CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 28, 2015, 09:01:43 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.
110355 Posts in 12746 Topics by 4884 Members
Latest Member: makemine69
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 68 69 [70] 71 72 ... 80
1036  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 1967 Camaro LA VIN number 16 Body #1 on: January 29, 2007, 01:02:24 PM
Barnum was right...
1037  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 Camaro battery on: January 28, 2007, 07:21:56 PM
For some reason Z/28s and maybe other small-block Camaros used a reverse-polarity top-terminal battery; aka Ford battery. All it means is the - terminal is on the RH side as you're facing the the engine bay, [+ -] not the norm for GM. BB Camaros used a 'normal' battery [- +]. Some will argue this but there are a number of Z/28 engine bay photos in vintage magazines that clearly show it.

The 69 AIM only shows side terminal battery cable assembly for the standard battery and shows 6 cylinder Camaros used RP; section 12 page A10 of the AIM. The next page shows the 'V-8' cables for the side terminal battery; all same. The 67-68 AIM shows the same thing for top terminal; all 8 cylinder cars had the same battery/cable configuration. But we know that was not how they were built.

There is no [+ -] topper; do not know if Z/28 side terminal batteries were also RP.

Why GM did this is unknown.
1038  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: stickers on core support and fan shroud 0f 69 z/28 on: January 27, 2007, 05:22:40 PM
I checked several vintage magazine tests and it is left of center in the photos.
1039  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: stickers on core support and fan shroud 0f 69 z/28 on: January 27, 2007, 03:19:04 PM
The only one that is correct is the "tune-up" label. The other two do not belong there.

It is usually on the core support although occasionally located on the fan shroud as on my last '69 Z/28.
1040  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 302 hemi prototype with crossram on: January 27, 2007, 03:15:50 PM
That ad has been on ebay nearly continuously.

Those heads sure get a lot of attention considering they are no more than a failed engineering experiment. Chevy could not make them work; got Yunick involved. He couldn't make them work either. No race history, never sold to the public, no factory installations.
1041  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 1967 Camaro LA VIN number 16 Body #1 on: January 27, 2007, 01:02:07 PM
It is not the lowest VIN. Norwood #13 still exists with a body built May '66.
1042  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Could this be the original distributor in my 1968 Z/28? on: January 19, 2007, 07:48:46 PM
You need to get The Definitive 1967-1968 Camaro Z/28 Fact Book by Jerry MacNeish. There is also a 1969 version.

Jerry states that 1111266 distributors were used in all 1967 and early production 1968 Z/28s. Later '68s received distributor 1111467. The one you have may not be original but could be correct.

www.z28camaro.com


1043  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Original calipers, '69 Z on: January 09, 2007, 01:40:31 PM
Probably a partially collapsed LH front hose. OE calipers were Delco, single-piston.
1044  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 69 Vigilite / Front Parking Lens on: January 08, 2007, 07:50:50 PM
The directional lenses with the bright ring were standard on early-production rally-sports as indicated by early dealer ordering info. The January 1969 revision no longer lists them so they were discontinued at that time.

Lenses with the bright ring also had the outer circumference painted argent.
1045  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.
1046  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.
1047  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.
1048  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








1049  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. 
1050  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".



Pages: 1 ... 68 69 [70] 71 72 ... 80
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 0.102 seconds with 18 queries.