Messages

2086

General Discussion / Re: Is This a Legit Z?

« on: June 17, 2013, 10:05:53 PM »

Tag looks real. Supposed to have a medium green standard interior [721] which appears to have been changed to black. 59 E is frost green with parchment vinyl roof. No one is looking for those colors.

Block appears to have been decked with a chain saw and re-stamped.

2087

Restoration / Re: 1969 Z exhaust and smog systems

« on: June 15, 2013, 05:22:26 PM »

Whatever system your car had new it wasn't very good. Worst of the bunch was probably NC8, chambered. 4 mufflers, small diameter tubing, lots of bends. On a ZL1 dyno test many years ago a stock engine with headers picked up 80 hp when the system was disconnected.

I read somewhere the '65-'69 Corvette side-mount system [chambered also] was about a 50 hp hit on a BB.

2088

Restoration / Re: 1969 Z exhaust and smog systems

« on: June 15, 2013, 04:01:26 AM »

No...

2089

Restoration / Re: 1969 Z exhaust and smog systems

« on: June 15, 2013, 12:07:14 AM »

Jerry is correct-it would be VERY difficult to duplicate a production N10 Z/28 dual exhaust system. In fact if you had a complete NOS service system it would not be the same as production.

The first consideration is when the car was built. When chambered was recalled the Z/28 was changed over to the ’68 deep-tone muffler without resonators. Around April ’69 they went to the same muffler/resonator system used on the L48. This system had the head pipes welded to the resonators and the RH tailpipe welded to the muffler.

Mid-May ’69 they changed to “bright metal” tailpipes. Just got a big surprise here from Warren Malkin, a guy that has probably seen more original stuff than all of us combined. He has now examined several OE exhaust May-June cars and the LH tail pipe is NOT of the 2-piece construction as the right. What may have happened is the source had an excess supply of the standard LH tailpipe at the change and Chevy had a choice-scrap them or make them work. What it appears they did was to polish about 1/3 of the pipe and apply chrome over it-no nickel. There is an obvious difference in the finish between the pipes. At some point the LH tail pipe did change over to the 2-piece construction.

By the way big blocks did not use the interim “deep-tone” Z/28 system. The recall states L34 and L78 cars were to use the same system as the L48, meaning resonators. The famous undercarriage road test photos of ZL1 #3 shows the single muffler/dual resonator system-if you can imagine that.

Last month I pitched in to help install a Gardner system on a ’69. Very well made, carefully packaged, quality product.

2090

General Discussion / Re: 1996 Indy Pace Car (1969 Clone)

« on: June 08, 2013, 03:03:26 PM »

For 135,000 miles waaaaay over priced even if it wasn't ugly.

Spend $4,000 more for this one with 4,000 miles. You might see most of your money again someday.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/2002-Chevrolet-Camaro-Z28-SS-Convertible-2-Door-5-7L-/171053867382?pt=US_Cars_Trucks&hash=item27d39ae176

2091

Restoration / Re: Drum Brake Steering Arms vs Discs

« on: June 01, 2013, 08:50:37 PM »

The P & A manual lists them separately so they are different.

There really are no 'Z/28' steering arms. Fast-ratio power steering SS cars used the same arms with the 5.75" Pitman arm. All Z/28s used them with manual or power steering. If you use them you will have to use the 5.75" Pitman PS set up. You could use standard steering disc brake stuff; doesn't have to be fast ratio.

2092

General Discussion / Re: F41(1969)

« on: May 25, 2013, 08:05:33 PM »

Doesn't compute. Even an SS350 would have had a Muncie and 12 bolt axle with multi-leaf springs. Discs were optional.

That car was way more messed with than you remember. Sounds like someone swapped a BB into a 327/4-speed chassis.

2093

General Discussion / Re: Edlebrock 1967 SS TEST CAR

« on: May 21, 2013, 02:43:22 AM »

The feature was in the May 1995 issue. The photos are poor an difficult to read. Here's the data:

124377N102245

08C                                 D 

ST 67-12637  NOR 2067 BODY

TR 742-Y         R-R  PAINT

        EXL 2LGR 3SDK

        5Y

2094

General Discussion / Re: Edlebrock 1967 SS TEST CAR

« on: May 20, 2013, 05:12:10 PM »

The Edelbrock / Hot Rod ’67 Camaro SS350 [and the Estes ’68 Z/28 convertible] is a significant part of the history of the first-gen Camaro. The history was embellished over time and fact became interspersed with fiction.

Edelbrock has set the record straight-the car was in fact a standard production unit at Norwood and not the May 1966 pilot car that Car Craft had. PHR featured it many years ago with photos of the VIN and body tags so there is no question. The remainder of it is fact as far as I know.

The car’s complete history is known so no further research is needed.

2095

Decoding/Numbers / Re: Why Are Some Blocks Stamped and Some Not

« on: May 18, 2013, 02:14:47 PM »

To draw a conclusion that is statistically significant one needs at minimum an evenly distributed 5% of the total population. So for the '69 Z/28 at Norwood you would have to examine about 800 DZ engines manufactured from August 1968-October 1969.

2096

General Discussion / Re: 1969 Camaro RS Headlight Diagnose

« on: May 17, 2013, 01:10:26 AM »

Probably the slider in the head light switch broke. Common failure.

2097

Restoration / Re: Drive Shaft Restoration

« on: May 14, 2013, 10:30:38 PM »

What I have seen is white/orange/yellow[?] L-R. Stripes were about 10" back of the trans yoke CL. Maybe have it checked for balance while it is out.

Definitely put some coating on it or you will be back where you started from shortly.

2098

Restoration / Re: Drive Shaft Restoration

« on: May 13, 2013, 10:45:09 PM »

A non-abrasive method of rust removal is to use a length of plastic pipe. Cap one end, drop the driveshaft in. Fill with de-rusting solution, cap. A few days later, as clean as can be.

I believe that was how the '72 Trans-Am resto drive shaft got done on the SYC site. Wire wheeling won't get all the pitting and may destroy what is left of the factory markings.

Hey William that is how I removed the rust from drive shaft with Evaporust. Then I used the wheel to minimize the pitting. How far off is my finish?

Not bad-you can see where the factory stripes were and that is the original finish. For a driver I'd use it.

2099

Restoration / Re: Drive Shaft Restoration

« on: May 13, 2013, 05:35:17 PM »

A non-abrasive method of rust removal is to use a length of plastic pipe. Cap one end, drop the driveshaft in. Fill with de-rusting solution, cap. A few days later, as clean as can be.

I believe that was how the '72 Trans-Am resto drive shaft got done on the SYC site. Wire wheeling won't get all the pitting and may destroy what is left of the factory markings.

2100

Restoration / Re: Drive Shaft Restoration

« on: May 12, 2013, 03:47:44 PM »

Tough to impossible if it is badly rusted. Drive shafts were not coated in any way; new they had an appearance very similar to exhaust tubing. They were marked with stripes denoting balance and application but there is no factory documentation on color/position. Got rusty fairly quickly.

Simplest way to restore it? Have a new tube installed. Painting a rusted 'shaft silver doesn't get the job done.