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 - bertfam

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 205
31
Restoration / Re: Posi tag on rear before or after painting
« on: December 31, 2017, 03:36:44 PM »
Yes, through late 1967 production the plug was 3/4 x 14 (Service P/N 3866433 - "Plug & Tag"), then starting late 1967 production (exact date unknown) and after, the plug was 1/2 x 14 (Service P/N 3931171 - "Plug & Tag").

Ed

32
Garage Talk / Re: Muscle car assembley line video
« on: December 30, 2017, 08:12:16 PM »
If you can't find John (and Al), I've pointed them out in the picture below.

Ed

33
Restoration / Re: Posi tag on rear before or after painting
« on: December 29, 2017, 10:54:02 PM »
Mike, this would be a good question for John. I'll see if I can get him to reply.

In the meantime, here's what I believe.

The axle was painted at the axle assembly plant (i.e. the Detroit Gear and Axle plant), but not filled until it got to the vehicle assembly plant (Norwood or Van Nuys). This leads me to believe that some kind of plug or cover may have been used to cover the fill hole when the axle was painted, and then the plug and tag (which came as a "unit" - P/N 3866433 - see below) installed after the axle was filled.

Of course, this is just a guess on my part, but it seems to me that if the "unit" were painted at the axle plant, it would be difficult at best to completely mask off the tag and I don't recall ever seeing any overspray on any posi tags.

Ed

34
General Discussion / Re: 69 Z/28 124379N591947
« on: December 27, 2017, 04:18:40 PM »
jt, the reply Bryon posted is because of WHERE you originally started the thread (the Orphans section). While it's not allowed there, I see no reason not to allow it on the forum so I moved it to the General Discussion section.

I also fixed your title (you were missing the 9 in 124379N591947

Ed

35
Decoding/Numbers / Re: Documentation for 9N657909
« on: December 26, 2017, 09:04:03 PM »
From ebay:

Quote
This listing was ended by the seller because there was an error in the listing.

Let's see if it comes back, and if it does will it still have the fake paperwork?

Ed

36
Originality / Re: Original door mirror fame
« on: December 21, 2017, 06:23:09 PM »
Chick, I try not to say never which is why I don't participate in judging (just WAY TOO MUCH DRAMA), so it's very possible there were mirrors with little to no parting line. However, that being said, the process of die casting leads to quality issues after xxx number of castings have been done. Dies wear, and especially dies where you have to place two or more dies together to form one part. The mirror base consisted of two separate dies, joined together at the parting line and then the metal poured into the die. While I don't know this for sure, I'm fairly certain the GM directive stipulated that the excess slag be ground off. This would have probably included any excess slag at the parting line. Especially at the top where it's easily seen. Did they always do this? Apparently not since original mirrors have been observed with a HUGE parting line (up to a few millimeters in fact)!

Yes, I'm sure there were many sets of dies, and lots of replacements once the originals became too worn to use. This same exact base was used on the Camaro, Chevelle, Nova, Full size... and even other GM divisions for several years, so it stands to reason there would be varying degree of parting lines due to the number of dies used, the age of a particular set of dies and the degree at which the metal worker cared!!

I've attached a picture of a base with the "typical" parting line usually seen (although I've seen a LOT worse than this one!), and another picture of a base with a very wide parting line as shown if you were looking forward seated in the driver's seat.

However, all this being said, if you're having your car judged and the rules say there should be a parting line, then there should be a parting line! But again, I don't get involved in judging since I don't need the headaches!

Ed

37
Originality / Re: Original door mirror fame
« on: December 21, 2017, 01:44:06 AM »
Thanks Bob.

Ed

38
Originality / Re: Original door mirror fame
« on: December 20, 2017, 08:08:43 PM »
Quote
I have an NOS in-the-box dated 7-DMI-9 passenger side mirror with an extremely faint seam, barely visible. Pictures if anyone wants to see it.

I would. I'm still collecting pictures for the mirror report and need some really good high resolution shots.

Can you email them to me? My email address is in my signature below.

Thanks!

Ed

39
Originality / Re: '68 Camaro Inst cluster bulbs/ sockets
« on: December 20, 2017, 08:03:33 PM »
Yes Paul, the Owners Manual. The Generator and Brake warning lights (P/N 455626) are shown in the Owners Manual (page 69) as number 1816 (3CP) bulbs. The others have different part numbers. 1445, which is a 1CP, and 194, which is a 2CP.

Ed

40
Restoration / Re: 1967 Muncie speedo cable hole question
« on: December 20, 2017, 07:21:18 PM »
Norwood cars typically have all three, but LA cars typically only have two! Not sure why. Perhaps the surfer dudes in LA were lazy and itching to hit the waves!

Ed

41
Originality / Re: '68 Camaro Inst cluster bulbs/ sockets
« on: December 20, 2017, 07:19:30 PM »
Mike, that 5-1-67 date is in regards to note 14 (circuit drawing revised) and note 15 (screw and washer drawing removed), so it has nothing to do with the socket. If it did, there would be a note next to item 8. And you can't go by dates in the AIM since it's not necessarily the date the change became effective. It was just the date the note was entered into the AIM. The actual change could have been much earlier or much later than that.

Ed

42
Originality / Re: '68 Camaro Inst cluster bulbs/ sockets
« on: December 20, 2017, 06:29:09 PM »
Good guess Mike, but I don't think it's correct since the 1967 AIM shows the gray sockets (P/N 3882798) for the Generator and Brake warning lights as well. The operators manual shows these two lights were 3 candle power as opposed to 1 candle power for the rest of the lamps, so that may have had something to do with it. This isn't something I've ever researched!

Ed

43
Originality / Re: Original door mirror fame
« on: December 20, 2017, 05:10:12 PM »
Quote
Thanks for the info but the goal here is to find and document other 68/69 Camaro's with their original LH door mirror frame that has no mold line/seam.

Chick, I highly doubt you're going to find any.

There were three suppliers to Chevrolet for the outside rear view mirrors in the 1960's. Donnelly, Ajax and Standard. (Although I've never seen a Standard mirror on an original first generation Camaro. If you DO have a Standard mirror on your car, please contact me!!)

I've examined literally hundreds of these mirrors over the last 50 years and ALL Donnelly mirrors had the line, even on service replacement mirrors that were supplied well into the 1990's. Ajax mirrors even had the line, although not as pronounced as the Donnelly mirrors. I don't have enough pictures of a Standard mirror to tell, but from what I do have, it appears they don't have a parting line. But again, I've never seen a Standard mirror on a 67-69 Camaro.

Your theory about the chrome platter cleaning up the line is valid since I've seen that several times in the past. It's unfortunate, but unless you stipulate that the line needs to stay, they may not know any better.

Your only option now would be to get another original mirror and have him rechrome it, but this time make sure he doesn't remove the dumb line!!!

Ed

44
Decoding/Numbers / Re: Documentation for 9N657909
« on: December 20, 2017, 04:50:16 PM »
Quote
Hmm intersting since the tag looked authentic to me.

It is! That's what's really scary about this car. The trim tag is real and has never been removed so that brings up a huge red flag about the VIN. An inspection of the hidden VINs would be highly recommended in this case!

Jerry contacted the seller a few days ago, but as of yet, they're still showing the fake paperwork in the auction. Looking in my crystal ball, I foresee several lawyers buying new houses with the money they're going to make off this!!

Ed

45
1968 - Orphans / Re: Muncie 8N434250
« on: December 18, 2017, 08:39:10 PM »
Quote
That's funny, the way Kelly originally posted the partial VIN is the way it is stamped in the photo.

In that case we'll add 1N8434250 to the thread for future searches!

Ed

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 205