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 - bowtie68iho

Pages: [1] 2
The original 67-68 tail light housing backing plates after almost 50 years look like a dull gray plating with a spangle pattern.  I'd say they almost look like an old galvanized chain link fence that has lost its luster over the years.  Even the repros have duplicated the aged, dull, finish (but the repros don't have the SAE 67 stampings).  Chain link fences are/were hot-dipped galvanized and also have the spangle pattern in the finish due to large zinc crystallites in the molten solution. 

Electrogalvanizing, also known as "clear zinc" plating, is a thinner plating than hot-dipping and does not have the spangle in it. 

In a separate CRG blog under Restoration, "Cadmium vs. Zinc Plating," JohnZ stated that either zinc or cadmium plating was an option in the 60's.  However, he didn't clarify which form of zinc and for which parts.  I'm guessing certain parts were clear zinc and certain ones were hot-dipped?  A good picture of aged, dull looking original ones, is posted under CRG blog Restoration, "Restoring a galvanized finish ???."

Does anyone know with certainty whether hot-dipped galvanizing or electrogalvanizing (i.e., "clear zinc"), or either, were original plating finishes on these housing backing plates?  Either finish would be shiny and look very different than the aged, dull look on all original and repro ones today.  It is important for our community to know if either or both of these finishes are acceptable to judges.

Thanks in advance!

There are 4 hex nuts (size 3/8"-16) with lock washers that mount the power brake booster to the firewall.  On UPC J50/A2 of the1968 FAIM, the bottom two nuts/washers are listed as "PRODUCTION NUT & L. WASHER."  The upper two are GM part numbers 9418931 (nut) and 103321 (lock washer).  Are the bottom two nuts/lock washers different than the top two?  What finish are these fasteners, phosphate (gray - black) or zinc (dark silver)?  The nut is not in the AMK Products catalog and the lock washer is available in both finishes. 

My gut says phosphate, but then why is the screw (3848408) zinc plated on the zinc dichromate bracket for the proportioning valve (UPC J52/A2 of the 1968 FAIM)?  Is it because it contacts the zinc dichromate plating?  If so, then shouldn't the 4 nuts/lock washers be zinc plated?

Any help would be appreciated.  Thanks in advance!

How many 1st Gen Camaros have been certified as Legend Concours from the inception of Legends through the 2012 Camaro Nationals?  Has anybody published these numbers?

I think it would be great if each future Legend Concours certification plaque also had a serial number on it that showed it's unique sequence among past Legend Concours cars?  At least then people seeing the plaque could realize the rarity of this high-level, prestigious, judged event.   I kind of relate this idea to either the Supercar Registry (Yenko, Dana, Motion, etc.) or Jerry MacNeish's Z28 Registry.

On the other hand, even though it might not be a current problem, serializing Legend plaques could also prevent future fraudulent plaques claiming concours certification.

I found an official GM photo that shows that Delcotron alternators originally had stickers on them.  Maybe the sticker fell off soon after the car left the lot, so not many people remember them as originally being there.  Even virgin survivor cars may have had them fall off over the years. 

Anyway, attached is a photo of a reproduction Delcotron sticker and a photo of Figure 2c (black and white GM photo) on Page 6Y-8 of an original (not reprinted) "1968 Chevrolet, Chevelle, Camaro, Chevy II and Corvette Chassis Overhaul Manual" (dated 1967) showing that same sticker affixed to the top of the alternator, with the Delcotron text bottom pointing toward the pulley.

With the official GM documentation presented here, will the Legends Judges accept having this Delcotron sticker on an alternator at the 2012 Camaro Nationals?


What is the assembly line correct 1968 Camaro vacuum break control assembly (i.e., choke pull-off) for a Rochester 4-barrel (4MV) carburetor?

According to Group 3.725 Carburetor Charts 23 and 25 of the 1967-1969 Camaro Master Parts Catalog No. 691A (June 1969), the correct vacuum break control assembly is #7034909 for all 327, 350, 396, and 427 cubic inch engines with Rochester Carburetor Model 4MV.

According to the "GM Part Number Replacements and Supersessions" Manual (August 1979), Part #7038960 replaced Part #7034909.

Last year, I bought a NOS #7038960 vacuum break (i.e., choke pull-off).  It had a silver-grey front and black rear (see photos below).  Note the "RP" logo on the front.  It seems that all of the aftermarket choke pull-offs are an off-white color.  Which color is assembly line correct?

Also, what is more correct for points in Legends judging: An incorrect-color, service replacement Rochester Products OEM part, or a correct-color aftermarket non-OEM part?

What is the correct "grey tip" oil dipstick for all 1968 Camaro small blocks?  Does anyone have a picture and details on the text scribed onto the blade?  Hopefully, JohnZ or one of the Legends judges can chime in.

All small blocks (302, 327, and 350) used the same oil dipstick (Group 1.516, 3923239) according to my 1967-69 Camaro Master Parts Catalog No. 691A (dated July 1969).  Page 6/B2 of the 1968 AIM also lists 3923239 as the dipstick for V-8 engines (pictured was a small block) and lists the dipstick as having a "grey tip". 

If it helps your search, according to my 1971 P&A 30A, the dimension from Full to Stop (Length A) is 17-17/32 inches and from Add to Stop (Length B) is 18-7/16 inches.

Originality / Thickness of original outside door handles
« on: May 15, 2012, 09:29:59 PM »
There were two different outside door handles used between 1967 and 1969 according to my 1967-69 Camaro Master Parts Catalog No. 691A (dated July 1969):

Group 10.527
1967-68 used 5716870, 71
1969 used 9706522, 23

Does anyone know which of these sets is the "thick" type handle and which one is the "thin" type?  Supposedly, there are noticeable differences between the handle thicknesses.

Does anyone know what the factory finish was on the two parking brake connectors between the intermediate cable and the two rear cables?  The NOS ones on eBay and the repops are clear zinc.  However, many NOS parts are GM service replacements and do not necessarily have the same finish as the factory originals.

Where the two factory original parking brake cable connectors natural, dark gray phosphate, black phosphate, or clear zinc?  Thanks in advance!

Does anyone recall whether the 1968 Camaro Rally Sport headlamp hinges (3918873, AIM Z22/A7) and headlamp door backing plates (3914747-8, AIM Z22/A7) were painted or a natural pot metal finish from the factory?  If painted, what color (black) and shade (flat, satin, or semigloss)?  The repros all have the hinges as unpainted pot metal and claim that was the original finish.  They sell the door plates as semigloss black.

Were the short pivot bolt (3899863, AIM Z22/A7) and long pivot bolts (3903453, AIM Z22/A7) for the 68 RS hinge phosphated or clear zinc plated?  All of the repros are clear zinc plated?

What were the factory finishes on the fender washers (3767139, AIM Z22/A8.5) and springs (3925477, AIM Z22/A8.5) for the 68 Rally Sport bell crank assembly?  I've seen repro springs as either clear zinc or satin black.

Lastly, what factory finish was on the headlamp bulb adjustment spring (5953168, AIM 12/A6)?  I've seen repros as either zinc dichromate (gold) or satin black.

Originality / Finish on battery hold down clamp
« on: April 13, 2011, 08:41:46 AM »
I just bought three used, original battery hold down clamps.  All three had the two "dimples" on the crimp side, but were covered in crud from years of use.  When I cleaned them off, they all had black EDP coating over bare phosphate plating..  Well, just two weeks ago a friend if mine had a supposed NOS one that was phosphated.  I've seen NOS GM replacement ones on eBay that were phosphated.  In a different CRG topic on battery clamp bolts, JohnZ said his original clamp was painted black.

Does anyone know what the original assembly line correct finish was?

I'm trying to piece together details on all direction and hazard flashers for 1967-69 Camaros.

The 1968 AIM lists the following 5 flashers for the 1968 Camaro:

Traffic Hazard Signals on 68 AIM Page 12/B1:
-3928799 (round shape).
-3904868 (optional, rectangular shape).
-3934200 (optional, rectangular shape).

Direction Signals on 68 AIM Page 12/B4:
-383638 (rectangular shape).
-3909545 (optional, round shape).

I have three different parts GM/Camaro catalogs: P&A 30A (dated August 1971), Camaro Master Parts Catalogue No. 691A (dated July 1969), and Camaro Master Parts Catalogue No. 731a (dated Dec 1972).

However, Group 2.892 among my three catalogs lists only the following 3 flashers for the 1967-69 Camaro:

-1967-69, 383639, 2-bulb, Type 1264H, A-418B.
-1967-68, 383637, 3-bulb, Stat Co. No. 145 or Tung Sol No. 323.
-1967-69, 3928799, two to six 1156 bulbs and two 1895 bulbs - heavy duty / Superseded 138303.

None of the part numbers match between the AIM and these parts catalogs.   Does anyone have pictures of assembly-line-correct traffic hazard and direction flashers that they can post for 67-69?  Also, can anyone put the specific manufacturer name, model number, text color, body color, stripe color, etc. of flasher with each of the GM part numbers listed above so everyone else reading this thread can get the correct flashers too? 

Lastly, I assume that non-RS used the 2-bulb flashers and RS used the 3-bulb flashers??

Thanks, all! 


Originality / What are the colors of each wiring harness tag?
« on: March 22, 2011, 10:59:47 PM »
Does anyone know what the original wiring harness tag colors were for each of the various harnesses on First Gen Camaros?  Here are the tag colors that I know of so far:

-A/C wiring harness tag was light blue. 
-Rear (trunk) wiring harness tag was white and located near left rear side marker light.
-Intermediate wiring harness tag was orange and located under the dash.

I need the following harness tag colors:
-Front light/alternator harness.
-Engine harness.
-Under dash harness.
-Powered convertible top harness.

Each tag had three thin arrows grouped together that fanned out (one bent 90 degrees to the left, one was straight, and one bent 90 degrees to the right) and the last 4 numbers of the GM part number.

The 68 or 69 AIMs do not show a pinch clamp on the radiator neck nipple for the overflow hose.  All that is shown is an overflow hose already attached.   I've seen black diamond "U" pinch clamps on some cars (not sure if they were original cars).  Was there ever a pinch clamp holding the hose to the radiator neck nipple?  If so, what color was it?  Black, yellow, olive drab, or red?

Originality / Brake booster vacuum hose, ribbed or not, what markings?
« on: January 05, 2011, 01:00:56 AM »
Does anyone know what an original brake booster hose looked like and how long was it?  Was it ribbed or smooth?  What text was stamped on it?  Was it different for 67, 68, or 69 Camaros?  Was it date-coded?

Corvettes had "SWAN  L. D. VACUUM BRAKE HOSE  FC-1" on them.  Any help would be appreciated.


Attached is a photo of two differential pinion flange straps, one stamped with the Saginaw "S" and one with a capital "T" (presumably, for Tonawanda??). 

Which one is factory correct for a 1968 Camaro with a TH400 automatic transmission (Norwood-built car)?

Pages: [1] 2