CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
January 30, 2015, 09:02:13 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.
109286 Posts in 12657 Topics by 4866 Members
Latest Member: jamejia1967
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 68 69 [70] 71 72 ... 79
1036  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: BR Axle Code On A Z28 on: January 04, 2007, 05:05:36 PM
Around October 1968 the Muncie plant started adding a type code to the date stamp on 4-speeds: A=wide [M20] B=close [M21] C=HD [M22].

The pop does not usually have this code for some reason. The trans should have it however; would be P9B17A for a wide.

There were also grooves cut perpendicular to the input shaft splines for the same reason: 2=wide, 1=close. No grooves was M22. This is not true of service replacement input shafts.
1037  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: BR Axle Code On A Z28 on: January 04, 2007, 01:51:42 PM
Every 1969 Camaro was built to a specific dealer order. The order could be for dealer stock or for a customer; the process was the same. Hence there really is no 'special' order.

Unless otherwise specified a Z/28 was built with a 3.73:1 non-positraction rear axle. If positraction was specified the car would be built with a 3.73:1 positration rear axle. However the Power Team Chart shows that a Z/28 could be ordered with 3.07, 3.31, 3.55 or 4.10 axle ratios. 410 or higher required posi. There was at least one 69 ordered with 488s. 

Your car was ordered with that axle, probably for a specific customer that never took delivery. I hope it has a wide-ratio trans.
1038  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Front Spoiler on: December 23, 2006, 02:47:13 PM
Excellent question!

Car Life wondered also and tested 3 cars with and without spoilers in the June 1969 issue; a Z/28, GTO Judge, Javelin. The Javelin spoiler did nothing, the GTO rear spoiler increased front lift.

Only the Z/28 spoilers actually worked, the best configuration being front only.
1039  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Window Sticker Font on: December 12, 2006, 01:38:38 PM
Seems like William had a real problem with me not putting correct ECL codes on a replica window sticker. Since these are not readily available, I have no choice. Hence, it was his recommendation to put "repro" on the Sticker so no one would mistake it for real. I may have read into a bit too far, but the "you must be joking" comment suggests I would be doing something terrible by not making it perfectly correct. I can't imagine that anyone would confuse a freshly printed sheet of paper with a 40 year old window sticker.

In recent months several dealers have been "taken" by re-created paperwork. Both were build sheets, one so bad it was amusing ['70 Chevelle form for a '69 Camaro] the other an excellent repro build sheet for a '70 LS-6 that only a very knowledgeable Chevelle guy could spot. A well-known auction house has had to buy back several cars that turned out to be fakes.

If dealers are getting screwed by this stuff where does that leave the average person?

You may be acting in good faith but sell that car with the repro w/s and it could come back to haunt you. Subsequent owners may not know it was a repro. If a large sum of money was involved count on memories to suddenly get fuzzy.

My advice: Forget the repro w/s, broadcast copies, build sheets, body tags, warranty folders.

If you would like an inkling of what is going on behind the scenes go to:

www.copo.com








1040  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: DZ Block ? on: December 11, 2006, 07:34:18 PM
There was no block casting specific to the 302 engine.

The castings used by Chevrolet to build them were also used for 300 & 350 hp 350 engines. The block in question did come from a Camaro but with the code gone there is no way to tell if it was a 302. Since it has been messed with the crank may not be original. 
1041  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Window Sticker Font on: December 08, 2006, 11:34:15 AM
So for purposes of creating a replica window sticker, a 5 in front of the RPO code, along with any ECL from a sample found on a real window sticker should do the trick.

You must be joking.

I have been doing '69 ECL research for years and probably add a few every month.

While there are some specific to certain performance options there are many permutations of others. For example Z22 Rally-Sport Equipment currently has 20. One would think Pace Cars would use the same one; no such luck-there are at least 4. A specific performance option may have different ECLs with different engines.

I would go on but when I yap about ECLs Kurt S' BP goes way up.

Nothing wrong with doing a window sticker "recreation" but be aware that for 1969 Camaro used 2 forms [early-late]; both are different than other Chevrolet lines. Prices changed [Z/28: $458.15/$473.95/$506.60/$522.40], options were added/deleted during the year. Some options were not available with unrelated others. You will never get ECLs correct.

And based on what is brewing in the hobby you better note it as a "repro".



1042  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Spoiler AND Rear Antenna on: December 08, 2006, 11:09:33 AM
I have other photos of that car and know the story behind it.

It is the Styling mock-up car shown at the kick-off dinner. It also had black rockers.
1043  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Help decoding my 69 vin on: December 05, 2006, 09:20:41 PM
ps why did you say that A39 and A85 do not exist?

The codes may have been used elsewhere in GM, just not on Camaro and not for those options.

For the record Custom Deluxe Belts [req on Z11] were YA1, Front Shoulder Belts were YA3.
1044  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Help decoding my 69 vin on: December 05, 2006, 01:17:11 PM
I doubt there was intent to deceive. There are a few guys that offer window sticker re-creations and this is simply one of them.

With the documentation legal mess brewing in the Yenko/COPO world I would put that in a drawer and never display it with the car. If you sell the car throw it out.

I looked at your site, the restoration/car looks outstanding. The protect-o-plate is all the car needs.
1045  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Help decoding my 69 vin on: December 04, 2006, 08:43:34 PM
And a bad one at that.

A39 & A85 did not exist. Many of the ECLs are incorrect; "5ZJ7AG" indicates 14 x 6 rally wheels.

The form is incorrect and the body number is missing.
1046  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: sandblasting? on: December 04, 2006, 08:31:06 PM
Having done my share of sandblasting I strongly recommend that you have a professional shop do the work. Sandblasting of this magnitude [entire floorpan] requires a large compressor and sanblasting equipment, all of which can be rented. The car will need to be suspended; don't even consider lying under it. It will take a lot of sand and is incredibly noisy & messy. You will also need personal protective equipment. Inhaling sand is hazardous and it can easily end up in your nose, ears and eyes.

Sandblasting can warp and work-harden metal so you do not want to do any exterior sheet metal. If you get careless it will instantly ruin glass. There will be sand in the car forever.

Were I to do a car again I would first remove all panels due to be replaced and would seriously consider having the remainder of the paint/rust chemically stripped. There are rust-neutralizing solutions now available that are far more thorough than sandblasting. Hot Rod did a feature on this topic in the June 2006 issue.
1047  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Camaro disc brake rearend on: December 03, 2006, 07:03:08 PM
It could be a conversion using late '70s Cadillac Seville rear discs. They were built off a Nova platform and I understand the discs bolt-on.
1048  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Help decoding my 69 vin on: December 02, 2006, 12:25:41 PM
The U73 Manual Rear Antenna option was not available with spoilers. The dealer should have noted the error and requested new documents. Errors like this aren't all that unusual. When a Camaro window label has the VIN entirely printed rather than stamped that is usually the reason.

AM front masts were telescopic, FM was fixed-height.

124679N637627

1=Chevrolet
2467=8 cylinder convertible
9=1969 model year
N=Norwood, Ohio final assembly plant
637627=137,627 unit built at Norwood

NOR 319187=unit # assigned at time of dealer order
TR 720=Orange Houndstooth interior
50=Dover white lower body color
A=white convertible top
05A=body assembly started 1st week May 1969
Z11=Indianapolis 500 Pace Car accents



1049  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 69 Cowl Induction Air Cleaner Question on: December 01, 2006, 11:22:00 PM
It is likely the insulation was not cut correctly. There was only one flange & seal for all applications.

Original equipment ducted hood air cleaners did not have chrome lids. For some time in the '80s GM service replacement units were supplied with chrome lids.
1050  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Cowl/Vin Match on: November 13, 2006, 08:57:10 PM
Tag looks fine.

It is in the db.
Pages: 1 ... 68 69 [70] 71 72 ... 79
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 0.089 seconds with 18 queries.