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 - william

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 135
Restoration / Re: restoration of copo
« on: October 15, 2018, 11:26:39 PM »
Sort of. Was on a lawn in Kuna, Idaho with a FOR SALE sign circa 1987. Was a bracket car at Firebird Raceway where it raced against another Cortez Silver ZL1, #13.

Known history back to the day it rolled off the assembly line, March 4, 1969.

Restoration / Re: restoration of copo
« on: October 15, 2018, 10:38:12 PM »
This was painted in lacquer 30 years ago by a friend in a 2-car garage. He also did the body work. All GM back then; no repro.

General Discussion / Re: 69 cowl tag
« on: October 15, 2018, 05:52:20 PM »
I wonder if it was a prank. NBR and 0A start appearing on tags as of Friday September 13, 1968. Earlier 09A tags are normal. Corrected for 09B.

Restoration / Re: restoration of copo
« on: October 15, 2018, 04:02:30 PM »

One of the nicest COPO restorations I have seen. Done by a hobbyist working out of his garage.

Restoration / Re: restoration of copo
« on: October 15, 2018, 12:11:21 PM »
Why? What is different?

General Discussion / Re: 69 cowl tag
« on: October 14, 2018, 12:07:28 PM »
Thought all the known NBR tags were from the 09A timeframe, so was the scheduled build week also a typo?

'NBR' tags are in the 09A time frame but were mis-stamped.

Fisher Body issued the tag when the production order was released to build the body for a specific dealer order. Fisher skipped some weeks; the tag date has a casual relationship to when the car was final-assembled by Chevrolet. For example, some 02D bodies were final-assembled mid-March '69. The Chevy schedule bank shuffled bodies after VIN assignment; cars were not build in body tag date or VIN order. Not unusual to see a D body tag with a lower VIN than a C date.

General Discussion / Re: 69 cowl tag
« on: October 14, 2018, 01:06:07 AM »
Is the body tag date 0A?

That's actually backwards. It was King-Braeger Chev until the early '60s when Jim King received a franchise. Braeger went on their own at that time. Jim King closed around 1980.

General Discussion / Re: Chrome shifter ball
« on: October 09, 2018, 11:05:39 PM »
I'm pretty certain that in 69, there was no jamb nut used on the chrome shifter ball.   I believe William told me that back when we were trying to decipher my car and I thought the jamb nut was missing.

True, no lock nut on '69 factory Hurst shifters.

Back in the day, saw many 67-68 Muncie shifters with the stud broken off.

Decoding/Numbers / Caveat Emptor...beware the carefully worded ad again
« on: October 09, 2018, 07:22:39 PM »


The ad makes no mention of Indy Pace Car or Z11 but it does have the door decals. Built too early to be a real Z11.

Decoding/Numbers / Re: '69 LOS Camaro - Tags and Docs on eBay
« on: October 09, 2018, 02:49:38 PM »
The FMVSS label was required for cars built for the 1970 model year. A CA built '69 would not have had one.

Restoration / Re: 69 remote mirror
« on: October 07, 2018, 02:32:32 PM »
No mirror was ever installed by Chevrolet on the passenger side. Available as a dealer-installed accessory.

Decoding/Numbers / Re: Caveat Emptor...another repro tag
« on: October 02, 2018, 11:55:06 PM »
Original top, repro bottom.

Originality / Re: 1968 SS Factory Tire Brand & Style
« on: October 02, 2018, 09:22:39 PM »
If I still had a 1st gen I would strongly consider the new bias-look Firestone radial Coker tire offers.

IMHO modern radials look like SUV tires; don't like them at all on an old musclecar. Sure, you can get repro bias tires but they still suck just like they did 50 years ago.

Maintenance / Re: 69 Z28 battery
« on: September 28, 2018, 03:40:02 PM »
My interpretation of his statement is at operating temp, the starter spins the engine normally but it does not fire immediately. A friend had this problem with his new '69 Z/28 and it was frustrating. Took a few trips to the dealer to sort it out.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 135