 - The carb "center to center" on the duct measures 10 3/4". I hope this helps.
That is the correct measurement between the carb studs on a GM Cross ram intake.
11
Trans-Am Camaros / Re: Heavy duty GM 12-bolt axles
« on: May 02, 2013, 05:42:55 AM »
Not quite sure what you mean by"The Heavy Duty Service Replacement Rear Disc Brake kit" or "differrent bolt pattern".
I own a small axle bearing JL-8 rear that has no stamp codes. That tells me it was a bare housing that was sold over the counter.
I also own a large axle JL-8 rear that has stamp codes. That tells me it was sold assembled over the counter--probably dragged around the counter.
When you refer to the "different bolt pattern" I'm guessing you mean the four holes on the flange that mount the caliper bracket or backing plate? This has NOTHING to do with the bearing size, as your pictures only show a flange and not the bearing area. ALL Camaro rear disc housings will utilize the larger pattern--same as the Impala you mentioned. This has NOTHING to do with the bearing size but rather the proper bolt pattern for the Corvette rear caliper bracket. Both small and large bearing axles used the big pattern because of the need to match the Corvette pieces.
I own a small axle bearing JL-8 rear that has no stamp codes. That tells me it was a bare housing that was sold over the counter.
I also own a large axle JL-8 rear that has stamp codes. That tells me it was sold assembled over the counter--probably dragged around the counter.
When you refer to the "different bolt pattern" I'm guessing you mean the four holes on the flange that mount the caliper bracket or backing plate? This has NOTHING to do with the bearing size, as your pictures only show a flange and not the bearing area. ALL Camaro rear disc housings will utilize the larger pattern--same as the Impala you mentioned. This has NOTHING to do with the bearing size but rather the proper bolt pattern for the Corvette rear caliper bracket. Both small and large bearing axles used the big pattern because of the need to match the Corvette pieces.
12
Trans-Am Camaros / Re: 1966-1972 Advertisements and classified ads
« on: April 16, 2013, 12:15:13 AM »
Both of Jon's ads show the same 67 Z with what appears to be a rear spoiler that was not an option for 67 
that was not an option for 67 13
Trans-Am Camaros / Re: Heater delete
« on: March 20, 2013, 02:06:58 AM »
My understanding is that starting with 1969 Federal law required a windshield defroster. Thus the heater delete option was eliminated. This would also explain why that sheet is NOT in the assembly manual. However, they did still produce the dash and firewall pieces as a service item.
Yes, the firewall pad would still have that area covered.
While I'm certain that some knowledgeable racers certainly did order 68 and earlier cars with the delete option, most probably did not.
However, my experience is that most heater delete plates have come out of regular cars in the state of Hawaii.
The plug used to eliminate the heater hoses from the engine had the 3/8 square hole, the same as used on the passenger cylinder Head of a 68 up small block. These tend to be hard to find new as most replacemends are the hexagon version. When I did mine some 20+ years ago I found the correct new plugs in an electric motor sales/repare shop. New electric motors have these plugs screwed in where the wiring conduit is run. The only difference is these are galvanized coated as I doubt the originals ever were.
Robert
Yes, the firewall pad would still have that area covered.
While I'm certain that some knowledgeable racers certainly did order 68 and earlier cars with the delete option, most probably did not.
However, my experience is that most heater delete plates have come out of regular cars in the state of Hawaii.
The plug used to eliminate the heater hoses from the engine had the 3/8 square hole, the same as used on the passenger cylinder Head of a 68 up small block. These tend to be hard to find new as most replacemends are the hexagon version. When I did mine some 20+ years ago I found the correct new plugs in an electric motor sales/repare shop. New electric motors have these plugs screwed in where the wiring conduit is run. The only difference is these are galvanized coated as I doubt the originals ever were.
Robert
14
Trans-Am Camaros / Heater delete
« on: March 17, 2013, 04:27:00 PM »
The firewall plates are held on with a 5/16 head screw. If you look at a 67 or 68 assembly manual you will find a sheet showing the heater delete. This also lists the part numbers for the pieces as well as the screws, #9419303. Then by looking at other pages you will discover that the same part number screw is also used on the resistor on the top inside box of the heater assembly. That is a common item you should be able to find. 
However, my experience is that not all these screws are identical.
Good luck and I appreciate your attention to detail.
However, my experience is that not all these screws are identical.Good luck and I appreciate your attention to detail.
15