CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 22, 2014, 04:52:02 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.
103338 Posts in 12156 Topics by 4691 Members
Latest Member: 67Nick
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19
256  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Could this be the original distributor in my 1968 Z/28? on: January 22, 2007, 03:45:53 AM
Hi Paul:

Yes I'm sure Jerry would know - probably better than anyone out there, but having said that there are still quite a few things that don't always fit 'the norm' when it comes to these first gen cars especially lower volume or specialty models like the Z's etc. but he surely has seen a lot of them and restores these units for customers all the time.
My car is now away in storage and will be for the next 5 months so checking for the water pump numbers isn't at all an easy deal for me at this point. Apparently according to my scribbled notes in my Definitive book (I added my own notes to each part listing in the book as I was searching) I see I found and discerned only part of a date code of G??8 on it when I was originally looking and I guess I never got back to try and find or clairify more than that...
The distributor point cam is the unit that sits on top of the actual distributor shaft itself and has the springs and weights on top, allowing more timing advance than normal due to the longer limiting slot cut into it. The 532 CCW is stamped on the underside of one the the wings of it and you might be able to see it with a small mirror squeezed in and aimed over the points or condensor. Obviously it is much easier to see with the distributor pulled out and held upside down.   - Randy 
257  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Could this be the original distributor in my 1968 Z/28? on: January 22, 2007, 01:31:55 AM
Sorry Ed - I misunderstood you reply - should read a little closer before I post I guess.
Can or should I gather you concur that both of our distributors (Paul's and mine) are probably original even though the dates seem so far off from the accepted norm?
If so, I guess it might or could tell us that Chevy intended the Z/28 model to be a lot more popular than it turned out to be in the first go-around and there were some left over distributors specifically built for those '67 models than languished in the parts bin until the start of the next year's production. That wouldn't be all that surprising since they never really advertised the '67 model from what I know, and only half way into the '68 year did the RPO become the actual model name and advertised as 'The Next Thing To The Corvette' from the ads I have seen.
Sometimes I wonder if parting out one of these things wouldn't be a lot more profiable than selling one intact from some of the EBay pricing I see going on - as I said crazy....    Randy
258  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Could this be the original distributor in my 1968 Z/28? on: January 22, 2007, 12:10:29 AM
Paul,

I'm not sure if it has much value since it's a 1967 (or even a 1977) date, but you never know. Heck, put it up on ebay for a buck and see if you get any nibbles.

Ed

Ed:

Seems to me that I heard on another site (Yenko one I think) where there was one of these 1111266 distributors being sold on Ebay - bid up to a crazy amount of $$'s just a month or two back - something like $2000 or more and climbing.
It was stated as being rare because it was for a '67 Z/28 model. I didn't see the final amount that it got sold for but it did make me consider at one point heading out to the garage wrenches in hand to pry mine out.... Randy
259  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Could this be the original distributor in my 1968 Z/28? on: January 22, 2007, 12:00:34 AM
Hello Everybody -

I'm a newbie and have a question regarding my 1968 Rally Sport Z/28. I recently towed the car from my parents home, where it has been stored since 1981, to mine as they are about to do some major remodeling. I decided to check the "numbers".  Two parts seem suspicious: the distributor and the water pump. The distributor is stamped 1111266 with a date code of 7A25 and the water pump is cast with the number 3838175 with a date code of D 13 7. According to the book "Chevrolet by the Numbers 1965-69" this distributor was only used in the 1967 model year and the water pump number is not even listed. My car has a build date of 02C from Los Angeles (born and been in California to date). So, the question is do I need to start looking for the correct parts or is it possible these are the factory parts? I've heard that sometimes GM would use parts they had a surplus of on the assembly line (especially in Los Angeles where they did not build as many Z/28s), or are these parts too old? Thanks in advance!

Paul 

Hi Paul:

I was just reading your post and found it quite amazing. I found the numbers you quoted from your distributor quite familiar sounding so I went hunting for my copy of the Definitive 1967-1968 Z/28 book. I had gone through my entire car (a '68 Z also) when I first got a copy of the book and recorded any and all part numbers and cast/date codes that I could find in it for future reference and information.
I always considered my distributor to be the original since most everything else on the car and especially in and around the engine particulairly, checked out according to what Jerry Mac Neish's book stated they should carry part number-wise. The reason I used 'amazing' earlier is that my distributor is also a 1111266 model and it also has the 7A25 date code on it!!
It has the #532 CCW long slot cam which the book described as being specific for Z/28's...My car is a Norwood 02D unit with most of the driveline parts either cast or date stamped in mid to late December '67 which I have been told makes it a fairly early production '68 Z/28 model as most were made a few months later. I never could find the number on the water pump and gave up looking although it may be under a few layers of paint or I'm just not looking in the right place for it.
Interesting distributor coincidence though and I makes me wonder if it is possible that such units were batch produced at some points in time for specific applications like the Z or other specific models...  Randy
260  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Kerosene washing??? on: January 20, 2007, 10:44:09 PM
Yea doesn't the price today make you sick. I recall throwing in a fiver on a Friday night (which got me a bit more than 1/2 a tank in my '70 396/375 Nova) and it lasted me most of the weekend of fooling around... Not many actual miles driven but lots of tire wear!!! - Randy
261  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Kerosene washing??? on: January 20, 2007, 01:45:44 AM
Thanks to the few of you who have responded to my post. I was hopeful this would get much more action and information for me than it did, since I know the average age here is probably high enough just by virtue of the fact that this is a first gen site!
Many here still may have original cars they bought in their early twenties or those who are reliving their youth by buying first gen Camaros again and l once resided in the Northern States or Canada I'm sure, must have had some experience with the kerosene-thing at least second hand... Maybe this whole thread wasn't Camaro enough related though I know they rusted almost a bad as Mustangs (am I allowed to use that word here?)...
I was especially hopeful that more 'paint experts' might have chimed in with their impressions or feedback about the durability or lack thereof, of base/clear paints these days verses the older types of finishes from the fifties and sixties. I'm reasonably sure that if the newer finishes can withstand the acid rain, airborne pollution, and high UV, that seems to surround us these days and to a much greater extent than 40-50 years back - then a bit of oil in the wash couldn't be that much of a daunting situation. But I will admit I know little about paint chemistry or application (wish I did).
The biggest issue I thought I would be warned about would be the tendency of any oils (and I felt it would take a substantial amount more than what I expected to hear was used kerosene washing 'back in the day') to loosen the adhesives that stick on the trim bits that abound on newer vehicles.
Anyway, Thanks to those who did respond and just the memories about kerosene in the wash does also take me back personally to a time in my late teens when life was much simplier and much more fun (high octane @ the pumps for $.30 CDN etc) and miles per gallon certainly wasn't the figure that entered anyone's mind or came up in conversation...
One thing though that IS still a constant and a certainty as well from those days past, is still (at least in this climate) our government's desire to keep the economy going by throwing ungodly amounts of road salt down at this time of year to insure we have to keep buying new vehicles much sooner than we should ever have to!   Thanks - Randy
262  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Kerosene washing??? on: January 15, 2007, 11:05:49 PM
I know to many this may seem to be an odd topic and a series of questions which have literally nothing to do with Camaros directly, first gens or otherwise, but my Z is hibernating away for the next 5 months or so and I have too much time on my hands obviously!!
Do any of you recall stories of washing vehicles in years past with kerosene or by adding it to the water bucket when washing a vehicle?
I recall many years back seeing a few older gentlemen who had cars that were 20 and more years old and still in perfect condition due to the fact that they (apparently) regularly washed their cars with at least some kerosene added to the water. It apparently got under and behind the chrome bits and into body seams where it slowed the rust and seemingly made a great difference to vehicles that normally would have rotted away many years earlier in most cases, due to heavy salting of our roads in the winter months.
The topic come up on another board briefly and it brought back memories of cars I saw that were immaculate back in the sixties and early seventies. The cars I recall seeing were then 15 to 20 years old and the paint and chrome was perfect - the reason I was given was the use of the kerosene...
The link that I read lately mentioned it was an old-timer's cure for keeping paint from oxidizing and the chrome bright and it got me wondering if it would still work as well today. I'm curious if it would or not be compatible with the current base/clear paints and all the plastic bits on vehicles today depending on the amount used.
Anyone know if this is more fiction than fact from years past or if it did work, would it still in this day and age? If yes then how much would or should be added to the water to help produce the desired effect without going overboard and creating environmental problems and a smelly mess?
I just bought a new Sierrra Z71 and driving it tonight through all the salty road slush really made me cringe and got me thinking about trying it if I can get some feedback that is positive...
Odd topic and questions I know, but I realize there are many oldtimers on this board (besides myself) who may be able to recall if this was a common and beneficial practice in years gone by.  Thanks - Randy   
263  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 2009 Camaro is Coming!!! on: August 15, 2006, 03:18:45 PM
I think we all are sharing the same sentiment.  Except for minor styling carry over (69 side fake side louvers, console mounted gages, 68 "looking" instrument cluster), not much else reminds me of the 1st gen.  In my mind, the front end is the weak link.  Back end is a much more pleasing design (to me).

Problem is that those that brought us the tri 5 chevys, 1st gen Camaros, etc are long gone, and a different breed of designer is behind the wheel.  Seems like they are trying to have their cake and eat it too by appealing both to those that grew up with 1st gen Camaros and the current youth market.  They aren't the same. 

It will be interesting to see if they can sell 100,000 Camaros / year.  I personally believe that Chevy is off target much in the same way that Ford was with the revival of the Thunderbird.  It was too new and not enought old.  They learned and took that learning to the Mustang. Ford has the right idea with the Mustang. Update it, but definitely have it carry the look of the late '60's.

AMEN:
Couldn't have stated it better myself - but I'll try...   
      It's too bad but I think this should be the signal to all (especially after everyone else is obviously able to get it) that the GM we all apparently fondly remember from the late fifties through to the early seventies for styling and sensing what their buying public wanted, is dead and gone.
      Just because we in this forum are generally first generation fans doesn't mean we have a licence to think we know that everyone generally would have preferred a more retro styled Camaro, as many comments in this forum have shown since the concept cars inception - but I do feel we all share the sense that GM doesn't even care about what we think - and so this model will be pushed ahead because 'they think they know us better than we know ourselves - as to just what we need and want'...
       I said it before and will again - this will be a marginally accepted platform which due to GM's inability to listen to their customer and fan input will deal it a premature death. It will be overpriced and optioned to enable only those prospective buyers with very deep pockets the opportunity to experience a true GM high performance car again, Corvette excepted - but how many of us over the years have chosen to buy Camaros even as we lusted for the performance that a Corvete would have provided - just because of price considerations.
      Ford and Chrysler have been able to fell the pulse of their buyers, but GM doesn't apparently even care to try, and this new Camaro will only be another nail in the coffin unfortunately!  IMHO - Randy
264  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: What should i expect to pay to have a pair of decent taillamp bezels rechromed? on: June 23, 2006, 03:13:44 PM
I have a pair of decet tail light bezels for a standars 68 and they have slight chrome flaking and pitting.... ive never had any thing rechromed so i was just wondering about how much it would cost... i want them to be nice... but not "show" i want the finish to be as origional... thanks in advance... david

I know Moroso makes nice units that are supposed to be excellent quality for repops both fit and quality-wise - but I haven't personally seen any in person. They were sold through Jegs and even Summit plus I've seen them advertised in many Chevy car mags as well. If I am not mistaken they go for a little over $100 each - which isn't bad and I would be surprised if you could even get good original ones rechromed in a quality manner for much less than that. Anyone else have any experience with these repops and/or whether $100 per, would cover redoing originals - that is IF anyone could find ones that warranted the work?  - Randy
265  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Silver Camaro Concept Car - Atlanta 2006 Auto Show on: May 22, 2006, 10:19:37 AM
If anyone cares, there is a lot of good info regarding the new Mustang retro Shelby/Cobra in the newest Hot Rod magazine out for July 2006 (how can they get so far ahead date-wise???) regarding the performance details, driving impressions, and costs of it. Anyway, it seems like the LS2 that Chev may stuff into the new (c)amaro might not be initially enough to ward off the close to 500 hp that the new Cobra will be packing - oh well back to the drawing board...
Anyway - aside from the Shelby article itself - I don't normally read the rants from the editors in their mags since they generally don't really say much, but in this edition David Frieburger (sp??) talks about the timing of the (c)amaro into the retro fray and the new Mustang and other models that may materialize eventually - but the best part of his ditty is where he states essentailly what  he believes all manunfacturers should be doing and when, to get any interest and sales in this newest faze of hot performance market cars, and I for one fully agree with him - see if any of you agree with it as well - the feedback would be interesting...Much of it sounds exactly like what Ford is actually doing at the present time.
It is also interesting to note that Ford not only will make available to the Shelby (and lower retro models of the Mustang) 'over the counter' optional performance packages to suit the new owner in his wish to either make his car a lot better handling or faster straight line etc. just by going down to the dealer and plunking down the $$'s and taking the boxes of parts home and wrenching for a weekend himself. Sort of the grassroots approach that made the Mustang appealling in the late eighties and early ninties and helped it kick the hell out the past decade or two of Camaros and their sales
 I do think Ford has a better idea - and is showing it again... No I'm not a Ford fan in the least - but have to give credit where credit is due...
I don't really think GM has a hope in hell of capturing much of any of this not only by the timing of their proposed new (c)amaro model but in the way they will approach the whole thing when and if they do get one out - considering the past... Its too bad!!! 
There is also a great artist's impression of what a frontal view of a new Firebird retro model would look like with using the new (c)amaro body styling and I have to admit to me it looks absolutely perfect in a retro-sense. Unfortunately the new (c)amaro rendition just doesn't look as right or as instantly recognizable to me   - Randy
266  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Silver Camaro Concept Car - Atlanta 2006 Auto Show on: May 19, 2006, 04:05:46 PM
I found this today at the following linK:  http://www.gminsidenews.com/index.php?page=Future_Product_Guide
Looks like a GM supported website of "insider news".

For Model Yerar2009, Chevrolet:-

Chevrolet Camaro:

Rumors state that the Camaro is on for model-year 2009. Cheesy Expect the design of the car to follow what that of the Camaro Concept car in coupe and convertible form. Power is said to come from the 3.6L V6 and an optional 6.0L LS2 V8. GM’s Oshawa, Ontario, Canada plant is likely where this Camaro will call home.

Addtional info. at this link as well: http://www.5thgen.org/ which was referenced in a previous post.

 IMHO Chevy better hurry - rumors on CNN. today suggest that the new Mustang 500hp Cobra due out this summer already has at least a $20,000 over sticker bidding price and they may end up going out even higher due to the fact that there are a couple available to each selected dealer - There may not be many big dollar takers left by 2009 for the (new small c) camaro - that and the high pref retro market may start to dry up in 3 - 4 years anyway due to changes in emission standards, crash requirements, and gas guzzler taxes etc.
  If you recall the real high performance times in the sixties only really lasted from late '65's thru to late '70's so by announcing it's availablility until 2009 this whole mess might just blow up in GM's face again as the market could have basically started to dry up - just in time for the new camaro's launch. Considering many of GM's other marketing fiascos over the years - it's really not that much of a stretch to imagine it occurring that way - hope not but....
  If the camaro did only show up with the LS2 in the hottest model and people had to pay over sticker to get one, it would probably only serve to make the Corvette more attractive to buyers in the long run - Randy
267  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Impossible to document? on: May 07, 2006, 08:35:43 PM
The suggestion to try GM Canada is an excellent one. The first title in Washington state was 12/12/69, the car was one year old by then, it may started life up north. I know I've seen the Canadian info on the site before but does someone have it handy?
                  Thanks Pat

Don't quote me - but I seem to recall from a conversation from someone - either G M Vintage Services or elsewhere - that almost all Canadian sold/documented cars were ones made and shipped from the Norwood facility... - Randy 
268  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Silver Camaro Concept Car - Atlanta 2006 Auto Show on: May 07, 2006, 06:28:52 PM
I still don't like the car, though it may be grow on me.    I think it needs to be much more retro as in 1rst. gen. styling.    But then they did not ask for my opinion.    That said, they may miss a huge part of potential market (baby boomers) by not making significant changes.   Anyone agree, or am I in a dream world???
Bill

Yep I agree fully - and if they don't retro the pre-production units more and soon enough to attract interest and satisfy the 'Boomers' they will lose so much hype by the time it is actually introduced, that the car will get shelved for lack of sales soon after it gets into production, if it does get that far...
Don't forget its the 50's and up age bracket that wants the retro stuff mostly, and they are the ones that have the $$$'s to be able to play with and now afford one that is decently equipped not the 20's group (I'm guessing pricing in the mid thirtie$$$ - in a form that will do the Camaro name some performance justice - not a V6-thing with a 3 speed auto for $27,000 with tires). Anyone who says otherwise has forgotten how the Mustang sales stomped the last version or two of Camaros produced and why!
IMHO - Chev will be so late , so overpriced, and so off the target with this not only with the styling, but with the way they market it - that it will fail miserably(what have they done right in the last 10 or more years otherwise to make us believe they can suddenly get it right now Huh except for the Vette - and those performance toes can't be stepped on by other division models as we have been seem in the past).
Others will have their comments I'm sure - if it ever comes to be - it will be interesting to see how it will play out nonetheless.
I still don't like the car as it is now either - but I will admit that as always, styling is a very subjective and personal thing, but that is what made our North American auto industry different from the others back when the cars wars were in full swing... It may grow on me but so far and after a couple of months of pictures, I have to admit I don't have any more appreciation of it now than previously... - Randy
269  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Problems with speedometer reading on: April 04, 2006, 04:01:28 PM
  Just for anyone's information - a few tire size calculator / comparison tools to compare the effects of different sized tires and I'm sure there are better ones available out there!
 
 The third one is kida neat visually - stolen from my son's favorite S10 v8 site that he frequents all the time. It's amazing the difference for example a 265/70/15 to 215/60/14 would make... Doesn't solve anyone's speedo woes - just a fairly good set of tools for comparing the effects of swapping sizes.

http://www.1010tires.com/TireSizeCalculator.asp
http://www.miata.net/garage/tirecalcold.htm
lhttp://www.rgp.nl/bird/misc/wielen.htm

                                                                                                        --Randy
270  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Problems with speedometer reading on: March 30, 2006, 12:38:44 PM

   I'm not up on the speedometer gearing - but as far as I'm aware the only first generation Camaro that had 15" tires was the Z 28 model.
   Again I'm not quite sure how much difference that tire upgrade in diameter would make as translated into actual mph but it obviously would be a constant amount throught the speed range...That would be in addition to any obvious error built into the original gearing for it - which all gear driven speedometer / transmissions have to greater or lesser degree.   --Randy
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19
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 0.096 seconds with 18 queries.