CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 01, 2014, 01:02:37 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the CRG Discussion Forum!
Forum registration problems: Make sure you enter your email correctly and you check your spam box first. *Then* email KurtS2@gmail for help.
104975 Posts in 12266 Topics by 4728 Members
Latest Member: MartySS
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 149 150 [151] 152 153 ... 156
2251  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: '68 396 fan clutch, ...correct PN(s)?? photos? on: April 03, 2006, 06:40:33 PM
Thanks John. That's what I thought. And of course, I have ZERO Chassis Broadcast Sheets for 68!! Isn't that always the way...

Ed
2252  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: '68 396 fan clutch, ...correct PN(s)?? photos? on: April 02, 2006, 08:42:42 PM
Thanks anyway John. I DO have a few 68 Body Broadcast Sheets (see below), but they don't show the Fan Clutch. It shows the Radiator, hoses, shroud, etc... but no fan or clutch!

If anyone knows the clutch codes for 68, please post them...

Ed


2253  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: '68 396 fan clutch, ...correct PN(s)?? photos? on: April 01, 2006, 01:41:31 PM
John,

The 68 AIM shows the following under K02:

3916139 Clutch Assmebly
3916140 Optional
5329100 Optional (with note 3 stating it was added 8-21-67)
3916388 RPO L34 and L35 (with note 1 stating RPO L34 and L35 was added on 8-7-67)
3927103 Optional (with note 4 stating this P/N was 3916589 and changed on 11-1-67)

A few questions:

1. Are you saying that my "OD" clutch is an Eaton and is original/correct for my 68 L89?

2. Is that "074" a Julian date (Monday, March 4th, 1968)? If so, it makes sense. It lines up correctly with the other parts of my engine which are dated Mid March/early April, 1968.

3. If this is a Julian date, then what's the "13"Huh

4. I also tried finding the 4174966 P/N in my P&A's, but came up empty. Would this by chance be an Eaton P/N?

Ed
2254  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Multi leaf springs on: April 01, 2006, 01:25:57 PM
Joe,

Before you make up your mind, contact Eaton and see what they recommend. Give them both part numbers and both spring codes and see what they have. You might find yourself going with the F41 spring.

Ed
2255  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Multi leaf springs on: March 31, 2006, 08:24:31 PM
Okay Joe, here's how it breaks down:

The 1968 equivilant of the 1969 standard "BY" code is "OC" (P/N 3930074). The rear spring load on this one is 520. Note that this is the "standard" rear leaf spring for the 68 L48 Coupe with minimal options that would affect the rear end. Also note that this is a 5 leaf rear spring...

The 1968 equivilant of the 1969 optional F41 (Special Purpose) "BM" code is "BI" (P/N 3932719). The rear spring load on this one is 510. Note that this spring load is actually rated less than the "standard" spring above! This is also a 5 leaf rear spring...

The 1968 equivilant of the 1969 optional G31 (Heavy Duty) "BL" code is "OG" (P/N 3932720). The spring load on this one is rated 650. (This one would give you a very harsh ride if you installed it!) This one is a 4 leaf rear spring. The chances your car originally had this spring is slim! (Coincidentally, this is the rear spring that MY CAR came with!)

Now, more than likely your car originally came with the "standard" spring ("OC" or P/N 3932719), which would be the 5 leaf set-up. However, if you want to upgrade a bit, go with the F41 spring. Just remember that your car WILL ride a little higher in the back than "normal".

By the way, if you want to know more about srpings and spring rates, you can download the SPRING TECH 101 book (in PDF format) from Eaton. It has a lot of good info in it.

Hope this helps...

Ed
2256  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Books every firt time 1st gen restorer should have! on: March 31, 2006, 01:59:59 PM
Yes, some of these books bring big $$$ on ebay. The big one is "Camaro, 1967-1969 Fact Book" by Frank Incremona and Dr. Murrell Dobbins. I've seen this book sell in the mid 100's!! I spoke to Dr. Dobbins once about this and he said it was nuts the money this book was bringing. (I was asking about the chances of him putting out another release...) He said he would be happy to Xerox it and send it to me for free if I wanted, but at that time (about a year ago) he didn't have any plans on another release. He said the book was too dated and would have to be totally revamped if he were going to do it again. Not something he was planning on...

But anyway, as these books go out of print, the prices go up. The old law of "supply and demand"... Start scouring the used book stores in your area. I actually found my copy of Dr. Dobbin's book in an old Seattle book store for a buck!! And in excellent condition yet! This was about a year ago, abouit a week after I spoke with Dr. Dobbins!! So you never know where one of these will turn up.

Ed
2257  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Multi leaf springs on: March 31, 2006, 01:48:20 PM
Joe,

If no one replies before I have a chance to get home and check my books, I'll let you know later on this afternoon.

Ed
2258  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Books every firt time 1st gen restorer should have! on: March 30, 2006, 10:30:48 PM
The Hooper book is currently out of print, but they come up on ebay from time to time. As a matter of fact, HERE'S ONE NOW!

For other books, check out THIS THREAD. It should be enough to get your library started...

Ed
2259  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Multi leaf springs on: March 30, 2006, 10:24:22 PM
Steve,

Nowadays I'm not sure how much you'll get out of it. It seems that there are really only a few options when it comes to rear springs on our cars. Places like Ricks, Ground Up, Classic Industries, etc... only sell one or two versions at most. Kind of a "one size fits all" mentality. That's probably why people experience problems when trying to fit these things onto their cars. Some folks complain that the car is too high, others complain of just the opposite! Since GM had hundreds of versions of the same basic spring for each car, we can immediately rule out the "one size fits all" spring.

However, there IS hope! Places like Eaton or Triangle appear to be the answer. (At least according to their ads!!) Therefore, if dealing with one of these type of companies, it's best if you know what you're talking about before contacting a salesman. IF you can give them a rear spring rate and/or a spring code to go by, there's a much better possibility that what you come away with will be much closer to what your car originally came with in the first place.

In some cases, I can look up original codes and/or Part Numbers in the P&A and give you an exact spring count and spring rate. I can't do that with all applications since the P&A doesn't list every spring that came on these cars, but I can probably get you in the ballpark. So in these cases, it would be benificial if you knew the code at the bottom of the calculation program.

If you can get me the code, I'll give it a shot!

Ed
2260  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Multi leaf springs on: March 28, 2006, 09:38:51 PM
Joe,

There are a few things you need to read before making your choice. The first is an ORIGINAL THREAD regarding springs on the old forum. There's a link in one of the replies that will take you to a 1969 Camaro spring calculator. Although it's for a 69, it will get you close enough if you can determine (approximate) what options you car originally had. To be honest, I don't think there are that many versions of the rear springs available, and any set you get would probably be okay. However, your original question was to do with 4 or 5 leaf and if you can give me the spring code you come up with, I should be able to tell you if it was originally a 4 or 5 leaf setup.

Ed
2261  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: Voltage regulator not working properly? on: March 28, 2006, 04:26:22 PM
Jeff,

Good luck and by all means, please keep us informed.

Ed
2262  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: Voltage regulator not working properly? on: March 28, 2006, 03:55:58 PM
Don,

That being said, it still won't get you the bottom half of the regulator, where the P/N and date code is stamped. I think Jeff is looking to keep that part as well, and I just can't say if transferring the internals from the original AC Delco to the VR715 is possible. I would assume you could do it but since I've never tired the transfer, I can't say for sure. Jeff, give it a shot on an old used regulator (not you "correct" date coded one), and let us know how it works out. If I had an old Delco regulator, I'd try it, but I tossed all mine out years ago (like a fool)!

Ed

2263  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Window Guides on: March 28, 2006, 12:06:29 PM
You need to purchase the "1968 Body by Fisher Service Manual". It has the blow-up diagrams of the front doors, rear quarters, etc... in it. It's around 20 bucks at most of your repop dealers.

HERE'S A THREAD showing the various books you might need.

Ed
2264  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: Low brake pedal after booster installation? on: March 27, 2006, 05:36:10 PM
Yes, both pedals should be about the same height, and yes, there are two lengths of pushrods that were used from the booster to the master cylinder. However, I believe it's the master cylinders that are different, not the boosters.

Anyway, it's been awhile since you posted this. Did you figure it out?

Ed
2265  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: Original 10 bolt oil type on: March 27, 2006, 05:32:29 PM
Quote
I "believe" it's a few quarts

Hey! I was only off by a few pints!! (That should make a nice mess on the garage floor...)

 Shocked

Ed
Pages: 1 ... 149 150 [151] 152 153 ... 156
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.125 seconds with 18 queries.