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.

Topics - KevinK

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
 Just curious since I thought X-codes started mid December (12)?
   This is an unrestored, no motor shell,does not look tampered with at all and car is not for sale.  It's not my car and in private setting so no pics available. 

ST69 12437 NOR______ (body sequence # is <160000)
TR 711           69 69
11A                  X11

Restoration / Trunk lock orientation issue...? (67)
« on: May 15, 2013, 12:33:27 PM »
I posted this over on TC, but thought to see if anyone here could add to this...

In the final assembly phase of my '67, go to put the trunk lock cylinder in and when in, the key slot is rotated about 90 degrees.
The key slot is normally vertical, and since there's only one way the cylinder fits in the lock opening ,something is odd.
I've never had an issue with this, ...anyone else ever come across this?

For the record, my car is an early build '67 (Oct. '66), and this is the original rear panel.

   Ironically I was comparing to my other '67  (a survivo coupe) which is exactly the same since it's also an Oct. '66 build. But something doesn't add up when looking at the drawing from the other thread comparing the two layouts. Mine seems to match the one on the right, ...but neither of the tailpanels have ever been changed on either of the cars. (?)
 Can someone verify this drawing is labelled correctly?

   I never really paid much attention to the alignment slots on these locks. Is '68 the same as the '67?
   The net here is I need to figure out what lock cylinder to get that will be oriented correctly since my car is in final paint...


   FYI, ...this is a photo of my survivor (41,000 miles) '67 coupe. The tail panel along with all the other sheet metal is original.

Restoration / Seatbelt date code tags, change in font size, when?
« on: June 15, 2012, 06:53:22 PM »
Anyone here know WHEN the font (size) changed on the seatbelt tags? 

  Photo of an original belt from my (11A) '67 and an arbitrary '68 belt


1969 - Orphans / 19N508785 Block on CraigsList (Newburgh, NY)
« on: May 25, 2010, 02:18:52 AM »
... I contacted the seller and he provided the following #'s:
  V0838 DZ to the ad:

 His reply to my inquiry:
  only found # on front behind alt and they were pretty worn looks like  V0838DZ 19N508785 don`t know if these are what your talking about?  have a guy stopping tue nite to look at it

     I am trying to have a look at it tomorrow (will photo if I can)

General Discussion / Major announcement, ...Camaro reveal 7/21/08
« on: July 15, 2008, 09:12:46 PM »
Monday, July 21st, 4pm  (This is BEFORE the dealer announcement..., ...see below)

A LIVE major annoucement on July 21st at 4pm

Also, please note the following regarding the 7/22 dealer present (from J.Fitzpatrick)...

Please note the following regarding the 7/22 dealer presentations....

The Camaro Marketing Team realizes there is a lot of excitement and anticipation regarding the upcoming 2010 Camaro reveal. We understand the desire to get as much information about the new Camaro as possible; however, the IDL (Inter-Distance Learning) Broadcast is a private GM to Dealer training activity. Only GM and Dealership employees are authorized to view the telecast. Please do NOT visit a dealership and ask to view the broadcast.
If you worry that you miss something, don't; you find out very soon that there will be plenty of information available on Monday, July 21, on the new 2010 Camaro.
John Fitzpatrick
Marketing Manager - Camaro

Date: 5/20/2008 Camaro Summit #2 feedback

OK, it is.

Sorry for the delay, ...but I needed to get "The Father's Blessing" so to speak ;) before I posted. It's LONG, ...but I tried as best I could to provide as much information within the constraints of what we're allowed to say…

This is a long read but I wanted to include as much as I could to describe the experience of being at the Milford proving grounds attending the Camaro Summit 2. I’ll talk about the people and then, with as much detail as permitted, I’ll describe my personal impression of the new Camaro.

Let me start by saying, …THANK YOU! to Chevrolet, …for an incredible experience, …and an opportunity of a lifetime. I consider myself extremely blessed to be part of these Camaro Summits.

Words alone can not express my sincere gratitude and thanks to the people of General Motors who are involved with Camaro. I am beyond impressed when I find they are as passionate as any crazed enthusiast, yet also very aware that it needs to be more than just another muscle car. Their expertise with the level of technology and commitment to get it right, is impressive to say the least. To see that safety and quality were at the top of every aspect of the design (to details I couldn’t even imagine) was not only mind boggling, but clear evidence they are building a car targeted as best in class. Their focus on fuel economy clearly has NOT taken a back seat either. What is simply amazing is that they have managed to come up with a Camaro that can be the muscle car of the 21st century, yet also a fuel efficient daily driver for those that want to get around in style. A daunting task to say the least, …to satisfy the hardcore enthusiasts who want to be the first one down that ¼ mile, or the quickest around those apexes, …yet also offer a Camaro that will have fuel efficiency necessary in today’s economy. I must say, …they’ve built an incredible Camaro.

I will add, …this has been one amazing educational experiences for me as well. To see what goes into building a car, …safety, managing costs, weight considerations, engineering and quality considerations, …and not even getting into all the marketing studies they do. Trust me, …they have done a LOT of other focus group work, don’t think for a minute they are just talking to “enthusiasts”, …they DO get it. They also know they can’t satisfy everyone, it’s simply not possible. I would say though, if you have 10 things on your ‘Must have list’? …I feel pretty confident, …you’ll get 8-10 of them.

One of the things that really struck me was how all the designers and engineers talk about Camaro, …in many ways, they don’t look at it as a car. It has a personality, almost as if it’s alive. To hear them say (literally in their own words) “…it’s like raising a child”, the way they look at it, how they describe it, it really impresses upon you how deeply connected they are with this car. As if their own, it’s pretty obvious they’ve accepted the responsibility for raising it to a new level in today’s world, and I think they have every reason to feel the pride they show for bringing such an incredible Camaro back to the streets.

Now, …my impressions on the car. Obviously I can not reveal specific detail, …but I’ll do the best I can to describe what we experienced. Let’s face it, the Concept Camaro was a huge hit. Yes, some will say it’s too retro, others say it’s not retro enough, some don’t like it, but most absolutely love it. None-the-less the new Camaro has styling that clearly has gotten attention, …and GM knows it. With that said, …as we walked around the black curtain to see four new Camaros sitting there, …they were unquestionably true to form with the concept.

I stood there, amazed to begin with that we were there, …but it struck me, Camaro is back! …and there are four of them right here in front of me. As I noted the colors (red, silver, black and another), I began to see the cars were in various trim that one would find typical of Camaro. In many ways I felt a sense of relief, …since right in front of me was proof positive that GM has been listening, …and they are fully intent on getting this car right. There are noticeable differences with the packages we saw (ie. V6’s vs. V8’s), …a couple areas I thought could have been enhanced, …but overall, you could clearly tell them apart. Let me just say, the black one sat there looking like a panther ready to chase down anything that tried to run from it, …I was very impressed. Some other things were done that honestly I didn’t think would make it, …but I was very pleased to see the offering (as I know others will too). Admittedly, there were details I (and I know others) had hoped for that I did not see. Yet I believe they have this covered, …so I am not overly concerned. As for wheels that we saw (and we didn’t see all of them ; ), …one set was a huge hit with everyone, …very cool. Headlamps, …yes we saw the real ones, …you will not be disappointed, trust me on this : ).

The interior, …I am 6’ 1”, …and there was PLENTY of leg room. I actually had to move the seat forward to comfortably push the clutch in. Headroom was fine too, …as you move the seat back, …it seems to go lower a bit. With a helmet, it could be close. The back seat, …let’s face it, it’s fine for kids or car seats, …but not for someone 6’ tall. The seats were very supportive, …true to the concept style, …but much much better looking in my opinion. The overall layout of the dash, location of controls, shifter, etc. was fine. The console gauges were much improved over the concept, more visible than I thought they would be, very nicely done. The dash gauges were better than the concept, …and the lighting was very nicely done as well. There were a couple interior features that I would have liked to see differently. In all honestly one of them is ‘high’ on my list. Interestingly enough, …I was alone on this, …most others were fine with it. Again, …not a show stopper, …and surely not enough to take away from what I thought was an excellent interior design. The B-pillar, …yes it’s there. Sitting in the back seat you see it, …but interestingly from outside the window hides it. Hidden so well, …that I can’t recall anyone mentioning it. I was pleasantly surprised at how well they incorporated this. What was a concern for me, …is no longer. Around back, ..the trunk, …it’s surprisingly huge with plenty of space and easy access, no problems there at all. Up front, under the hood, …very clean (think concept) and I was surprised at some of the things they have planned with regard to the look of things.

OK, …drivetrains. Without detail (which I can not get into), ...I think they did an excellent job of covering the bases. From a base V6 to an upfitted V8, …whether fuel economy or horsepower (or even both) is on your mind, …you will not be disappointed one bit. As for transmission choices and engine combinations, …I think everyone will be very pleased (except the competition of course : ).

Before I get into driving impressions, …let me close the above with what the engineers continually reminded us. The cars we looked at were still being refined and fine tuned. They sure looked like finished cars to me, …fit and finish was exceptional. I can only imagine the level of quality that the final production cars will get.

The chance to drive…

First we drove the (auto trans, V8) ‘mules’ (the black cars that literally had white paint applied with a roller). These cars have been used, and tested in all kinds of ways, …so I wasn’t expecting much. To my surprise, …the car was very quiet, …not a rattle to be heard, …I was actually shocked considering the abuse they’ve gone through. The suspension was firm and predictable, …but not harsh at all. I was very impressed with how it handled, …and then I was told it was only 65% final in that car. That being the case, …it’s going to make our 4th gens look bad. The car did not feel too big, or too heavy, it tracked well, it accelerated fine, and the exhaust tone was perfect, …overall very impressive. I’ll interject here, that the engineers did ‘put them through the test’ so to speak. A controlled high speed turn, …and some (quick) straight line romps, …it sounded great and did the job quite well in my opinion. Visibility out the windshield was fine. I recall some saying there was issue with the A-pillar (ie. airbag) but I did not find that a problem at all. Door mirrors were the right size (and body color too), and when you look around, visibility was unobstructed. Overall feel of the car was excellent.

Next was a drive in the V6 car (fitted with a manual trans). I did not personally drive it, but observed and talked with almost all the others that did. The performance of this car was a huge surprise to all, …especially given the fuel efficiency capabilities (which is another success story in itself). I can say this, …it would give our 4th Gen SS’s a run for their money, …it surely surprised the heck out of us. Just to note, …the exhaust on the V6 cars was not the real exhaust,…they made it a point to tell us that.

What we did not drive was a manual trans V8 car. Based on the V6 that was driven and ‘some numbers we were shown’, …I don’t think we have anything to worry about… ; ).

As we’ve heard before, …”…the future indeed looks very bright.”



 Just curious how far apart the cast date is/could be from the stamped date on the tube??
  (This is a 10-bolt rear from a 1968 Camaro, ... 3.08:1 posi )
  If I'm reading the cast date clearly, ...I believe it's " F 26 7 ", ...where the stamped date is " PE 0918 G1 ". 
    If I'm correct, ...that's June 26th '67 cast vs. Sept. 18th stamped. That's about a 2  1/2 month spread which seems like a lot to me, ...but maybe it's 'typical'?
     Related, ...these are the numbers off the ring gear: " 1 GM 3790629 12 37 9 67 ", ...which (9 67) seems to match the stamped date.
   Thanks in advance for any info,

1968 - Orphans / '68 302 block 8N456682
« on: January 02, 2008, 11:34:14 AM »
...from an ad over on TC:
   ...sorry if this is a repost.

Originality / Quadrajet - air cleaner "SPACER" originally used?
« on: October 07, 2007, 10:43:40 AM »
  I recently purchased a repro air cleaner assembly where the BASE hits on areas of the carb (QJet) before it seats completely to the round gasket. The thread over on Team Camaro ( ) seems to indicate a "spacer" was (should be?) used under the base?
  I was/am not aware of this, ...and am curious if there was indeed a spacer and/or if so, does anyone have a photo of an original? ...if indeed one was used.

Originality / Alt. pulley diameter? (L34/L35)
« on: September 09, 2007, 11:25:36 AM »
 Anyone know what the diameter of the alternator pulley is/should be for an L34/L35 application ('68)?

Originality / '68 BB Clutch Bellcrank/Z-bar mount point and length ?
« on: September 05, 2007, 12:28:09 PM »
I'm finally re-installing the BB into my '68, ...however I have a question on the clutch bellcrank/Z-bar.
  When the Z-bar is mounted on the block side pivot ball (with the pivot ball mounted in the block as compared to the bellhousing) it seems awful close to the steering shaft/rag-joint. The AIM I believe shows the pivot ball in the block, ...but it almost seems the Z-bar would clear the steering shaft better if it were mounted in the bellhousing. (?)
  I was temporarily running a small block in the car (until the BB was finished). The Z-bar used with the SB is about 1" longer than the one I believe is for the BB. Is the BB bar indeed shorter?

1.) Does the block side pivot ball mount in the block or the bellhousing?
2.) Is a BB Z-bar shorter than a SB Z-bar?
  ...just to note, ...I do have the correct '...621 bellhousing and the engine frame mounts are the (original) correct BB ones. (ie. driver side slightly taller, (PN '......7').

  Thanks in advance for any information,
  ...lets hope it stays this clean...
 (Note: clutch pivot ball mounted in block, ...should this be in the bellhousing?)

  ...Finally resting back home again.

  Hopefully I'll have time over the next couple weeks to get everything back together and finish this up.  Will keep you posted...  ;)

 My '67 327/275hp w/smog has an emission decal on the air cleaner with #6421914 on it (decal is black with gold lettering).
   Does anyone know if this is specific decal (#6421914) is being reproduced? (a couple places I checked don't have that #)

Originality / Dist question... (re: '67 327/275 AIR PG)
« on: July 10, 2007, 03:11:17 AM »
I've got a low mileage original '67 with a 327/275hp, ...with A/C, ...with AIR, ...and PG trans.
  The distributor in the car (believed to be original) is # 1111150 6K13. The car is an 11B build with most dates mid October '66, the distributor date falls right in.
   From what I have read, ...I thought the distributor would have been 1111249...?
  (The reason I checked is that I am looking at a block (for parts), ...said to have come from a '67 Camaro 275hp, ...and it too has the 150 distributor, ...which I initially was thinking was incorrect...)
   ...maybe I'm just too tired, ...but looking at Colvin's book (by the numbers), seems the 150 distributor is listed for 283 applications... ???
   ...anyone know for sure??

  It is my understanding there were two designs of the starter heat shield from the mid 60's to early 70's (on a number of chevy's, ...including Camaro).
   Anyone know when the approx. swithcover was from 1st to 2nd design?  ...I am trying to locate the correct one for my (04C) built '68 Camaro (396).
   ...I believe the 2nd design is slightly larger than the 1st.

Ebay link here...

  This is the same car: (...I copied this from my post back in Jan.)
...I owned an unrestored L30/M20 RS briefly, ...but have since sold it (CRG has all the info on it).
   Here's a link to some photos I took of the car

  Interestingly enough, ...the guy who purchased it from me (from Missouri) had it up on Ebay (advertised as an RS/SS):,1 went over what I sold it to him for, but didn't meet his reserve.
   ...What I couldn't quite figure is WHY he painted the trim tag??
    Here's a pic when I had the car (nothing touched):

 ...and this is from the Ebay auction for the same car:

  ...I will refrain from jumping to conclusions, ...but it does make one wonder...???

    ...and what the trim tag is today (3rd one in photoset):

Pages: [1] 2 3 4