Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Topics - rich69rs

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
16
General Discussion / Hot August Nights in Reno: 31 July - 9 August
« on: July 24, 2009, 05:32:33 PM »
Anyone going to be at Hot August Nights?             http://www.hotaugustnights.net/

Very convenient for me since I live in Minden, NV only 45 miles south of Reno.  That week is always a week of vacation time for me to relax, unwind, and enjoy the cars.  All 5500 registrations are filled.  Most of the slots for 2010 are already filled as well.  Quite an event - and the high desert is a great place for this event.

Richard

17
Restoration / 1968 Camaro Smog Pump from L78 Car
« on: May 29, 2009, 05:29:06 AM »
Ran across the following ad in a local "shopper" publication.  Perhaps helpful to someone out there.  I'm quoting the ad directly as it appears, making no claim for accuracy, just passing along information.

"Remanufactured High Performance Smog Pump for 1968 Canaro L78, 375 Hp car.   Deep grooved original GM pulley.  NOS air injector tubes.  Includes all mounting brackets and hardware.  $1000 OBO.  (775) 230-2724

775 area code is northern Nevada.

18
1969 - Orphans / #19N615153 Your DZ Block is on Craigslist in Memphis, TN
« on: December 02, 2008, 06:21:13 PM »
This was originally posted under General Discussion. 

DZ Block, Casting #3956618, is on Craigslist in Memphis, TN; see the following link:

http://memphis.craigslist.org/cto/913073511.html

Contacted the seller and received the following information:

VIN# is stamped at the oil filter and is:  VIN  #19N615153

Seller's name is Buddy 731-988-6174

Asking Price:  $2750

19
General Discussion / Water Neck Part #3958002
« on: November 23, 2008, 01:28:54 AM »
In a previous thread, http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?topic=3635.0, water neck #397212(6,8 or 9) was discussed.  Jerry answered the post that the water neck (and part number) was a generic replacement.

I came across a water neck today in a salvage yard that was in a box with other water necks.  This particular yard has a several older cars.  The water neck has part number 3958002 clearly cast into the base of the water neck.  Also, it was painted Chevy orange, and being that I found it in a salvage yard, probably original paint?.

Anyone have a listing as to the usage for #3958002? 

In appearance, it looks just like the one pictured in the thread mentioned above.  Aluminum water neck with no lobe and hole on the backside for a carb return spring.

Richard

20
General Discussion / Today You Can Order Your New 2010 Camaro
« on: October 13, 2008, 11:37:25 PM »
http://www.chevrolet.com/camaro/?evar1=camaro_presale

Received an e-mail from Chevrolet today with the "news" that the 2010 Camaro can now be ordered.  Go to above link for more info.

There is a spec document that you can download in PDF format.  Prices start at (MSRP):
$22,995 for LS Coupe; $24,995 for LT Coupe; $27,330 for LT Coupe (2LT option package); $30,995 for SS Coupe; $34,180 for SS Coupe (2SS option package)

....and unfortunately, for some unknown reason, no Z28 designation at all.  Go Figure. 

21
1969 - Orphans / HD Code 350 L65 Engine on eBay
« on: September 18, 2008, 03:05:02 PM »
No VIN given.

Block cast date code is:  E 26 9.  Block casting number is 3932388.  Pad number:  T06I4HD

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1969-CAMARO-350-ENGINE_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ33615QQihZ005QQitemZ150294800285QQrdZ1QQsspagenameZWDVW

22
Maintenance / Temp Gage Problem / Question
« on: June 01, 2008, 08:22:08 PM »
Yesterday when I went to take my '69 out for a little Sat afternoon crusin', as soon as I turned the key to the "on" position (engine hasn't started yet), the temp gage reading went immediately from C to beyond H to the fully pegged position to the right.  Car was obviously not "overheating" as I hadn't even started it yet.  I disconnected the wire from the temp sending unit, turned the key back to the "on" position, and the temp gage continued to read fully pegged to the right.  With the wire disconnected, it should have come back to read C.

The temp gage circuit functions based on the variable resistance of the temp sending unit as a function of engine temp.  Cold engine, higher internal resistance in the temp sending unit, and the gage should read C.  As the engine heats up, the internal resistance in the temp sending unit decreases and the needle on the temp gage moves to the right.

I have verified the circuit operation to myself in the past by warming the engine up, noting the temp gage reading, and then disconnecting the wire at the temp sending unit.  As soon as you disconnect the wire (open circuit - high resistance), as you would expect, the temp gage reading would instantly go to C; reconnect the wire to the temp sending unit and the temp gage goes back to reading normal engine temps.

I've checked the resistance of the temp sending unit in the car (135 ohms with engine temp of 190F; 530 ohms with cold engine) and compared the "cold" reading to a spare sending unit that I have.  The spare unit also inidcates approx 530 ohms ambient conditions.

Bottom line, I do not believe the problem is in the sending unit but rather the problem is the gage itself.  I'm basing this on the similar resistance values between the sending unit in the car and the spare one that I have, and more importantly, the fact that when I disconnected the wire from the temp sending unit (open circuit - high resistance), the temp gage does not come back and read "C", but stays pegged to the right which indicates a "low" resistance.  I have also checked the resistance through the "green" wire that connects to the temp sending unit to the ground at the battery and get about 135-140 ohms - basically measuring the resistance of the wire and the internal resistance of the gage.  Does anyone know if this reading is "normal"?  I'm guessing that it is lower than normal and is telling me something about why the gage is staying pegged to the right.

However, before taking the console apart to get the gage cluster out and change the gage, I wanted your thoughts in case I'm missing something.

Thanks in advance.

Richard



23
The attached broadcast sheet in the following link:

http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?topic=3932.0

was recently found on a 1969 RS Van Nuys built car on the gas tank.  The engine code is HD (block #172 on the broadcast sheet) and if I'm reading the carb application code correctly it is DD (block 176 on the broadcast sheet).  In 1969 HD is the engine code for the L65 with TH350 tranny.

The owner of this car and I have exchanged e-mails and I believe that he will be posting some detailed pics of the carb.  From pics that I have already seen, the carb currently on the car is indeed the Rochester 2Bbl, SAE 1-1/2" variant.

This has been previously discussed at:  http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?topic=3006.msg22733#msg22733.  This car provides additional documentation as to L65 carb. application. 

This car also has RPO C60; air conditioning.  According to info. currently in the CRG Report, 350/250 engine with auto tranny and air conditioning used carb application code DF where this broadcast sheet indicates DD (if I'm reading it correctly).  In the report, DD is shown as correct for 350/250 with auto; without air.

24
From the CRG chassis; spring usage section:  http://www.camaros.org/images/pages/chassis/69_spring_ID_PA34.jpg ; For 1969, front springs YA Spring as 3955716 and YM asd 3955722

Also, from the CRG chassis; spring usage section:  http://www.camaros.org/images/pages/chassis/69_spring_chart.pdf ; For 1969, this table does not list a part number 3955716; shows YA, YC, YH, YM, and YP as all having part number 3955722.  Also shows HH, and HG as having part number 3955727 and EL, EM, EQ all as having part number 3955712. 

Although the chassis / spring section in clearly states:  "As noted, there are some difference between the service information versus production usage...", I would suggest that the second chart be more clearly marked as being a service replacement chart, not original part number chart, and that the most accurate info. with regard to originality is contained in the first chart; i.e. correct, original part numbers.

I would concur with the first table; 
         that in 1969, YA spring was part number 3955716. 

Attached photo is one of the tags I found on my front springs.

25
General Discussion / Muncie Casting Numbers
« on: March 26, 2008, 05:00:53 PM »
Would it be possible to have a link in the drivetrain decode section that links back to this table in the transmissions section?

Richard

http://www.camaros.org/trans.shtml

26
Decoding/Numbers / Master Cylinder Quiz - Need Some Help
« on: February 16, 2008, 11:38:11 PM »
Until today, I had no reason to doubt that the master cylinder on my '69 RS was not original.  My car has power drum brakes and according to CRG information under the Chassis section:

"Master Cylinders

1967-69 Camaros used Delco Moraine master cylinders. The casting number is on the the side of the master cylinder. All 67-69 drum brake cars used the
5452310 casting except 1967 J65 cars used the 5461862 casting."

The section goes on to state that:  "The application code for the master cylinder was stamped on a small pad on the front of the casting,..."; and that the application code for all 67-69 drum brake cars, either power or manual, should be: BS.  There is a note that states that:  " unverified CT code has also been observed".


Now for the quiz question.  The attached pic shows the master cylinder on my car.   The next two posts with attached pics show the casting number and the application code stamp.  The casting number on this master cylinder is:  5460465 and the application code is indeed CT.  According to CRG data, this master cylinder was originally on something other than a 69 Camaro.  Any ideas where it came from?

 


27
Maintenance / Template for Installing a Tach in the Dash of a '69 Camaro
« on: January 13, 2008, 06:34:41 AM »
I had received an e-mail from one of the forum members asking if I had any additional information about properly installing a tach in the dash of a '69 Camaro in place of the original fuel gage.  In order to make the tach fit properly, after the fuel gage is removed, the cutout in the dash needs to be enlarged for the tach to fit and mount properly.  At one time I had a template and instructions for doing this and when the forum member originally requested the info, I couldn't find the template.  Well tonight, while looking for something else, I found the template.  It is attached here for anyone who might need it.

Tony, hope this is not too late to be helpful with your project.  Good luck.

Richard

28
Following is excerpted from Chevrolet Product Campaign Bulleting #69-C-6; dated March 3, 1969 and entitled:  Product Campaing #9006 Quadrajet Carburetor Fast Idle Cam Replacement


All 1968 and some 1969 Chevrolet equipped with the Quadrajet 4-barrel
carburetor have a type of fast idle cam that could crack and eventually
separate from the carburetor. If this occurs, a section of the cam
could become lodged in the throttle linkage and cause the throttle to
be held in a partially open position. If this should occur while the
vehicle is in motion, the vehicle will not slow down when the driver
removes his foot from the accelerator pedal. While this is a remote
possibility, if it does occur, the driver should shift the transmission
into neutral, apply the brakes and bring the vehicle ~o a complete stop.
Install a new type fast idle cam on vehicles involved in this campaign
in accordance with the instructions in this bulletin.

VEHICLES INVOLVED

All 1968 Chevrolet passenger cars and trucks equipped with a V-8 engine
and a Quadrajet 4-barrel carburetor are involved. All 1969 Chevrolet
passenger cars
and trucks equipped as outlined above and built prior to
the following serial numbers
are involyed..............

Camaro:

Los Angeles     L-523411
Norwood         N-599752


The document is 6 pages long.  Page 1 is attached to this post, pages 2 - 6 follow in subsequent posts.

An observation on my part.  If you wanted to be judged correctly in a concours show, to have the fast idle cam that came on the carb from the factory poses an obvious safety risk.  As noted in the document, the replacement fast idle cam for all small block V8's with auto transmission is red in color and the replacement cam for all smal block V8's with manual tranny and all 396 BB cars is blue in color.  For me, I'd rather have the correct cam and not risk a failure which could result in the throttle linkage being stuck open.  I guess another option would be to have the correct cam colored as per factory original.  I wonder how many 68 - Feb 1969 Q-Jets are out there today without having been upgraded as per this dealer campaing bulletin.

29
General Discussion / Body Numbers 231468 and 220831
« on: August 26, 2007, 01:09:59 PM »
From a previous recent post in the Decoding section, VIN #124379N578059;  BDY # on the Cowl Tag 231468 is currently being discussed.  This is an 01B Norwood built RS.

The VIN on my 01C '69RS is: 124379N581767; and the BDY # on the Cowl Tag is:  220831

Body number 231468 was actually assembled (based on VIN #"s) 3,708 units (VIN 's) ahead of body number 220831 (my car), although the factory acceptance of the order for my car (when the BDY number was assigned) preceeded BDY 231468by 10,637 orders! So for whatever the reason, the factory accepted the order for my car 10,637 orders ahead of the order for BDY 231468, but my car was assembled approximately 4 days later!  Norwood ran a steady rate of 912 cars per day. As close as I have been able to figure it, I believe my car was assembled on or about 17 January 1969.  (See the following previous discussion:  http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?topic=1556.0)[/i] 

Where this is of great interest to me is that although I do not have any formal documentation to prove what engine was originally in my car, there is anecdotal evidence to support the 327 badges on the front fenders.  Problem is that as of late 2005, no 327 equipped '69 Camaro built after the last week of Dec 1968 is shown in the CRG database.  It is well known that no orders for a 327 equipped Camaro were accepted after midnight 1 Jan 1969 but I have always wondered if my car was actually ordered before 1 Jan 1969 and build during the 3rd week of 1969 with a 327 engine in it from the factory.  The difference in these two BDY numbers is very interesting to me for that reason.  I know (based on these two BDY numbers and CRG decoding information) that the order for my car preceeded BDY 231468 by 10,637 and that based on VIN #'s (and the information referenced in the link above) that BDY 231468 went through assembly at Norwood somewhere around Monday 13 January 1969.  I wonder how many orders / day on average the factory accepted?  If BDY 231468 was assembled at Norwood on or about Monday, 13 January, then there were only 7 working days prior where the factory could have accepted new orders (assuming that the factory only accepted orders for new cars Mon - Fri) .  For my car to have been ordered after 1 Jan with a 307 instead of a 327 would have meant that Norwood would have accepted on average 1520 orders/day over the first 7 working days of January 1969.  Is this reasonable?  I would expect them to be receiving somewhere around 1000 orders/day to justify a production line of 912 cars/day.  Factory receiving 1520 orders/day seems high to me when compared against what Norwood was actually producing.  If the factory was receiving, on average, 1520 orders/day and only producing 912 cars/day, the backlog would get out of control very quickly.

I would be very interested in any thoughts or comments from someone who is more familiar with Norwood production schedules than I am.  Are my assumptions above flawed?  If the above is plausible, would it have been at all possible for a 1969 Camaro to have been ordered prior to 1 Jan 1969, with a base 327 V8, and assembled during the 3rd week of Jan 1969 with a factory installed 327? Not asking what is in the CRG database - just asking based on the above - could it have been possible?

30
There were two Technical Service Bulletins Issued on how to cure wind noise around the A Pillar and the door glass area of the car.  The first bulletin was issued on Nov. 8, 1968 and is 12 pages long.  The second bulletin, a supplement, was issued on April 30, 1969 and is 8 pages long.  Unfortunately, due to file size limitations, I can only attach 1 page per posting.  Attached to this post is the first page of the Nov 8 bulletin.  The subsequent 11 posts will contain the following 11 pages.  Following that will be 8 posts containing the 8 pages of the supplement issued on April 30, 1969.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
anything