CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 26, 2014, 12:18:21 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.
102390 Posts in 12081 Topics by 4665 Members
Latest Member: 67RagTop
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 53 54 [55] 56 57 58
811  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Somebody's Feeling Frisky on: April 01, 2006, 04:50:15 PM
Ok - someone wanted to be funny and it is laughable.

Please remove the 74 Pinto, the 80's something Mustang II, and the Chrysler K car from the pictures on the home page.
812  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Adding console gauges and tach for 69 Camaro on: March 31, 2006, 08:25:39 PM
Guys:

This topic came up not too long ago - see attached link:

http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?topic=281.0

I've done it and it was no problem.  You don't change anything in the dash harness.  The existing setup in a car with idiot lights has a temp line coming in already to the light, just need to take the light out of the circuit and run the temp line to the temp gage.  (Also change out the termperature sending unit to one for gages).  Ammeter and tach leads can be run as new wires from the tach and ammeter gage out through the firewall to the coil, horn relay and the charging circuit junction block near the battery.

If you want to set it up as GM built it, the tach and ammeter leads (3 wires total) need to be terminated at the proper locations in the bulkhead adapter under the fuse block in the interior of the car.  (Temp lead is already properly terminated.)  Then if you replace both wiring harnesses in the engine compartment (engine and front light harnesses) with harnesses that are for a gage setup, you'll pickup the tach and ammeter connections through the bulkhead connectors.

Fuel line connection is simply a matter of extending the existing lead for a fuel gage in the dash to get it down to the console.

The last item is to remove the existing oil pressure switch and connect the oil tubing from the engine through the firewall to the oil pressue gage.  The existing lead for the oil pressure switch can be eliminated as it is no longer used.  (if you change out the harness, one for gages won't have this connection.)

Check out the attached link and let's go from there.

Richard
813  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 69 Deluxe interior window cranks on: March 29, 2006, 05:58:55 PM
Never really checked - although probably not
814  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 69 Deluxe interior window cranks on: March 28, 2006, 09:47:32 PM
My 69 RS has blue custom interior (TR 716 on the cowl tag).  The interior (except for the rear package shelf) is original.  The window crank knobs, as JohnZ has indicated, are clear - although a little yellowed with time.
815  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: Voltage regulator not working properly? on: March 28, 2006, 12:37:59 AM
Been on the road for a couple of days and just now getting a chance to catch up with the lataest posts.
 
The solid state regulator has one small circuit board inside with a few resistors, diodes, etc. - and that is it.  No moving parts - nothing to adjust.  When you pick it up and hold it in your hand, you can immediately tell that you are holding the electronic version because it isn't nearly as heavy as the original mechanical style. 

Good luck.
816  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: Voltage regulator not working properly? on: March 25, 2006, 10:40:32 PM
Don:

I can't help you with the problem that you are having with your original style, mechanical voltage regulator.

However, I do have an upgrade suggestion that I think would be "money in the bank".  There are replacement "solid state" regulators that are physically the same size and footprint of the original.  The only difference is that the cover doesn't say "Delco-Remy" like the original one does.

Most starter/alternator/auto electric repair shops carry (or can order) this solid state replacement regulator.  As I recall, price is in the $25-$40 range.

Going to the local Chevy dealership won't help.  Although you can still get a GM replacement voltage regulator, it is the mechanical (original style).  GM doesn't offer a solid state alternative.  Although I am very much into "originality" when it comes to maintaining and restoring our classic Camaro rides, this is one area where you can perform an upgrade that definitely makes sense and it will be transparent (with one very small exception) to anyone who is looking.

If you decide to use one of these solid state voltage regulators, in order to keep the appearance "original" you will have to replace the cover with an original Delco-Remy cover from an original regulator.  (The original cover has the words "Delco-Remy" stamped in it.)

The cover on the solid state regulators that I have seen are all held on by screws.  The cover on orginal regulators was riveted in place.  No big deal, drill out the rivets and the cover comes off.  Install the Delco-Remy cover on the solid state regulator base, bolt it in place, hook up the connector and you are done - no adjustments - nothing to adjust.  The one small difference in appearance is that the Delco-Remy cover will be bolted in place instead of riveted.  To me a small concession for this reliability upgrade. 

Both my 69 RS and my 66 Chevelle have solid state voltage regulators with original Delco-Remy covers and I haven't had any problems.  5+ years on the Chevelle, 1 year on the RS.
817  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Correct intake for L30 on: March 25, 2006, 05:14:30 PM
I have a 68 4Bbl Qjet intake, casting number 3919803; Date code D 24 8.  References that I have state useage as '67 / '68, 327 cid 300/350 Hp, no indication in my refs about 350 cid useage.  It is available if anyone can use it.
818  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: sb flywheel (flexplate?) sizes on: March 23, 2006, 09:48:37 PM
I would have thought the same thing - that both covers would fit either flywheel.  Makes sense.
819  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Rally Sport Vacuum problems. HELP! on: March 22, 2006, 06:20:51 PM
Bear with me as I mentally walk through this.... I'm out on a business trip and don't have any references with me.

The orange line to the relay valve is a "reference vacuum source" which is applied to the top of the diaphragm in order to control the position of the pilot valve inside the relay. 

The position of the light switch (or operation of the overide on the relay) either leaves vacuum on the orange line to the relay or cuts it off.

Whether vacuum is on or off the orange line to the relay valve then determines diaphragm and pilot valve position which determines vacuum routing from the reservoir tank (yellow striped line) through the relay (via pilot valve position) to either the red striped or green striped lines to the actuators, which then determine doors open or closed.

The test that you made effectively took the light switch out of the equation, routing engine vacuum directly to the reservoir tank and to the orange striped line input to the relay.  Engine running, doors are closed - so far so good.  Moving the relay overide should have the same effect as operating the light swithch.  Vacuum should be removed from the relay reference which should change vacuum routing and open the headlight doors. 

What you've done makes sense - looks like the relay has gone south.  If you remove the relay, you can see the bottom of the pilot valve shaft.  Maybe you can move it slightly, try a drop of oil.  If it is stuck, maybe it will free up.

I'd be interested in knowing if you do conclude that the relay is the problem.

RT
820  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Blue Paint Mark on Steering Column on: March 22, 2006, 06:08:33 PM
Thanks John
821  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Blue Paint Mark on Steering Column on: March 21, 2006, 11:10:48 PM
The attached PDF file contains two pictures of the steering column in my '69 RS back in 2005 when I was reassembling the front end.  After cleaning the column, the blue paint mark appeared.  I am assuming an inspection mark of some sort?

I know someone out there has the answer.

Thanks

Richard
822  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Rally Sport Vacuum problems. HELP! on: March 21, 2006, 02:02:11 AM
What you mention in your original post about how the relay valve is labeled vs. what is in the assembly manual is interesting.  I just noticed that the Word doc that I attached in the previous post also shows red on top, green on bottom (same as your relay valve is labeled). 

However, one must assume that the AIM is correct.  GM simply routed the vacuum hoses as needed to work with the original style actuators.  Easier to re-route the tubing as opposed to redesigning the relay valve or actuators.

Attached pictue is one of many reference dissassembly pictures I took of various pieces of the car as I was dismantiling it.  This particular picture shows my relay valve, with original tubing still attached, prior to dissassembly and removal from the car.  White paint marks were my additions to help me keep straight in my mind what tubing went where, etc.

You'll note that green is on top, yellow in the middle, red on bottom - which agrees with the AIM - and is the way Chevrolet (Norwood) assembled it. 

Thanks for pointing this out - good catch

Richard.

823  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Rally Sport Vacuum problems. HELP! on: March 21, 2006, 01:47:24 AM
The key may be in the fact that you did the same thing I did - replaced original designed actuators with Pacific Rim repro c _ _ p - don't get me started.

When I did the same thing back in the summer of 2004, my new, repro actuators (acquired from Classic Industries) had two problems.  1) the vacuum connection on the actuators wrere not oriented the same as the originals, which caused an interference issue between the vacuum connection on the back side of the cannister and the mounting bracket - relaitively minor, but still a nuisance that had to be dealt with.

Secondy, my headlight doors did exactly the same thing - they stayed closed when the light switch was pulled all the way out and the lights were on and they were open when the light switch was pushed in all the way and the lights were in the off position.  I wasted the better part of an afternoon chasing the vacuum connections at the light switch, at the relay valve, and then it occurred to me to swap the vacuum lines on the actuators and connect the red stripe line to the back (instead of to the front) and connect the green striped line to the front (instead of the back) of the actuator.  You could accomplish the same thing at the relay valve, but then to the astute eye it would be obvious that, per the Assembly Manual, this was not the way Chevy (Norwood) originally built it.

Bottom line is that the actuators, at least the two that I got, operate bass ackwards.  Go figure. 

Run a little experiment, swap the vacuum lines at the actuators - I'll bet your relay valve is ok.

Attached Word document is a pretty good guide to the system, diagrams, etc.
824  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 1968 manifold pre-heat sheild & tube for 327/210 on: March 19, 2006, 10:25:02 PM
I feel your pain.  By far and bar none, finding the correct air cleaner, heat stove pipe, and exhaust manifold with heat shield was the most difficult part of putting together the correct 327 / 210 hp engine for my '69 RS.

You are correct, in that these items do not exist in the aftermarket - not highly demanded.  Suggest eBay and the various swap meets.  I found the correct mainfold, with heat shield attached, at Hot August Nights in Reno back in 2003.  Air cleaner and heat stove pipe I found at salvage yards.  I also found (and still have) a '68 air cleaner for the base 327 / 210 hp set up.  I assume that you have the air cleaner?
825  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Need 3953692 water pump on: March 19, 2006, 02:45:05 AM
Dave:

Hope you find your water pump.  When I found the correct 69 327 cid for my ride, it still had the original 3953692 water pump, K 8 8 date code for Nov 22 engine build.

In my searching around over the years, I do have a spare GM water pump.  It is #3927170, date coded E 17 71.  I realize that you are going for an accurate date coded rebuild and that this pump probably isn't what you are looking for - however, it is available.

Additionally, according to page 224 of Chevrolet by the Numbers: 1965-1969, it states the following about #3927170: This water pump was used interchangeably with #3953692.  #3953692 saw extensive usage, #3927170 saw very little usage

Good luck

Richard

Pages: 1 ... 53 54 [55] 56 57 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 0.158 seconds with 18 queries.