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] 4 5 ... 139
Decoding/Numbers / Caveat Emptor...another repro tag
« on: November 29, 2018, 11:23:56 PM »


Car was final-assembled on or about December 24, 1968. That's 6 weeks prior to the release of the Z11 option.

General Discussion / Re: BE rear end
« on: November 29, 2018, 06:11:09 PM »
I watched the vid. My guess, he was stating the code phonetically so as not to be misunderstood. He should have said 'Bravo Echo'.

General Discussion / Re: BE rear end
« on: November 29, 2018, 01:02:16 PM »
Sounds more like BS to me.

Restoration / Re: slip yoke for M21
« on: November 20, 2018, 01:11:47 PM »
The driveshaft used for 1969 Camaro w/Muncie 4-speed was 49.56" C-C on the U-joint trunnions. One of the several service part numbers was 3970521.

The production Z/28 driveshaft remains controversial. They are often seen with the trunnions aligned; for other Muncie applications they are offset as usual. The Assembly Manual does not list a part number. It is possible in production, Z/28s used a driveshaft balanced to a higher rpm.

For the record, 67-68 driveshafts are longer and used different trunnions. They don't interchange with '69s.

General Discussion / Re: Not sure where this should be posted
« on: November 18, 2018, 05:53:14 PM »
I have examined more than a few of these. You have no idea what has been done to resurrect ZL1 blocks after an engine failure. Ugly welds on the outside of a block are common; I looked at one that had a rod go through the lifter gallery. Yes it was repaired.

I know of two ZL1 Camaros that were raced from new; both engines were decked as part of a race engine build-up. I'm not convinced this one was decked.

If the engine is as described and checks out, the asking price is not out of line.

General Discussion / Re: MCACN ? Who's going?
« on: November 15, 2018, 07:41:50 PM »
We will be there tomorrow when the doors open. Best show around!

Decoding/Numbers / Re: Caveat Emptor...altered/swapped tag
« on: November 12, 2018, 07:43:08 PM »
Second time around; was on ebay Sept 2016.

Decoding/Numbers / Caveat Emptor...altered/swapped tag
« on: November 12, 2018, 01:06:57 PM »


That VIN was final-assembled on or about November 14, 1968. Car has a 09C body tag, 3rd week September, 1969. One or both tags are not original to the car.

Restoration / Re: rear licence plate bracket 69 camaro
« on: November 10, 2018, 05:43:42 PM »
Careful with that.

By the '80s GMPD would send the '74-up X body bracket. Fits but looks nothing like the production '69 Camaro bracket.

General Discussion / Re: April 1969
« on: November 07, 2018, 03:33:44 PM »
Chevy stopped accepting Z/28 orders in November '68; dealers were ordering far more than they could build. When the dust settled, they were on allocation. Engine capacity increased shortly afterwards.

Probably most Z/28s were ordered for stock. Dealers didn't want to inventory slow-selling high-performance cars over the winter.   

General Discussion / Re: April 1969
« on: November 07, 2018, 01:31:51 PM »
FWIW my Z/28 db [about 5% of the total] shows Z/28 production peaked in February and May at Norwood; January & February at Van Nuys.

Decoding/Numbers / Caveat Emptor...altered/swapped tag
« on: November 05, 2018, 04:29:38 PM »


That VIN was final-assembled on or about May 27, 1969. Car has a 12A body tag, 1st week December, 1968. One or both tags are not original to the car.

Maintenance / Re: mystery oil leak
« on: November 05, 2018, 04:14:56 PM »
Factory BB w/chrome covers used special gaskets coated with a silver sealant. Paragon has them.

General Discussion / Re: Supplying the Assembly plants with engines.
« on: November 04, 2018, 05:49:38 PM »
Many years ago I was involved in the restoration of a '67 Z/28. The car was routinely questioned because it has an 06E date on the body tag but the engine was built July 6, 1967. The engine has a no-question VIN stamp and matched the Protect-O-Plate.

How can a June car have a July engine?

The carsí VIN tells the story. The normal VIN range for 06E builds in N242500-N247900. The VIN for our Z/28 is N251xxx, final-assembled on or about July 12, 1967. Other N251xxx builds have 07B tags. VINs were assigned as the finished body arrived from Fisher and was checked into the Body Bank at Chevrolet assembly. What that indicates is the order was initially released to production during 06E but quickly went on hold, most likely because Chevrolet Production Control learned they were short on Z/28 engines. There are a few other 06E Z/28s in the normal VIN range and those have July 3rd engines. Another batch of Z/28 engines was built July 6th. The build order for our Z/28 could then be released. Z/28s built through the end of the 1967 model year usually have July 6th engines.

General Discussion / Re: Supplying the Assembly plants with engines.
« on: November 04, 2018, 12:16:44 AM »
I wasn't there, but worked in Supply Chain for much of my manufacturing career.

All mass production of this magnitude begins with Demand Planning. Chevrolet determined that they would sell about 225,000 Camaros annually. Next, how many 6 cylinders, how many converts, etc. This is further divided into how many of each model/option is forecast by Marketing. The plan drives manufacturing capacity at the parts plants.

Z/28s sold far better than anyone anticipated so for '69 the production plan [stated in the January '69 Hot Rod] started out higher than í68. You have to start someplace so maybe Chevy initially planned on 15,000 Z/28s for í69. That means over 50 weeks of production, youíre going to need 300 DZ engines, 1,500 15Ē wheels & E70 x 15 tires, et cetera, per week. Breaking it down further, thatís 60 DZ engines per day from the Flint engine plant. Thatís enough to put them in continuous production aka Make To Stock; nearly everyday Flint built DZ engines and shipped them to each Camaro plant. Engine plants did not stock finished goods. The production schedulers knew they could release 60 Z/28 orders every day because Flint shipped 60 engines every day.

Low-production 396/427 engines do not appear to have been produced on a continuous basis. Prior to releasing a production order, someone would have to verify it could be built. Known as Material Assurance, it is easily done in todaysí ERP systems. No idea how it was done in those days; wouldnít surprise me to hear someone went out on the floor and counted.

Production Control at the assembly plants probably knew the forecast and maintained a small inventory of L78 engines. When stock dropped below a certain point, an order was placed and a batch of maybe 50 JH/JL engines would be built. Thatís why it is common to see the same engine date on cars built weeks apart or widely varied dates on cars built at the same time; the engines remained in stock much longer. Some 03B COPOs have January 23 MN engines, some have early March MN engines. Never happens on Z/28s; all the 03B cars I know of have early March engines.

Appears the same strategy was applied to L89 engines, but in smaller quantity. I have data on 31 L89 cars [10% of the total]. There are 27 engine build dates; 1 group of 2 another of 4 with the same date. In the group of 2, the first engine was installed 21 days after build, the other 49 days. Maybe built in batches of 5 or 10.

As production shutdown approached, Iím sure production control tightened up ordering. No Plant Manager wanted to get stuck with obsolete inventory at the end of a model year. It is common to see L78 engines built July 24th & 25th in Camaros built through the end of production. When those last engines were fully committed to dealer orders, Central Office would notify dealers L78 orders could no longer be accepted.

Z/28 engine production concluded about two weeks prior to the end of 1969 production.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 139