CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 24, 2014, 01:59:41 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.
105730 Posts in 12341 Topics by 4754 Members
Latest Member: Jake
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 53 54 [55] 56 57 ... 59
811  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 1969 Alternator date on: April 20, 2006, 01:28:45 PM
Sorry I don't have one Dave - but I'll keep my eyes open.

But a man whose ride I definitely want to see  - '69 w/327.  My kind of guy!
812  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: re-stamping a block on: April 18, 2006, 04:08:46 PM
Although, not a cloned car, to me a restamp is still a restamp - originality has been lost in the sense that there now is no way to prove that the restamped engine was original to the car.  Doesn't matter that you know it is original, no way to "prove" it that I am aware of...and a car commanding high $$$$ needs documentation to justify the $$$$.  I don't believe that restamping qualifies as documentation.  To easy to fake. As you state - two shops that you know of that will do this.  Will they only restamp original blocks or will they stamp anything?

If the car is put on the market at some time in the future, and it is clearly stated that the block has been decked and restamped, and the potential buyer acknowledges this and agrees, no harm, no foul....but if that fact is not mentioned, ......now we are into the arena of personal ethics.

Last year I finally installed the correct 327 in my '69RS.  When I bought the car in 1991, it had the wrong 327 in it -   a mismash of parts from a variety of engines.  Over the years, I found the correct 327, pulled it out of a '69 Camaro that was being parted out, engine partial VIN and car VIN agreed, best information said the engine was original to the parts car.  Date code was acceptable.  I needed a FK code, this one was FJ (powerglide vs. 3 spd manual). 

When I had the machine work done on the replacement 327, I fully documented (pictures) the pad stamp prior to sending the engine to the machine shop.  I never considered a restamp.  Kind of proud of the fact that the engine originally installed in a plain jane 3 spd coupe, VIN# 124379N551248; engine code V1122FJ, is now in my ride.

Whoever winds up with my RS after I'm long gone, will also get a plethora of documentation describing everything that I know about the car.  Only being honest with the next owner.
813  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: ac delco voltage regulator part number for 68 L34? on: April 14, 2006, 12:58:47 PM
It may just be old age, but in both pictures, the top (black) covers appear to be bolted to the base.  From what I've seen, original ones had the top riveted to the base..
814  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: 68 RS hideaway headlight doors intermittent on: April 13, 2006, 02:22:54 PM
Don:

I had this problem occasionally on my 69 RS prior to reworking the system last year.  When I took the door assemblies appart, I discovered that a couple of plastic bushings that guide/support the shaft that the doors articulate on were missing at the bottom location on both sides.  Probably just wore out over time.  So one possibility is shaft binding due to worn/missing bushings.  Additionally, a little moly spray lube is helpful as well.

I've also noticed a tendencey for the doors to stick open if the vacuum hose routing isn't exactly as it is supposed to be.  On the '69 there are a couple of large u shaped clips that bolt to the front of the radiator support, one on each side.  As the vacuum hoses run down the radiator support to the actuators, they are supposed to be captured by these clips.  On mine, if one of the hoses slips out, it can interfere slightly with the movement of the door in the open position - and actually press against the door cover when the door is open - and hold it in the open position.  A slight push on the door would release the binding condition with the loose hose and the door would close.  I assume that the '68 setup is similar.  If it is, be sure the vacuum hoses are routed/secured properly.

And as a final thought - check valve ok in the main vacuum line from the intake?  Relay valve working properly?  Anything that might affect the correct  vacuum routing at all times to the actuators.
815  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 2 Barrel carb tag on: April 10, 2006, 03:00:10 PM
I was able to get the correct carb for my '69 RS 327/210 HP; auto, no A/C (p/n 7029110) from Daytona Parts Company in New Smyrna Beach, Florida; back in April 2005.

The carb I purchased had the tag on in.  Their website is at the following:  http://www.daytonaparts.com/

Maybe worth a call.

Good luck
816  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Somebody's Feeling Frisky on: April 01, 2006, 07:18:25 PM
Yup - kinda figured that was the case

All good fun.  But imagine the shock with the K Car in the '69's slot!
817  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Adding console gauges and tach for 69 Camaro on: April 01, 2006, 05:07:57 PM
I can only recall one harness in the kit I used that adapted the existting wiring in my non gage console to the required wiring in the console to accept the gages.

If I read Rick's on line catalog correctly, page 199, top right states the following:

CONSOLE GAUGE CONVERSION HARNESS
Install the console gauge option just like the factory did in non-gauge cars. 100%
correct wiring, colors and connectors. Complete kit with detailed instructions.

Use Console Harness below to complete installation.
6706 67 A/T original console shift ..........
6709 67 A/T original column shift ..........
6705 67 All manual trans .......................
6806 68 A/T original console shift ..........
6809 68 A/T original column shift ..........
6805 68 All manual trans .......................
6906 69 A/T original console shift ..........
6909 69 A/T original column shift ..........
6905 69 All manual trans .......................

I believe that you only need to select one harness from the above listing that fits the particulars of your car, i.e. manual vs. automatic, original column or console shift, etc., and that the one, correct harness will adapt your current setup to accept gages.

There are two othe console harnesses listed below these in Rick's catalog.  As I would read the catalog, these would be replacement harnesses for cars that either came with gages or for non gage cars.  To me these listings are just to simply replace what you already have without converting over from non gage to a gage setup.  Best bet would be to double check with Rick's.

Richard
818  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.
819  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
820  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
821  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.
822  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.
823  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.
824  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.
825  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.
Pages: 1 ... 53 54 [55] 56 57 ... 59
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 0.103 seconds with 18 queries.