Messages

16

Trans-Am Camaros / Re: Cross-Ram VS Ford's IR Dominators

« on: January 04, 2019, 09:41:23 PM »

Interesting in that photo of the semi-hemi head the absence of basic roller rockers.  Still using the error-prone and heat producing stamped steel rockers.  Comments?

My guess would be they were using as much off the shelf stuff they could. If the intent was to actually make the engine available to the public, via RPO or COPO, it would have left with the stamped rockers as they were not going design a roller on a very low volume engine. The option price would have been extremely high most likely as i look at how expensive the ZL-1 option was for Gibb and that was no where near the development work than designing the semi hemi head and the more special parts would have made the engine that much hard to sell.

IF Chevrolet was going to homologate the semi hemi can't valve head for Trans Am it would have required the sale of the correct amount of production units. SCCA got bit by FoMoCo and their Tunnelport heads in 1968. By 1969 SCCA was verifying that production was being met. And for 1970 the numbers produced for homologation went up drastically. That engine would have had to be sellable to the public.
John

17

General Discussion / Re: Bloomington Gold adding Camaro's for 2019

« on: January 04, 2019, 12:58:57 AM »

I'm a new guy on this forum, and a Ford guy to boot. But after reading everything here, and everything on the Corvette forum I'd tell the Bloomington Gold folks to pound sand. See the deal is this....the Corvette folks have an image issue. It involves their noses being in the air and too many hairy chested shirt open gold chain wearing owners that look down on the heritage of the C1, C2, and C3 cars. I came here to learn about Camaros. I'd like to add a couple of those to my garage. I could give a flip about the fantastic plastic cars. The fact is the Corvette guys need the Camaro guys to support their show or they wouldn't be so gracious in allowing the Camaro group to attend.....you know....over there....in that parking spot...not here.
John

18

General Discussion / Re: New guy question

« on: January 02, 2019, 06:24:19 PM »

Needs an AAR 'Cuda, Challenger T/A & a 1969 Firebird T/A in that collection also
...Joe

Also, a Penske Javelin! Now you guys got me going…I want all of them too!  lol

Yes! The Mark Donohue 1970 Javelin SST or the T/A Javelin with a 390 and the T10 transmission would be a great car as well. Probably a good choice for the 4th car in that group moving the 1970 Z/28 to 5th car status. The AMC cars are however really dependant on the documents.

See the following link;
http://www.tajavelin.com
John

19

General Discussion / Re: New guy question

« on: January 02, 2019, 06:03:55 PM »

I agree with all that has been said. I would also add, picking up a copy (or borrowing), a copy of Jerry M's definitive 69Z book, will educate you on some basics. I would also advise to read the CRG links about 69 Camaros in general, and read different posts and responses on here.

Just curious how did you settle on a 69Z? Vs. an SS, or 69 vs. 68 or 67?

I have a '69 BOSS 302 and '70 BOSS 302 eventually I'd like to complete the collection with a '69 Z/28 and a '70 Z/28. I'm in no hurry to buy, I'm in the education phase right now. I am a patient individual. I figured this was the best place to learn about my target interests.
John

John,
As you know Chevy did not have a specific VIN number for the 302 DZ engine unlike Ford. Yes, it is much easier to ID the Boss 302's  'G' code on the VIN and unique 1/4 panels (1969). That said, (and as mentioned) documentation is key when searching for a Z/28. Like my collector car friends say "No documentation, no premium"
Btw, a '69 and '70 Z/28 would be a very nice addition to your collection of T/A cars.

Scott,
Thank you for"finding" this website for me, I have PM'd with Jon Mello about sharing pictures of the inside of the 1969 factory T/A engines. From carburetors to the oil pan, I'm in the process of taking better pictures of some of the parts. But it should be fun to share and maybe compare what "stock" FoMoCo supported team parts look like compared to actual stock FoMoCo production line parts. Possibly someone can be enticed to share pictures of actual Chevrolet team car parts from 1969 - 1970.

This link goes to where those pictures would eventually be.

http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?topic=17074.0

John

20

General Discussion / Re: New guy question

« on: January 02, 2019, 01:17:02 AM »

I agree with all that has been said. I would also add, picking up a copy (or borrowing), a copy of Jerry M's definitive 69Z book, will educate you on some basics. I would also advise to read the CRG links about 69 Camaros in general, and read different posts and responses on here.

Just curious how did you settle on a 69Z? Vs. an SS, or 69 vs. 68 or 67?

I have a '69 BOSS 302 and '70 BOSS 302 eventually I'd like to complete the collection with a '69 Z/28 and a '70 Z/28. I'm in no hurry to buy, I'm in the education phase right now. I am a patient individual. I figured this was the best place to learn about my target interests.
John

21

General Discussion / New guy question

« on: January 01, 2019, 08:08:18 PM »

Okay, what documentation or what processes need to be followed to make sure that you don't get a fake 1969 Z/28?
John

22

General Discussion / Re: 302 with crossram dyno numbers

« on: January 01, 2019, 01:52:28 AM »

Rebuilt my 69 Z engine this past year. Been in the car for 35 years and I decided to go through it. Only variations from stock specs are .040 overbore, 3927140 off road camshaft, stiffer valve springs, 69 GM crossram, and 1 5/8"primary 3" collector equal length headers. Best numbers were 370 lbs. torque @5700 and 417 H.P. @ 6700.

Compression ratio?

23

Trans-Am Camaros / Re: Cross-Ram VS Ford's IR Dominators

« on: December 27, 2018, 09:04:43 PM »

Jon,
Yes AMC did use them also…Btw, the Dominators were approved by SCCA, since they were homologated parts from Fords FIA records. That said, do you think Ford 'stretched' the rules by using IR Dominator Holley's to try and create a 'cheap' Weber type of induction?

Ford was always trying to stretch the rules to their advantage. They spent a lot of corporate money and expected wins.  All the manufacturers wanted to win but I think Ford was the most aggressive, i.e. the 15x9 wheels with offset that made them look like a 15x8, the Tunnel Port 302 that was never a production engine, the special front suspension components for '68, etc.

Did Chevrolet have any specific head castings for their 1969 or 1970 Trans Am engines? If so what was special about those T/A cylinder heads?
John

I dont think they did, but Im not an expert of any kind on the trans am cars as they were way before i was even a though. Though I have yet to see any odd ball casting numbers when it comes to small block heads that have listed in a book that were Z/28 specific. My guess is they were standard 2.02 heads (possibly the angle plug head?) that were then cleaned up with a good port and polish.

CBoy68SS,
Thank you for your answer, after I asked the question I read through the Traco thread and from Pigpens comments I kind of had the feeling that was the case. It sounds like the castings we're hand selected from production parts. Unlike the probably nefarious FoMoCo habit of making "slightly different, maybe better than production parts" with almost the same part number. I appreciate your time and answer.

John

24

Trans-Am Camaros / Re: Cross-Ram VS Ford's IR Dominators

« on: December 27, 2018, 09:12:55 AM »

Jon,
Yes AMC did use them also…Btw, the Dominators were approved by SCCA, since they were homologated parts from Fords FIA records. That said, do you think Ford 'stretched' the rules by using IR Dominator Holley's to try and create a 'cheap' Weber type of induction?

Ford was always trying to stretch the rules to their advantage. They spent a lot of corporate money and expected wins.  All the manufacturers wanted to win but I think Ford was the most aggressive, i.e. the 15x9 wheels with offset that made them look like a 15x8, the Tunnel Port 302 that was never a production engine, the special front suspension components for '68, etc.

Did Chevrolet have any specific head castings for their 1969 or 1970 Trans Am engines? If so what was special about those T/A cylinder heads?
John