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.


Messages - camaro cat

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
1
Originality / Re: 69 Gas Caps revisited - original Cap?
« on: December 18, 2016, 12:56:56 AM »
I don't know how I missed this thread, and I don't know how much more information is needed. I looked at the gas cap from my 69 that came with it when I bought the car in the summer of 1979 and the cap still has gray primer sprayed on it by a previous owner. Car is an 02D built in NOR, has ears, SM stamp on one of the ears, black rubber gasket, has the 3 indention's on the back side, finger tabs are located closer to the "ANTI SURGE" lettering than "VEN TED", which appears to be more uncommon. Maybe I can eBay it for $500 because it is the more rare 2nd version or something like that. LOL. Cap looks to be in good non corroded but dirty and painted shape so my guess is it will stay on the car if and when I ever get it finished.

Loren

2
General Discussion / Re: door Jamb embossment
« on: September 14, 2016, 09:08:18 PM »
I can tell you my 10C LOS has the first design telephone style and they are original as I've owned since Sept. of 1976. No sign of any quarter replacement.

Loren

3
General Discussion / Re: 02D production date
« on: January 19, 2016, 11:30:59 PM »
That is interesting and I am glad I asked. So if there are no 10D LOS tags that are known, it is very likely that the 31st was the beginning of 11A tag attachment. However it also could be that what ever the last serial number recorded at the end of 2nd shift on Monday the 31st for October production, then had many Camaro's with 10D tags following it until the end of the week when the last 10D  tag would have been attached to a firewall that would have then come off the assembly  line sometime the following Tuesday the 8th or Wednesday the 9th.

Loren

4
General Discussion / Re: 02D production date
« on: January 19, 2016, 08:58:07 PM »
I'll add in. My 02D N605415 has a ship date according to NCRS of Thursday, 2/27/1969 and shipped to Bill White Chevrolet Co., Tulsa, OK. 1969 was a leap year so Friday, the 28th was the last day of the month. This brings up a question for my 67 to help understand how cowl tags where dated in line with actual production days. My 67 is  L110515 with a cowl tag date of 10C; and according to NCRS, a ship date of Tuesday, 10/25/1966, and shipped to Van Chevrolet Co., Shawnee Mission, KS. With  Halloween being the following Monday the 31st, was Monday the only build day that would of had a 10D cowl tags attached to the firewall, while Tuesday's production would have been the first 11A tags attached or would the first 4 days of November also have stayed with a cowl tag date of 10D and Monday, November 7 would have had the first 11A cowl tags installed on firewalls. 

Loren

5
Originality / Re: 1969, which pinion snubber
« on: March 09, 2013, 09:18:59 PM »
Round bolt on
BN 3:55
L/78,M-2?
02D Nor

Loren


6
I will post about a car my son & I were privileged to see last weekend about 1.25 hours away from us. A friend/customer of mine asked if I wanted to look at a low mile 69 Camaro a former workmate and current friend of his had bought from the original owner back in the beginning of December. As an added bonus, my son and I were picked up and given the honor of riding in my friend Monte's 1970 Citrus Green RS Z/28. Monte also owns a 69 Camaro that is built more for speed and this comes from when he worked for the company connecting this all together.

This Camaro is a sport coupe painted in code 57 Fathom Green and has a Black vinyl top with a code 721 standard medium green interior. Trim Tag shows it was built in Norwood during 11A and has an X11 on the tag. I noticed the tag rivets looked like they had no filler in them but tag has to be real. Car was ordered by first owner for his wife from a salesman friend at Fred McKenna Chevrolet in McPherson KS. Today this dealership is known as Wallace Chevrolet. Original owner worked for Boeing in Wichita KS and would not allow his wife to drive it to her work so he took her to work himself in another vehicle. They apparently drove the Camaro on 3 different trips and it probably helped that they never had any kids. I also was told this car was never driven during the winter.

Options I saw include an L65 2 barrel 350 c.i. engine mated to an M38 TurboHydro 350 automatic. I do not remember what the rear end ratio was and this car does have the original window sticker and POP which would list that. Under the hood are A/C with the sealing strip and foam blocks located on top of the radiator support and between the radiator support & radiator all there and in excellent shape, Power steering & Power Drum Brakes and the brake vacuum booster still has a white dot located at the top by the code tab & the thick paper tag located on the white elbow attaching to the vacuum brake hose. Car has a dual exhaust and though it has been replaced, it does have the doubler plate welded in the rear drivers wheel well. At all 4 corners and in the trunk are 5- 14x6 rally wheels and are attached to 4 finned drum brake hubs. Car was built with Style Trim so it has all the stainless trim on the wheel wells, driprail moldings, rear quarter moldings, etc. and white pinstripes coming over the wheel wells and following the body lines going back. On the exterior also installed where the stainless door edge guards. Under the hood and in the trunk are the light packages and they work as we had both open for most of the 3 hours we were there. The interior is very interesting as even though it is a standard green interior, it contains a column shift tilt column with a standard green steering wheel, 4 speaker AM/FM stereo radio with 4 speaker covers all painted in that medium green color and the back window tray looked perfect, the last 2 interior options are green floor mats and a remote control mirror.  I cant remember if the interior had any wood accent pieces but I do not think so.

Originality on this car is outstanding. Paint is said to be original with no repairs ever made. 1 very small ding was pointed out to me just above the drivers door handle. Story is when the original owner went to pick it up at McKenna, he saw the door ding which apparently came from when the car transport unloaded the car. McKenna offered to repair but the owner refused. I was shown some crazed paint on top of the drivers side front fender but didn't look at the passenger side for the same. Paint has very good luster and shine yet for being the original lacquer. Owner did point out a slight small bump or bubbling under the vinyl top seam below passenger side rear window. There also is a small  rust spot about 1 inch long and the width of a pencil on the rear side of the passenger rear wheel well. Car was undercoated by McKenna when it was new and they also sprayed undercoating on the gas tank. As I looked at the bottom side, and if you knew me personally, you'd know that me getting on my knees is not a good thing, I noticed that the original spiral shocks still were on the rear and I think the front ones are there also but I can't confirm that. I also saw that this car was built with a 10 bolt multi-leaf rear end. Is this about the only situation a first generation Camaro had multi-leaf rear springs on a 10 bolt rear?

Weatherstripping was all excellent looking and soft, with no tares or gouges. Even the trunk weatherstrip still had its red mark to designate the center. Current owner says the windows roll up tight and the car drives quiet inside.  With a standard interior, obviously, the trunk did not have a floor mat, and the trunk looked very nice & as it should be. When the owner picked up the car he had the, common for the day, chrome with rubber flap splash guards applied to all 4 wheel wells and they still look good. Obviously with 42,000 miles the original tires are gone and when the switch to radials was made, the original owner had the spare also changed. Under the hood 3 areas could use a little work and correcting. Valve cover gaskets were changed along with a warranty replacement of the waterpump. In both situations the original owner decided to touch up the chevy orange engine paint. He did not mask off anything so a little overspray that needs cleaned off the throttle linkage and the A/C mounting brackets by the waterpump. Original alternator, power steering, & A/C belts were changed but the originals are still with the car. However the top radiator hose and possibly the bottom hose also were replaced and unfortunately the clamps were replaced with common hose clamps. Air Cleaner black paint looks real nice and the stove pipe is in place. Engine is clean and paint looks good. With an automatic trans I assume it is right that there is no smog system.  I did notice the alternator mounting bracket looks like the 1970 style as it has more holes in it.

I am sure I have forgotten some items but I hope a painted a picture that accurately describes this car.  I strongly encouraged the current owner to Google "Camaro Research Group" and become acquainted here and get the cars info posted in the data base. I know that this post is "worthless without pictures" but that will be up to the current owner to provide. Car does have its original window stickler and POP.

As a summary to recap what I saw, was a shiny dark green Camaro with good looking white accents to set it off with an exceptionally clean interior, excellent condition trunk, and nice looking engine compartment. With 42,000 miles, the owner should not be afraid to drive it and put some more miles on it. However condition and originality wise it looks like a car with 20,000 miles. The original owner was not a car guy,he just was a quite a bit above average in care and how and when he would drive the car and had no idea these cars could be worth what they are today. Current owner reports the original owner also has a riding lawn mower he also bought back in the day and it is in similar condition   

The tie between the 2 involved in myself & my son being privileged to view this Camaro is that they worked together at Patterson Racing which builds race engines for 1 or 2 classes of NHRA drag racing. 

A little story to finish this essay about how hard it can be to give up something you've been close to for so long. Current owner told me that when the original owner agreed to the sale it was because his wife had passed about a decade ago, and he realized that being retired and in his 80's, he just didn't need it any more. Original owner requested that they do the financial trade at his bank and that the current owner have someone else remove the car from his property before he went back home. As it turned out, they still decided to make the exchange at the original owners house. After completing the deal, the current owner; with the original owner standing beside his garage door, climbed in and started the car, put it into drive, and turned around to wave goodbye, and thank you to the original owner; and saw that he was no longer there. 

Loren

7
Originality / Re: Leaf Spring code?
« on: February 16, 2013, 10:26:38 PM »
I just reread this post & this time as I looked at the picture of the edge of the spring, it immediately struck me that  the embossed letters are not "GMU" but "GM-U". Not a big deal but if it helps in determining the source for this detail, then hopefully I've made a small contribution.

Loren

8
General Discussion / Re: LA/Norwood shipping
« on: July 20, 2011, 02:18:12 AM »
And my 67 L-30 was built @ Van Nuys, shipped to and sold new at a Chevrolet dealership in Kansas City KS.

Loren

9
Decoding/Numbers / Re: 67 L30 Carb
« on: June 03, 2011, 04:28:58 AM »
My 10C LOS L-30 was built with a Carter carb.

Loren

10
Originality / Re: Front Calipers
« on: October 12, 2009, 01:56:58 AM »
I understand. I was afraid I had done the same thing and had to go back and recheck. That's when I went crazy and noticed the different styles of font on the numerals.

Loren

11
Originality / Re: Front Calipers
« on: October 12, 2009, 12:33:05 AM »
Are you sure that's right? I looked at mine and they are both cast 5463633. In looking at them they are the same casting, just machined differently.  I noticed that on both, the first 3 digits "546" are the same size. On one the number 3 in the 4 spot is a much larger font that any of  the other number's, but on the other caliper it is the same size as the first 3. On both, the last 3 digits "633" are larger font than the first 3 or 4. The caliper machined for the passenger side which has the large 3 has a casting date of 20 while the other side has a date of 345. They go on a 02D car. This may be the craziest bit of detail I have ever posted about but to much is better than not enough.

Loren

12
Research Topics & Reports / Re: Gas tank date codes
« on: August 04, 2009, 04:13:33 AM »
I finally took the time to to check the other tank I have access too. It is an 11D date code and the tank has a 69 51 stamped on it. I notice others have one upside down number on their tanks. It could be that the 5 and the 1 were installed backwards and should have been 69 15 which lines up better with other submitted info. On my 02D car I always thought the 29 69 meant the 29th day of 1969 which fits with a 02D build date. But that is obviously not right. My guess is it refers to the 29th week of gas tank production for 1969 production and probably started at the end of July or beginning of August 1968.

Loren

13
Research Topics & Reports / Re: Gas tank date codes
« on: July 19, 2009, 12:10:53 AM »
The tank from my 02D car is also 29 69. I think I can get a code off a 1st week of Dec 1968 to add also.

Loren

14
Originality / Re: Smog hose part numbers
« on: August 24, 2008, 01:53:24 AM »
I'll bite. These hoses are originally off a 70 Camaro L78. I have known of the the car from the early 70's when I was still in grade school. The owner was also an owner of the 2 Camaros I own now and I bought the entire smog setup off him in about 1983 for $15. I also have 4 of the original steel wheels from that car. The long hose is 3940937 GM JR and the short hose is 3969908 GM LM. The long hose still has that white residue on it that original hoses can have.

Loren

15
Originality / Re: groove machined in original rear brake shoes
« on: August 19, 2008, 01:48:11 PM »
Yes. I have my original used one's, and own a couple of sets of NOS shoes. They all have grooves in them as you describe as do the front disc pads for 67/68. I have not yet found a set of NOS 69 disc brake pads but assume they are similiar.

Loren

Pages: [1] 2 3 4