CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2015, 01:34:51 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.
112337 Posts in 12906 Topics by 4940 Members
Latest Member: navan
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 71 72 [73] 74 75 ... 83
1081  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: NOS sheet metal prices on: February 15, 2007, 10:27:13 AM
Yup; that was me behind the counter Sat-Sun.
1082  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: NOS sheet metal prices on: February 14, 2007, 02:05:22 PM
I worked for a Camaro business [CPX] '83-'97. By the time 1st gen Camaro sheet metal went disco in the early '90s much of it fit like crap. We returned many '69 LH coupe quarters and '67 front fenders. At one point the '69 ducted hoods were so bad GM had to redo the tooling. You can still spot those from the era; they have much more 'curve' than the fenders. Even the stuff that fit was quite wavy; the last '69 fenders are easy to spot because the body line over the wheel well doesn't match up at the door. None of them fit nicely at the windshield trim. The last core supports were so wrinkled on top it was hard to place the tune-up sticker.

And it wasn't just sheetmetal. '67 'Camaro' fender emblems were twisted or bent and would break during installation; '69 'rally-sport' emblems were clearcoated without cleaning and were full of dirt. Order '69 Camaro 396 fender emblems and they would send '70 Nova emblems that weren't even close. Order '68 Z/28 rocker covers and they sent chromed '69s. The chrome on bumpers looked like bad silver paint; sometimes they would be missing some of the mounting holes. '68-'69 console doors were horrible; no pebble grain at all.

In general many servce parts fit and function but do not have the same appearance as OE. The '69 rear license plate holder is a good example; the service part has a different mounting bracket than OE and is easy to spot.

Yup, nothing like NOS.
1083  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: What all came with copo 9737 on: February 06, 2007, 09:11:13 PM
Per Chevy info 9737 was available on Camaro only with 9560 or 9561. It was called "SPORTSCAR CONVERSION/YENKO". As a result it is quite rare; very few non-Yenko COPOs had it. Berger and few other dealers knew of it; documentation for these cars is quite hard to come by.

There were at least 3 prices for the option during the model year: $126.40, $160.10, $184.34. Chevrolet Shipper Copies for many of Yenkos' COPOs exist; cars in the last order batch had the factory in-dash tach but it is not listed on the Shipper. It is thought 9737 was amended to include the factory tach, which was made available at Yenkos' request.
1084  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: '69 exhaust manifold. on: February 04, 2007, 08:19:10 PM
All 69 manual trans sbs had the AIR system.
1085  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: '69 exhaust manifold. on: February 04, 2007, 05:59:50 PM
LH 3942527, RH 3946826. These are AIR manifolds for manual trans applications. Auto trans did not have AIR so manifolds are different.

Same as Z/28; repros are available.
1086  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Is my DZ motor a phony? on: February 03, 2007, 10:31:39 AM
At peak operation, Norwood was rolling about 1,500 cars per day off the line. 

That's about double, dude. Norwood did around 800 Camaros per workday. Don't go by body tag dates and VINs. Do the math-165,300 cars between the start of 1969 production [08D] and June 30, 1969, maybe 212 workdays.
1087  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: stickers on core support and fan shroud 0f 69 z/28 on: January 30, 2007, 01:22:17 PM
the coolant sticker on the pass side.

The coolant sticker belongs in the drawer. Not used on US sold 69s.
1088  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 302 hemi prototype with crossram on: January 30, 2007, 01:15:32 PM
Maybe Heartbeat reproduced them.
1089  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...
1090  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.
1091  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.
1092  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.
1093  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.
1094  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.
1095  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


Pages: 1 ... 71 72 [73] 74 75 ... 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 0.09 seconds with 18 queries.