CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 28, 2014, 09:39:27 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.
102442 Posts in 12088 Topics by 4668 Members
Latest Member: Carbuff
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 78
61  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Rust question on: October 23, 2013, 12:49:28 PM
The seller is the LAST person on earth that will give you an unbiased answer to that question. You have to have the car inspected prior to purchse. Don't even consider not doing it.

'60s cars, not just Camaros, were not well made to begin with and were never intended to last 45 years. Perforation of body panels is the least of the rust concerns; structural components such as frame rails, floor, roof and cowl panels are common rust areas on Camaros. They are often patched up enough so as not to be obvious and the owner may not be aware of prior poor repairs. The car needs to be thoroughly inspected on a lift by someone who knows where to look and what to look for. Pictures won't get the job done.
62  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1969 California trim tag code mo 44 ? on: October 21, 2013, 07:21:00 PM
Based on Canadian import records it is known that cars were built at Norwood and shipped late August 1968. Production start-up probably began Monday, August 19. There are many details to attend to so production is nowhere near capacity; less than 2,000 cars were built during the 10 days of production. Chevy did not publish the last VIN for August ’68 so the data is extrapolated by working backwards. The first two ZL1 Camaros were delivered to Gibb Chev on Dec 31, 1968 putting their final assembly on the last day of 1968 production December 27, 1968. Last car built in ’68 at Norwood was N569987.

1968 estimated work days for Norwood were Aug 10, Sep 21, Oct 21, Nov 24, and Dec 20.

1969: Jan 22, Feb 20, Mar 18, Apr 20, May 20, Jun 20, July 10, Aug 15, Sep 19, Oct 25, Nov 5.

From Oct ’68 through March ’69 Norwood operated at capacity; 57 units per hour, 912 per week. As of April ’69 that dropped by 25% due to Firebird production moving there. No Camaros were built April 6-12. The first two weeks of May ’69 saw production again hit 912/week, the last time that would happen as production capacity was shared with Firebird through the end of production.

VN appears to have started a bit earlier with cars thought to have been assembled as early as August 12-there are some 08A body tag dates. Knowing the last VIN for each month and with about a dozen broadcast copy dates one can re-construct a reasonably accurate calendar through April. That’s when the stoppage hit; the last few cars may have been built as late as early July. The peak months were Jan and Feb with production hitting 250-280 Camaros per week.
 
It’s a work in process-as more data becomes available I see how it fits-and thus far it usually does.
63  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1969 California trim tag code mo 44 ? on: October 21, 2013, 12:46:02 PM
Norwood gets tough to estimate starting April 1969 when Firebird production moved there. For a short period no Camaros were built. VN isn't difficult. Chevrolet published the last VIN produced by month for all plants. That combined with VN broadcast sheets showing the date printed [after body fab] makes it possible to closely estimate production. There was a work stoppage there so some cars with May body tags were final assembled much later. For reasons unknown Norwood broadcast copies are not dated.

The production rate at VN for Camaros was not constant. The 57/hour at Norwood was the max rate and they didn't always hit that number. They also worked some Saturdays.
64  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1969 camaro cowl tag/vin decode on: October 16, 2013, 02:29:22 PM
For '69 Camaro orders were on the same confirmation process for both plants. The confirmation process is largely component availability. It cannot be mixed with other car lines.
65  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1969 camaro cowl tag/vin decode on: October 16, 2013, 12:03:21 PM
Question:   What happened to the *orders* corresponding to those additional 76,000 or so Bodies assigned?   Only 42,803 additional cars were built during the extended production at Norwood..   Were the BDY NBRs modified on August 1 for the remaining cars to be built?   I'm assuming that very few, if any, customer orders for '69's were accepted after that point, so were those remaining *orders* internally generated numbers to maintain the parts pipeline given the apparently known issues with the upcoming '70 production??   Maybe JohnZ has some memory or information about what happened at that time?

They weren't built. John DeLorean wrote a book about GM in the '70s and had a lot to say about Chevy when he took over as GM Feb 1969. Dealers typically ordered far more hot-sellers than the plants could build. Chevy stopped taking Z/28 orders for a time in November '68. About that time they just cancelled thousands of Camaro orders. No idea what went into the decision process but large volume dealers had a lot of clout. He also stated that many dealer orders had errors and some may have been cancelled for that reason.

Chevy re-set the BDY numbers to 100001 when '70 production started. I'm sure the normal customer/stock/fleet order process remained in place an order for a short time, maybe into to early October '69.   
66  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1969 camaro cowl tag/vin decode on: October 16, 2013, 10:42:08 AM
There is no direct relationship between the two numbers. The BDY number was generated when Central Office confirmed the dealer order; the VIN was assigned when the car was in production. There were far more BDY numbers generated than cars built. The BDY numbers were reset when 1970 production technically began; the highest number I recall is about 376000. They began at 100001 so that's 276,000 confirmed orders. At that point about 170,000 Camaros had been built at Norwood, 31,500 at Van Nuys. Around 75,000 confirmed orders were cancelled. How cars were scheduled for production involved several factors, when they were ordered was probably not first among equals.
67  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 69 coil bracket on: October 07, 2013, 08:36:34 PM
The bracket for the 302/350 ZL2 application positions the coil at a greater angle from vertical, moving it away from the air cleaner. The difference is slight; maybe 10º.
68  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 69 coil bracket on: October 07, 2013, 06:43:00 PM
All you have to do is read the assembly manual.

It lists 1115270 coil assembly for RPO L48 & Z28-no mention of BB because the production coil & bracket on a BB did not interfere with the ZL2 air cleaner.

The 302/350 ZL2 coil bracket is the same one used on '66-'67 275/327.
69  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 69 coil bracket on: October 07, 2013, 12:13:58 PM
396/427 engines did not need a different coil bracket for the ZL2 hood.
70  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Missing trim tag on: September 29, 2013, 03:28:54 PM
There is far too much paranoia over trim tags.

The only real significance they have is establishing a car was in fact built with certain valuable options, usually high-performance. For '67 an SS or Z/28 is in trouble if the tag is missing or has been replaced. If that isn't the case and you're just planning to make a hot rod out of it no one will care. If your restoring it to original condition down the road it may discourage some people. The tag has nothing to do with title or registration. Installing a non-original tag in an attempt to pass the car off as something it wasn't can get you in trouble.   

Don't ever buy a car with a missing or altered VIN tag.
71  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 69Z rear ratios on: September 28, 2013, 09:50:04 AM
For all '69s other than Z/28 posi was required with 3.73 and lower ratios. For Z/28 posi was required with 4.10 and lower; 4.10 was dropped as an option for Z/28 June 1969.
72  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1969 Z/28 firewall crayon marks, question? on: September 23, 2013, 07:06:01 PM
I have a broadcast copy for an LA Z/28 with this typed notation at the bottom:

PHYSICAL SEQ FOR THE FOLLOWING JOBS WILL BE 658, 660, 659, 661 BROADCAST ARE IN THIS ORDER.
73  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1969 Z/28 firewall crayon marks, question? on: September 22, 2013, 05:50:42 PM
Our '67 Z/28 had 258 inside the lower grille panel. Vintage road test photos of ZL1 #3 show 718 written on the trans cross member.
74  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1969 Z/28 firewall crayon marks, question? on: September 22, 2013, 04:45:56 PM
There are survivors with visible crayon markings and the explanation is simple. Paint did not always adhere well to the grease pencil and quickly flaked off. The markings were done by Fisher Body during body fab to guide the workers. This was long before any paint; firewall blackout was done after the car was painted. Remember that the next time you see a restored Camaro with the paint code written over the blackout.  

There was a marking made after paint that is often visible. The unit number has been seen on sub frames, and inside the lower grille panel.  
75  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1969 Z/28 firewall crayon marks, question? on: September 22, 2013, 12:47:16 PM
Soda, media, essentially the same thing.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 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 0.081 seconds with 18 queries.