CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 31, 2014, 02:43:20 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.
102521 Posts in 12093 Topics by 4669 Members
Latest Member: paulmanta
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 58
1  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: 327-210hp,2bblcarb jet adjustment on: July 24, 2014, 10:55:54 PM
I'd check the gasket between the carb and the manifold - had one actually fail on me about 20 yrs ago while driving my '69 RS (327 cid / 210 HP / 2 Bbl Rochester) down I-12 in SE Louisiana.  As long as I was cruising ant 70, it ran fine.  As soon as I exited the interstate and came to a stop it died.  New carb to manifold gasket and all was good to go.

Unless the idle mixture screws are way off (typical setting is about 1-1/4 turns out from seated position) I would be looking for a vacuum leak which is allowing too much air into the intake at idle and causing the car to want to stall.
2  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Nice 69 Convertible - not mine on: July 04, 2014, 05:53:52 AM
Definitely the right color!  Wink  Grin


.....with seldom seen DX1 stripe
3  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: RS Headlight Vacuum Hoses on: June 11, 2014, 04:34:01 PM
I took a little different approach in that I'm not as concerned as I was 20 years ago about head bolt markings or the number of ribs on the RS vacuum hoses.  I replaced all of the headlight vacuum hoses on my '69 RS back in 2004/05 when I had the front end of my '69 RS spread all over the garage.  Very glad I did.

I want my car to look "original" but at this point in my life there is a limit.  To me it is no different than putting an original wiring harness back in the car - it is 45 years old, has been exposed to the elements of the engine compartment, and it really doesn't matter (IMHO) whether it looks ok or not - it is 45 year old technology rubber and wiring - it has seen better days and it only goes down hill from here.  I took a similar approach regarding distributor points.  It was time to throw them out in the snow and install a Pertronix (or equivalent) kit with their upgraded, higher voltage coil.  If the car doesn't run and operate properly (especially regarding safety related items) the rest really doesn't matter.

If you don't do anything else, by all means please replace the rubber hoses that go through the firewall to the headlight switch.  My car has power drum brakes and with the booster and master cylinder installed, at least for my hands, it is impossible to reach down and replace those hoses without taking everything apart.

Just my two cents - good luck.

Richard
4  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Restoration help on: May 15, 2014, 05:42:16 PM
Beautiful car!  Congratulations on getting her back - and on the street!

Richard
5  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Original dealer info for 1st gens is available on: May 05, 2014, 05:37:56 PM
From NCRS

We are missing the following data:
1969 Camaro 9N508855 to 9N587275
1970 Chevelle made in Atlanta, Seventh digit would be A.

NCRS does not anticipate nor have we been authorized to offer any additional GM brand information.


So from Sept 68 to end of Jan 69 NOR is missing.

Ok, I gotta ask because I've been sitting here like many anticipating the launch.  When was it discovered that 78K cars were missing from the data?  Hard to envision missing that minor detail.  Would have been nice to have known about it on the forum sooner.  Really deflating at this point to say the least since my 69 RS xxxxx9N581767 is in the middle of that list of missing VIN's.

Richard
6  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Window Stickers on: April 30, 2014, 11:35:28 AM
I used Triple A to reproduce mine.  Not great communication, but ended up with a decent product.  I have a little different take on these....... I recently attended a show with it displayed, and it was a HUGE hit with the crowd, as it was fun for the younger enthusiasts to see what prices were for these first gen cars and thier options.  If it is used in this manner, I do not see issues with reproducing them.  I used all of my cars data (Protecto plate/trim tag) to populate the template.  Anyone using them in a fraudulent manner to sell a car should be prosecuted.  But that can be said for any misrepresentation.  To me, a reproduced window sticker is no worse than a Showboard with the same info.  It's clearly a reproduction, and is used for display and educational purposes. There will always be scumbags out there using anything they can to purposefully misrepresent what they are selling. I think most buyers would not mistake a fresh reproduction as ~45 year old original..  Just my 2 cents...  Ed

I concur and also used Triple A

Richard
7  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Mud flaps? fender protectors? anyone? on: April 30, 2014, 11:25:14 AM
I'd pass - just can't envision them adding any aesthetic appeal.

Richard
8  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: N44 in non HP 69s on: April 24, 2014, 01:40:14 PM
Back in the 2004 time frame, when I rebuilt the front suspension on my '69RS (base V8, Powerglide, 2.73 open 10 bolt), as I studied what came off the car, my conclusion was that along with RPO N40 (power steering) I also had RPO N44; i.e. special steering, quick ratio.  As I understand it, at least for 1969, the two distinguishing features to look for are the long (approx. 5.8" long) pitman arm and the "short" outer arms.  The short outer arms have p/n LH-3954875 RH-3954876 and these were the same part numbers on the outer arms on my car.

Lock to lock on the steering wheel is about 2.2 turns.

If you haven't checked it out, I found the following site very helpful:  http://www.pozziracing.com/camaro_steering.htm#Steering_linkage

Richard
9  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Got My '69RS Back From Paint and Body on: April 14, 2014, 11:18:22 PM
Thank you all for the kind words - I really appreciate it.  Got some serious driving to do between now and the end of September.
10  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Your Friday Photo on: April 14, 2014, 04:35:02 PM
Very nice.....beautiful ride

The longhorns remind me of the rest of my week - traveling to Texas on business tomorrow.
11  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Got My '69RS Back From Paint and Body on: April 13, 2014, 08:32:57 PM
Perhaps it is my ignorance, but I thought it would be comfortweave, like my 712 car.

I don't know how many different seat material combos were available, but mine were / are just vinyl.  Rear bench seat is original - it hasn't been recovered.  Still in great shape - no one ever sits back there, except maybe during one of the parades during Hot August NIghts.
12  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Got My '69RS Back From Paint and Body on: April 13, 2014, 08:14:15 PM
absolutely GOR-geous Richard.!! Wink I think you hit Camaro Nirvana! Why the standard seats with deluxe door panels?

Car has the dark blue custom interior; trim tag #716
13  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Got My '69RS Back From Paint and Body on: April 13, 2014, 08:07:06 PM
Post 4 of 4
14  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Got My '69RS Back From Paint and Body on: April 13, 2014, 08:06:39 PM
Post 3 of 4
15  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Got My '69RS Back From Paint and Body on: April 13, 2014, 08:05:59 PM
Post 2 of 4
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 58
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 0.083 seconds with 18 queries.