CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 22, 2014, 10:11:04 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.
105663 Posts in 12339 Topics by 4753 Members
Latest Member: stpatrick
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 75 76 [77] 78
1141  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 12 bolt restoration on: December 30, 2005, 09:17:14 AM
As I stated previously the driveshaft flange was not painted. It must have been masked.
1142  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1968 RS Convertible with special-order two-tone interior - RARE FIND? on: December 29, 2005, 11:07:18 PM
I very strongly doubt this was a factory installation. It is far more likely a previous owner had a trim shop customize the interior.

There is a tag on the firewall near the master cylinder. What is the number next to the TR on the tag?
1143  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 12 bolt restoration on: December 29, 2005, 10:50:48 AM
I have dismantled many 12 bolt axles over the 15 years we had the business. I never saw paint on any part of a pb cable.
1144  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 12 bolt restoration on: December 29, 2005, 09:19:51 AM
That is why I thought the housings were painted before assembly-brake parts are never painted. Also I did not think the fasteners retaining the cover and backing plates had paint on them either. But John Z was there.

There is a good photo of a '69 Z/28 axle in the March '69 Hot Rod. The photo shows the brake drum mostly painted around the circumference, not much on the front around the studs.

Another good photo in the Aug '69 Hi-Perf Cars of the #3 ZL1 axle. It appears to be glossy, pb cables not painted.

Another detail was a paper label on each brake drum with the axle code.
1145  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 12 bolt restoration on: December 28, 2005, 05:37:16 PM
Parking brake cables are never painted.
1146  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 12 bolt restoration on: December 28, 2005, 11:23:15 AM
I believe axle housings were painted [glossy black] immediately after machining. Assembly paint daubs were later applied on the axle paint. Since the axle paint wasn't very good it did not adhere for long particularly in rust belt states. Brake components and axle parts [flange, etc] should not be painted. The rear axle cover and backing plates were likely received already painted. In my opinion cast-blast is not correct for axle housings.

Another common error is cast-blast for rear brake drums. There are photos in several vintage magazines showing the installation of t-bars or gears; drums were semi-gloss black. 
1147  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 z/28 ignition coil (early z/28 october 1968) on: December 22, 2005, 01:08:28 PM
John Z is correct.

SB duct hood cars used a coil assembly with the '66-'67 275/327 bracket. It positions the coil at slightly greater angle from vertical to clear the larger ducted hood breather.
1148  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 67/8/9 lower control arms on: December 20, 2005, 10:21:03 PM
67 arms have spot welded nuts for the lower shock mount. 69s used a J-nut.
1149  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 1969 L78 camaro convertable on: December 20, 2005, 01:21:45 PM
I have paperwork copies for 3 [Frost green, Burnished brown, Z11] and know of 2 more. That's 5. 11 is a number someone pulled out of the air, like the "only 34" bb Z11s.

No one knows, not even Chevrolet.
1150  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Catalytic converters on 69' Camaro ! on: December 18, 2005, 12:06:17 PM
Here in Wisconsin [Milwaukee & 3 adjoining counties] 1968-up must go through emissions testing unless the car has collectors tags, available to vehicles over 20 years old. Applying for collector status requires a final test. Rural areas generally do not require testing.

HP cars can be a problem. I have heard of all sorts of schemes such as testing the car with a different engine.
1151  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: REAR END DATE on: December 13, 2005, 01:17:45 PM
Ok now I understand.

Every Camaro with paperwork is a fake 'cuz Wayne sez so.
1152  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: REAR END DATE on: December 13, 2005, 11:45:09 AM
Any Camaro witha rearend more than a couple weeks out from build date makes me figure that things got changed.

So you are stating that the 2 owner 67 Z/28 with POP and 100% OE drivetrain, purchased in 1987 long before repro anything is bogus because you say so.

So you are stating that the 2 owner 69 L78 with POP and OE drivetrain, purchased in 1981 long before repro anything is bogus because you say so.

As for SS cars, the 3-speed floor shift was standard equipment.

You need to learn the difference between fact and opinion. When you have some facts feel free to share them.
1153  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: REAR END DATE on: December 12, 2005, 01:24:27 PM
For the 1969 model year there were 243,085 Camaros manufactured. Do not form opinions about them because you've looked at 50 cars.
1154  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 69 X77 code Camaro Many fact questions. on: December 12, 2005, 01:19:31 PM
First gen Camaros have what GM identified as a "steering knuckle" same L-R. The steering arms bolted to the knuckles. I believe 2nd gens have a 1-pc assembly.
1155  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: REAR END DATE on: December 11, 2005, 06:35:59 PM
In my experience much of what people assume about drivetrain date codes relative to the car is incorrect.

Our 06E '67 Z/28 had a July 6 engine, a March 20 rear axle and a June 23 trans. All OE components, POP to back it up. A good thing too since conventional wisdom would have people believing the axle was not original. The car also had its original alternator dated December 1966.

A fluke? Nope. I have the POP from a friends' long-lost 06A L78 car:  April 29 engine, May 6 axle, March 14 trans.
Pages: 1 ... 75 76 [77] 78
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.085 seconds with 18 queries.