CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 30, 2014, 01:24:35 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.
105842 Posts in 12352 Topics by 4762 Members
Latest Member: HarryQ
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 78
61  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Foil tape over conv pinch weld? on: November 18, 2013, 01:34:22 PM
Speculating, I believe the foil is there to protect the paint when the molding is snapped into position.
62  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Cowl hood and air cleaner on: November 17, 2013, 04:05:39 PM
A car built with ZL2 will have a .75" hole just above the fuse box for the wiring harness. There is another small hole for the relay on the firewall above the RH rocker cover.

63  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Trunk and header emblem. on: November 15, 2013, 06:19:30 PM
Note that each emblem was serviced as a kit that included attachment hardware. 7752901 had nuts with sealant, 3916654 had standard nuts.
64  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 69 Camaro 396 Exhaust manifolds on: November 11, 2013, 01:28:03 PM
The body tag date of the car isn't the determining factor. The manifolds were installed at the engine plant so the engine build date is the key. It would have to be a short time after the casting dates.

I would be more concerned with the quality of the manifolds. They are often badly pitted or cracked along the parting lines. Very common for the end bolt hole flanges to be broken off. AIR manifolds are worth more than non-AIR.
65  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Original tires on: November 06, 2013, 11:20:36 PM
Non-SS cars with F70 x 14 tires still received 6" wheels. SS equipment included PL5 tires so PL4 was an upgrade.

The 'standard' tire for COPOs 9560/9561 was technically the E78 x 14 black wall. One of the few unrestored ZL1s has an E78 x 14 tire label but was ordered and built with PL5 F70 x 14s. Most of the factory COPO docs I have seen list an optional tire: PL4, PL5 or COPO 9737. An optional tire could have been a requirement. Problem is I know of one that doesn't list an optional tire so it may have been built with E78s.

COPO 9737 was limited to cars also ordered with 9560 or 9561. There was no optional 15" tire; Z/28s and COPO 9737 cars were built with E70 x 15 Goodyear Wide Tread GT or Firestone Sport Car 200.
66  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Original tires on: November 06, 2013, 09:52:25 PM
None noted. The April 2, 1969 rev states:

(5) F70-14/B Fiberglass Belt White Lettered Blackwall….PL4

But it has two listings and prices. For Camaro SS PL4 replaced PL5 and listed for $26.25. For non-SS Camaros PL4 replaced the standard E78 x 14 tire and listed for $88.60. I have several docs for cars built with them and most are not SS.

The example that is known to exist is a COPO, price is $88.60.
67  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Original tires on: November 06, 2013, 01:23:37 PM
I believe that a very, very few 1969 Camaros were built with Goodyear Polyglas tires, none prior to April 1969. I would be more comfortable if those alleged existing cars had documents establishing they were ordered with PL4.
 
The statement that the Camaro hobby has progressed to the point where “hearsay does not get it” is correct. Hearsay is defined as “something heard from another person.” Abiding by that statement I have no use for what someone who has a vested interest in selling reproduction tires has to say on this matter. I doubt he was at either plant 44 years ago; the “tire shortage” yarn is more hearsay. This requires one to believe the THREE suppliers of RWL F70 x 14 tires used in daily production simultaneously ran out forcing the plant to use a far more expensive alternative. It’s a convenient way to explain a car that has an FG spare but docs that show it was not ordered with PL4. Very common for dealers to swap out tires in those days. I believe the Goodyear Polyglas tire was introduced in 1968, any tire dealer could have had them in stock.

While I do appreciate what the workers at Norwood had to say the memory of a rare option used over 4 decades past could be a bit fuzzy.

The few facts pertinent to this issue remain: the rev to the dealer ordering information showing the addition of FG belted F70 x 14 tires to the Camaro option listing as of April 1969; the existence of ONE documented PL4 car-with a Firestone spare.

68  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Original tires on: November 04, 2013, 01:30:17 PM
The tires became available for order as of April 1969. A car ordered that day would have been built 3-4 weeks afterwards.  This web site shows them as “5/69 intro”

While the explanation is mostly accurate it implies Goodyear was the only supplier of the optional FG Belted RWL F70 x 14 tire. The only known documented [dealer invoice] car built with them still has its original Firestone spare. Uniroyal was also a supplier; DeLorean’s book mentions this very issue.

Having bought cars back in the day it was very common to upgrade tires on a new car prior to delivery. All 5 were swapped out for something else so even a correctly dated spare does not necessarily mean the car was built with that tire.

No matter how you want to look at it PL4 was a very rare option; few cars were built with it. Not all of those few had Goodyears.
69  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: '69 Z28 Project Car Value on: November 03, 2013, 02:55:53 PM
It's much rougher than you think and the decked engine is a problem. No block casting was unique to the Z/28 and a blank pad will be a deal breaker for many people. It probably had a trunk mat so check out the trunk floor, rear frame rails, roof areas around the glass. If it passes muster and the trans/shifter, axle, carb, alternator, distributor, wheels are OE it is worth probably a bit more than your current offer. If the parts in the deal are current available repro, nice but nothing special. If NOS, could be a gem or two in the pile so find out. Any paperwork with it?

70  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1969 California trim tag code mo 44 ? on: October 25, 2013, 05:33:20 PM
I also have an 01C with I120 , the production date on the build sheet is 1/15.

That's the day the Chevy paperwork was printed and final assembly started; body fab was complete. The car rolled off the line a day or two later.
71  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1100837 9 F 17 on: October 23, 2013, 06:23:46 PM
Just checked my list. 06As commonly have 9E23 837s.
72  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.
73  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.
74  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.
75  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.
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 1.264 seconds with 19 queries.