CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 19, 2015, 04:09:00 PM

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.
112113 Posts in 12879 Topics by 4931 Members
Latest Member: Euclid
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 31 32 [33] 34 35
481  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: '68 396: Smog Diverter Valve "Broadcast code" question ?? on: March 25, 2006, 02:39:43 PM

You might want to review this thread.   The 7024764 has also been showing up on 396's.

482  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Correct intake for L30 on: March 25, 2006, 02:15:51 PM
Looks like the original part number was 3931575.  Used for all 68's with 4BC 327 & 350 engines except special high perf ones.  Rochester carb was used with this manifold originally too.

483  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 68 SS Hubcaps on: March 20, 2006, 06:42:25 PM
Note they are 65 Nova covers.  The part number has been used for more than one year and that may be why we are seeing different covers for different years on different vehicles.  At this point I suspect that the paint scheme changed for the year and the vehicle it was going to be used for in that particular year.

484  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1968 Diverter Valves on: February 28, 2006, 09:39:50 PM

Looking at your picture, place yourself on the left side looking straight on at the valve end.  Now look at the area below the valve body and on the part 90 degrees to the body that has the bolts that attach the valve to the orange bracket.  Look for 5 digits (facing the front).  These digits are the "valve" numbers.  Looking at it as in your picture.....the numbers are just below the vacuum line and 90 degrees to the left on the vertical shaft which is behind the bolt head.

485  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1968 Diverter Valves on: February 23, 2006, 08:04:00 PM

Would you mind checking the location of that number for us and reporting back.  The reason I ask is because there is the diverter valve (with a #) and attached to it is an extension (with a #).  The valve number is right next to where the extension and valve bolt together and the extension number is at the other end of where they bolt together.  Please recheck the number "2" in the 702 part also to see if it could be a "3".  Thanks!

486  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Please see picture of my 327 - question on originality on: February 11, 2006, 03:51:25 PM

When you say you want to "bring it back to original" that probably means different things to many of us.  Can you be a little more specific in what you're wanting to accomplish?  Did you say what year the car is?  I may have missed that but some basic info would help.  Manual or automatic?  3/4 speed?  Power steering?  For instance, you no doubt already know the rad cap and plug wires are not original just from their appearance but we are not able to help you with thing like the carb without numbers.  Are you going to add smog equipment if 67-69?  Take more pictures from different angles and post them.

487  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 67 SS350 Waterpump and Distrib on: February 09, 2006, 08:00:24 PM

My source shows part number 3890017 (Colvin cast number ='s 3782608) as the original water pump part number for you.  The distributor as 168.

488  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1968 Diverter Valves on: February 08, 2006, 07:54:55 PM
Yes it helps ccargo Smiley  The more info the better!!  Dean, do you mean 28469 instead?  The 24765 is the # given in the 68 AM.  I think it is a valid valve for the 68 Z.  By the way, I am not saying that the CRG table is not correct in any way.

489  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / 1968 Diverter Valves on: February 07, 2006, 08:31:03 PM
With regard to the report.  I have been looking into the question of just how valid the 68 part numbers are that are provided in the assembly manual (AM).  I want to say up front that I think Kurt did a nice job on the his (CRG) Report and I mean no disrespect to him or the work with what I've put in the attached table for folks to review.  While there are typo's in the AM part numbers I think that we can generally accept them as accurate until proven otherwise.  I've put together a table of valves that I could find in the 68 manual and some support info found in the AM for each where I found it.  Even though I can't find supportive info for each, as is the case for the Z28, I think that the fact it is in the manual is good enough for us to use for the hobby and think it's not unreasonable to utilize it in a list of numbers when "checking" valves.
490  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 68 SS Hubcaps on: February 06, 2006, 07:31:40 PM
Only problem Arno is that I ordered wheel covers (P01) and have Argent Silver on my car.  In my case I didn't order anything "post delivery" from the dealer so I don't think that explains it.
491  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 68 SS Hubcaps on: February 06, 2006, 05:29:17 PM
Ok, let me see if I have this right.  A SS car that was not ordered with P01 came to the dealership with dog dish caps.  A SS ordered with P01 had the SS wheel covers put on at the factory.  The SS that was not ordered with P01 and came with dog dish had the dog dish taken off and replaced with SS wheel covers at the dealership (from their stock) because it was a SS.  Is all that correct?
492  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 68 SS Hubcaps on: February 05, 2006, 06:11:45 PM

Just to make sure, we are talking about the same photo (black & white) of page 170 in the 1998 "The Conclusive Camaro Recognition Guide" ....right?  Rich, you are right, I do question what I'm seeing in the photo but I don't want to get hung up on that picture so I'm going to just say (and then I'm done with this photo forever now that I'm cross-eyed from looking at it so long Smiley) that the one I'm looking at, given the possibilities of differences (quality) in printing and whatever, just doesn't look black to me in that inner ring but I'm old and I'm probably wrong  Sad.  Arno, my car is British Green with white stripes, black vinyl hard top, with SS blackout paint trim.  Questions: John Z, who made the covers for GM and where did they come from (mfg plant locations)?  Rich do you see any indication in the part books that there may have been a cover that was "set aside" for a SS ordered vehicle?  By that I mean, if I ordered a SS with regular dog dish caps would it have come with SS covers because I ordered the there anything that would lend itself to conclude that from the books?  One more question for you Rich, how many original SS owners do we have in the CRG data base?  Am I the only original owner that kept his original SS covers on his Baby all these years Huh (Please treat that as a rhetorical Q if you like Rich  Wink)

493  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 68 SS Hubcaps on: February 05, 2006, 10:14:28 AM
Thanks for the clarification.  With regard to the shadows...I was referring to the picture in Hooper's book and not the dealer book.
494  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 68 SS Hubcaps on: February 04, 2006, 08:51:06 PM

What dealer book are you refering to?  Publication year?  I've looked at the photo in Hooper's book too and I think shadows are in play.  If you look real close you can see that the "black" of the center area around the SS is black and when you compare it to the inner ring area it is, at a minimum, several shades lighter.  Looking closer, light is reflecting off the rib and shinning on the inner ring area and it looks more gray (silver) than black in my picture.  The outer ring in my photo looks even lighter than the inner ring.  With all respect, I will put my original covers up against Hooper's photo any day, if you know what I mean Smiley  Wink  I have started to look back through some of my original paperwork to see what, if anything, I can find that might help on this.  So far the only thing I see on the original order form is "wheel covers" and the price.  Will keep looking.

495  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 68 SS Hubcaps on: February 04, 2006, 05:01:37 PM

Now that WOULD be a mystery in my case.  That would mean that 4 NEW Argent Silver 1964 Impala SS covers were put on my spanking new 1968 Camaro right there at the dealership. Additionally, and as I relayed to you in an earlier post, the ones I saw on the showroom Camaro, that was almost identical to mine and that had the same covers as mine, would have had to have been switched too!!  Smiley Shocked  Where would they get new 64 covers to start with and why would they do that?  He may not be 100% sure but I have tell you that I am 100% sure that since the argent came on my car it's going to take some powerful proof to convince me that they are not correct and that somehow, someway, my new car had new 4 year old Impala covers put on it.  Smiley

Pages: 1 ... 31 32 [33] 34 35
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.091 seconds with 18 queries.