CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2015, 04:01:19 AM

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.
112319 Posts in 12904 Topics by 4940 Members
Latest Member: navan
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 68 69 [70] 71 72 ... 83
1036  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: x-66 headlight bezels on: July 12, 2007, 09:38:49 PM
...don't forget the cross-ram!!
1037  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Camaro orders on: July 12, 2007, 01:00:54 PM
Dealers ordered cars for stock, fleet or individual customers.

Units ordered for stock were carefully ordered to be affordable and have broad appeal; I'm sure Chevy provided guidelines. I have all the 1st gen Camaro paperwork for a local dealer: 6 cylinder cars were usually manual trans with floor shift, 8 cylinders automatic with power steering and AM radio, ww tires & wheelcovers; maybe style trim and a console. Few had a/c. This dealer had only 10 Z/28s and some SS Camaros but no 396s.

BTW for every dealer that liked Hi-Performance cars there were probably 10 that wanted nothing to do with them. They had limited appeal, were an insurance and finance problem. Many were stripped of parts on the lot or stolen from dealerships. The fun continued after the sale with many returning with blown engine/trans/axle not always cheerfully covered under warranty.

By the early '70s a used '60s muscle car was nearly worthless as a trade-in.
1038  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: x-66 headlight bezels on: July 12, 2007, 12:17:57 PM
I cited 5 separate pieces of Chevrolet documentation that does not list chrome-trimmed headlamp bezels as included with Camaro SS equipment. The early versions DO list chrome-trimmed tail lamps which the Yenko has. There is a photo of it next to another Yenko which also has them.

I provided 2 sources of vintage magazine photos showing non-style trim X66 and SS cars correctly assembled with plain headlamp bezels.

Ergo Camaro SS equipment DID NOT include chrome-trimmed headlamp bezels. Our table is incorrect and should be updated.

If the hobby went by what people thought or remembered Z/28s would have black grilles.
1039  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: x-66 headlight bezels on: July 11, 2007, 10:28:24 PM
Correct; the std headlamp bezels are always the same color as the mesh portion of the grille.
1040  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: x-66 headlight bezels on: July 11, 2007, 09:39:05 PM
1969 Camaro dealer sales literature has detailed descriptions of what is included with the various option packages. "Camaro SS exterior features" does not list "bright headlamp trim" but style trim group does. The same description is repeated in the ordering info, salesmans' booklet and the three revs I have of the dealer order form.

The July 1969 Super Stock magazine road test of one of the first Yenko Camaros, known to be X66, clearly shows plain headlamp bezels.

The May 1969 Hi-Perf Cars road test of a non-style trim 396/375 Camaro SS also shows plain headlamp bezels.

Based on these original vintage road test photos and Chevrolet ordering info there is no reason to believe a non-style trim Camaro SS would have chrome-trimmed headlamp bezels.
1041  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 69 Tach - no gauges on: July 11, 2007, 12:17:30 PM
The tach-only option was requested by Yenko early in 1969 and eventually became part of COPO 9737. The last batch of L72 Camaros Yenko ordered had it. It is a very low-production option.
1042  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: x-66 headlight bezels on: July 09, 2007, 08:09:54 PM
Plain, painted black.
1043  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 1968 Z28 dates on: July 07, 2007, 05:51:30 PM
No time frame for them; Z/28s were built all year.

The Van Nuys plant regularly left a Body Broadcast Sheet stuck to the top of the fuel tank. If the tank looks original it may still be there.
1044  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Production Dating a vehicle by VIN on: July 03, 2007, 06:19:06 PM
Having spent many years and much time studying Norwood Camaro production for 1969 it is time for my 2. There is not always a direct correlation between body tag date and production date.

The date on the body tag was fixed when Fisher released the production order for the body. I do not know how far ahead they released POs; I'm sure there was a bank of orders as the last thing you want to do is starve the line. Lets say there were always a couple days of body POs queued at Fisher. This means a PO printed on Wednesday with an 04C tag attached may not have been started until Friday. That car would not be on the Chevrolet side until 04D.

In comparing a lot of cars it is not unusual to see an earlier VIN with a later tag date. The first two ZL1s N569358 & N569359 have 12E tags but earlier VINs than many 12C and 12D Camaros. It is well known those cars were built Dec 30, 1968 and delivered to Gibb the next day. That means the 12C and 12D Camaros that followed with later VINs were actually built on or after January 2, 1969.

For whatever reason Fisher did not always release POs in a orderly manner. This was around the time Firebird production moved to Norwood and there may have been some co-ordination issues. There is no question Fisher banked POs; how else could 06A Z/28s have mid-June engine dates? Ergo an 04C car may have actually been built 04B.

Remember the body tag meant nothing to Chevrolet. Fisher was free to do as it pleased.
1045  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: steering wheels - '69 on: June 15, 2007, 03:05:51 PM
The NK1 Cushioned-Rim steering wheel was annouced as a 1969 Camaro option in a Communications Kit and is listed in the April 1969 Dealer Ordering Info. That is why people believe it was available. No documented factory installation is known.
1046  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 69 Camaro X codes, did they make SS's without them in june? on: June 14, 2007, 10:25:39 PM
1047  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 69 Camaro X codes, did they make SS's without them in june? on: June 14, 2007, 07:46:42 PM
No T400/small blocks for 1st gen cars-if it was built with one it had to be a bb.

Rear axles did not have a VIN stamp. There is a casting date on the back of the axle center section. The axle code is on the front of the RH axle tube, about in the middle.

All Quadrajet equipped SS cars [L34, L35, L48] had two fuel lines, supply and return. L78 [375 hp] SS cars had Holley carbs and will have just one.
1048  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Interior and exterior color combinations on: June 14, 2007, 07:38:06 PM
1969 Camaro Dealer Ordering Info contains a matrix depicting "approved" paint/trim combos; silver & blue is one of them. No special order required but not very common. There is one currently on ebay.

I can't resist a can you-top-this: At SC-Indy a few years ago an Olympic Gold Z/28-RS with midnight green interior and brown vinyl roof.
1049  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 69 Camaro X codes, did they make SS's without them in june? on: June 14, 2007, 07:23:01 PM
Based on your 'handle' I assume this is a convert. For some reason converts missing X codes in the May-June time frame are not unusual.

If the trans is OE the VIN may be stamped on the LH edge of the trans mounting flange-where it bolts to the cylinder block. Tough to see and some cleaning may be needed but it is usually quite visible.
1050  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Ebay camaro on: June 02, 2007, 10:08:08 AM
All BS. That was done in the late '70s.
Pages: 1 ... 68 69 [70] 71 72 ... 83
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.