CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 02, 2015, 10:13:14 PM

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.
110409 Posts in 12754 Topics by 4890 Members
Latest Member: jay1970
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 71 72 [73] 74 75 ... 80
1081  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: your thoughts on date code 302 on: August 11, 2006, 12:25:17 PM
I have a small db of DZ engine dates relative to VIN. February is not even close to correct for an 05A car.
1082  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: m 11 option th400 floor shift non console on: August 09, 2006, 08:25:14 PM
When the ebay M11/T400 car was up earlier this year it was discussed on Someone posted a photo of a '67? Mustang shift bezel and it appeared to be the same part.

The thread is still there with the photos. Search M11. The thread is "Super rare 68 Camaro SS".
1083  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Dash Instrument Panel on: August 07, 2006, 08:52:18 PM
First of all there were 4 switches used: std, std w/gauges, rs, rs w/gauges. Make sure the new one is correct for your application.

My memory is a bit fuzzy on this but I do not believe the dash needs to be removed to replace the switch. There is a small spring loaded button on the switch. If you can reach under the dash, depress it and pull the switch knob all the way out-may take some jiggling. Once out, remove the round retainer nut and the switch can be pulled out and swapped.

If you already have the dash mostly loose, take the screws out of the heater control panel. Before you do that put some masking tape across the lens at the top-once loose the panel may spring back into the top of the dash which may scratch it. It also sounds like you do not have the nuts off the studs along the right side of the housing near the heater controls-you will have to get at those from behind. Also, the nuts under the radio knobs must be removed.

1084  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Parchment/Black question on: August 03, 2006, 10:18:52 PM
Nope; console would be all black.
1085  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: need a transverse muffler for 69 Z , on: August 01, 2006, 12:13:35 PM
It is fact.

Bill Porterfield did a series of dyno runs on a ZL1 engine. Disconnecting the chambered exhaust picked up around 80 hp.

Todays' 3" flowmaster X-pipe systems cost virtually no hp.
1086  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 z/28 full floating connecting rods - Fact or Fiction on: July 28, 2006, 07:14:49 PM
Nope, both of mine had floating pins.
1087  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: COPO? on: July 26, 2006, 12:26:34 PM
This a fairly common question on many of the 1st gen boards. The responses are predictable-look for this, what is the body number, etc.

None of it is proof the car is a COPO. The only proof is original factory paperwork or an unquestionable, original VIN stamped engine.

Cunneen has knowledge of the cars but no one has Chevrolet build records. I believe he no longer "certifies" cars.
If you have any reason to believe the car was sold new in Canada you can get info from the Zone office there as they still have records.

Your next step is to start tracking past ownership. Maybe someone has paperwork or the motor. Long shot but worth it. There are many near perfect COPO clownes out there. No one trusts undocumented cars these days.
1088  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 z/28 driveshaft on: July 18, 2006, 07:09:30 PM
Yup; car had bars and big rubber on a "BO" code 3.73 open.

Something broke, probably the rear U-joint, and when the driveshaft got loose it acquired a dent. The blacksmiths that repaired it re-installed the now-unbalanced driveshaft, trashing the pinion bearing. When I acquired the car everything in the housing went in the dumpster.

In all my years I have never heard of a driveshaft failure on a more or less stock 1st gen. 2nd gens are another issue. A friend twisted one into a knot on a '70 Z28.
1089  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 z/28 driveshaft on: July 17, 2006, 05:31:13 PM
I'm not nagging but there were almost 700,000 1st gen Camaros built and conclusions are being drawn based on a couple dozen datapoints.

I've been involved with the cars for over 30 years and the Z/28 driveshaft issue has been out there for as long as I can remember. It became an issue because most driveshafts at the time had in-line yokes. 30 years later we still do not know why some were different.
1090  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 z/28 driveshaft on: July 16, 2006, 01:05:57 PM
We had a Camaro parts business for 15 years and always kept driveshafts from parts cars for resale. In line yokes are the norm. When my 69 Z/28 driveshaft [offset yokes] needed to be replaced due to previous abuse my good friend Stevie at D & R provided me with the 'shaft out a L35 parts car-in line yokes.
1091  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: VIN vs. build these add up? on: July 16, 2006, 11:07:57 AM

The VIN range for 04C is N6366xx-N6277xx, about 8900 units.
1092  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: VIN vs. build these add up? on: July 15, 2006, 04:10:33 PM
The dates & VIN ranges you have posted square with data I have had for over 20 years. At Norwood there was no 03A, 03C, 04A, 04B. There was an interruption in output there for some reason. Having worked in manufacturing my entire career I know that for a plant dedicated to a specific product all it is takes an outage of one component to shut it down.

The range of VINs for 02A is N602xxx-N615xxx, over 12,000 units. Probably depleted stock of everything.
1093  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 z/28 driveshaft on: July 15, 2006, 03:53:40 PM
For 1969 the driveshaft was common to all 1969 Camaros built with a Muncie 4-speed according to the P & A manual. 67 & 68 driveshafts are longer and do not interchange.

What they did in production may have been another issue. Z/28 driveshafts often have offset yokes while most others did not. They may have been balanced to a higher rpm.
1094  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Brake Parts Numbers - 69Z - Rear Drums / Front Rotors on: July 13, 2006, 06:11:23 PM
Our 85,000 67 Z/28 had OE ball joints, drums and rotors. The rotors had never been turned and cleaned up with a light cut.
1095  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: corvette bronze code OO in many made? on: July 06, 2006, 03:06:25 PM
Chevrolet never released production by color so there is no way to know how many of each was produced.

Our small db indicates about 6% of 1968 Camaro production was OO, not really rare.
Pages: 1 ... 71 72 [73] 74 75 ... 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 0.084 seconds with 18 queries.