CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 27, 2015, 03:59:13 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.
111317 Posts in 12819 Topics by 4913 Members
Latest Member: devodave
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32
436  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Firestone or Goodyear F70-14 tires on: March 30, 2007, 06:52:40 PM
I have what I think is an original spare in my pace car.  It is a Uniroyal Tiger Paw.  Could this be.  Was that another tire option for 69?

Bill, Uniroroyal was indeed another supplier. I know they were used from 69 to at least 72, however the small raised script was unique for each year. Let me know what the script states such as  "Rayon Dynacor" or Rayon Dynacor Nylon " or Dynacor Rayon Fiberglass". Attached is a link to my survivor car with the original Uniroyal tires, scroll down the thread and you'll see where I attached a pic of the tires. 
http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/128375/an/0/page/10#128375


[Quote problem fixed by Kurt]
437  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Gardner transverse muffler system on: March 21, 2007, 11:12:46 AM
I have purchased both systems from them. The Transverse system is quite a bit cheaper, and sounds better (my opinion). I have a gardner chambered system that was on my Z for about twenty miles of use. Too loud for my taste but certainly has the wow factor. My yenko has their transverse system, and is very quiet. My L34 has their chambered and it sound very nice, if you like the glasspacks. I have an orig GM chambered system that I plan to install on the L34. It should be interesting to compare the GM to the Gardner.
438  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 69 Rear deffogger on: March 08, 2007, 12:48:47 PM
Thats the one... John, wow what a well preserved car, the shot of the underside of the package tray area is outstanding.
439  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 69 Rear deffogger on: March 07, 2007, 08:37:29 PM
The grill is incorrect,and from what I can see so is the fan assembly. 
440  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Chambered exhaust on: March 05, 2007, 12:10:58 PM
To my ear, the Z's are louder than big blocks in general. There are many variable that contribute, such as compression, chamber and exhaust manifold configuration and camshaft profiles.
441  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: blackout rear tailpan on: March 04, 2007, 02:55:20 PM
To answer the second part of your question, regarding exceptions there were a few. The actual 1967 Indy track BB pace cars did not have the blacked out tail panels, however most did including C1 and 01 coded cars. Also GM documents states exceptions for a few dark colors, but I have examined several orig paint cars with the panels blacked out. For instance my survivor rs/ss L78 tahoe turqouis  car was blacked out which is contrary to GM docs. In 1969 BB Z10's and Z11"s did not get blacked out tail panels. Again dark colors such as burnished brown were supposed to be excluded, but I have examined a few orig paint cars and they were painted black.
442  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: blackout rear tailpan on: March 04, 2007, 12:57:21 PM
Yes BB only.
443  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 67 Pace cars on: February 28, 2007, 11:48:48 AM
I believe that keeping it titeld in Chevrolet Motor Division is absolutely great...it adds to its provenance. My specialty insurance allows me to insure cars that are not titled/registered, so I see no problem.  
444  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 67 Pace cars on: February 27, 2007, 10:24:18 PM
Lets stick to the #3 car we were discussing, rather than make it too confusing , unless thats your intent. Since you only seem to agree/ understand Kurts statement, this is what you agreed with previously when Kurt stated it. Then disputed it when I stated it.

 "There was a pacer that at the event that was a 4K L78. This is an 04D car and is the car that Jeff is referring to. So far, it's the only IPC that's been found that has been a 4K car. Since it was a regular car (regular here meaning it was not one of the pacers)"

It was a regular pace car NOT a car that was prepped or paced the event, therefore it was NOT the #3 pace car.
445  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 67 Pace cars on: February 27, 2007, 10:14:57 PM
Sorry, I pasted too much of your statement. Let try this:

Also you now agree that the statement you made " The first and only Real 4K pacecar is the #3 car Period." is not true.
446  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 67 Pace cars on: February 27, 2007, 09:55:17 PM
I was referring to Kurts definition of regular, which you agreed with previously. "(regular here meaning it was not one of the pacers)"


Also you now agree that the statement you made " So if Chevrolet didn't want it to be a L78, why do you think it should be?
The first and only Real 4K pacecar is the #3 car Period." is not true.
447  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 67 Pace cars on: February 27, 2007, 09:43:50 PM
Thanks for clearing that up Kurt. And just to clarify it a bit further this 4K car was NOT the #3 pace car, rather just a regular festival car.
448  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 67 Pace cars on: February 27, 2007, 07:37:33 PM
Lets stick to the facts as presented by Charley and Phil. There is absolutely no question that this car had an L78 drivetrain installed by the factory assembly line and delivered as such to GM Engineering. Facts are indisputable when backed up by original engineering documentation, and a protecto plate as proof it was built and delivered as such. Opinions, well everyone may have one, but in this case they are not necessary as the documents speak volumes.
449  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1967 396 on: February 26, 2007, 11:47:35 AM
The car left the assembly line as an L78 4spd and delivered to the tech center as such, with the protecto plate in the glove box documenting the orig installed drivetrain info.  Subsequent changes were made at the tech center.

I would like to thank Charley for sharing his car, by showing it at his expense for all to see at several show a year. Two of which were the GM Nationals. This allowed the researchers/ historians the ability to connect the dots and identify the cars historical past in full verifiable detail.

450  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1967 396 on: February 26, 2007, 10:55:43 AM
I too want to make sure that the facts regarding pace car#1 are presented accurately.

*Fact the car would have been coded 4N if the original intention was for it to be an L35. 

*The original documentation backs the fact that it was built an L78.

*Fact the car has the original  protecto plate which I dentifies that this car was built as an L78 , 4spd car.

*Engineering subsequently decided to convert the car to a L35/L34 engine and automatic. Possibly for reliability/ ease of driving issues.

So in summary the car was built as an L78 and converted. All of this is documented with engineering work orders.

If anyone has information that is contrary please share it. The histories of these cars are important and our goal should be to present is as accurately as possible. Isn't this what this forum is about...

Pages: 1 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32
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 0.261 seconds with 18 queries.