CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
January 29, 2015, 09:33:42 AM

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.
109217 Posts in 12649 Topics by 4861 Members
Latest Member: TFuehrer
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 54 55 [56] 57 58 59
826  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
827  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.
828  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.
829  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: Voltage regulator not working properly? on: March 25, 2006, 10:40:32 PM

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.
830  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.
831  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.
832  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.

833  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Blue Paint Mark on Steering Column on: March 22, 2006, 06:08:33 PM
Thanks John
834  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.


835  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


836  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.
837  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?
838  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Need 3953692 water pump on: March 19, 2006, 02:45:05 AM

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


839  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Headlight switch knob removal and switch testing on: March 19, 2006, 01:44:50 AM
I replaced my swithch last year.  My '69 is a RS, so the headlight switch, like yours, also has the vacuum hose connections on it for routing vacuum to open/close the headlight doors.  Replacement switches are available in the aftermarket.  I purchased mine from Year One and it works fine. 

Only difference was that the original swithch, which I still have, had a couple of extra connections on it.  The replacement switch doesn't have the extra connectors - so your first impression is that the replacement switch is incorrect.  However, when you look at the wiring harness connector that plugs into the switch, there isn't any wiring at the locations where the extra connectors are on the original swithch. 

My original switch hadn't gone bad, but I had to remove it when I was redoing all of the vacuum lines during my front end restoration.  Once I had it out, I figured I'd go with a replacement instead of putting the old one back in (beside the basic switch operation, you have the rheostat for dimming the instrument cluster, and the vacuum connections - and I figured this was a good time to go back with new). 

Glad your shaft released easily from the switch.  Although I found the button on the bottom of the swithch easily enough, once depressed, the shaft didn't want to release.  Had to wrestle it for quite awhile.

I don't know of any wiring diagram for the switch itself.  Only thing I can find is the basic wiring dirgram for the dash which shows the wires connected to the switch, but nothing relating to the internals of the switch.

Just to cover a couple of other possibilites - are you sure it is a switch problem? 

Wiring harness properly connected (on both sides) of the fuse block/bulkhead connector? 

Is your headlight wiring harness properly grounded at both ends?  Should be a ground connection for the headlight wiring harness, to the radiator support, on both the driver and passenger side. 

Even if properly grounded at both locations, do you physically have a good ground at the connector to each headlamp?  Do you have 12v to the headlamps when they are supposed to be on?  Do you have 12v to the parking lights in both switch "on" positions (park and full on)? Good ground at the parking lights?

If all else checks ok, replacement switch is an option.

Good luck - Richard

840  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: cloning on: March 17, 2006, 09:39:54 PM
At least for the 1969 model year, a coupe to RS conversion is NOT simply adding hideaway headlights and a couple of badges.  Yes, it is a trim package, a very elegant and complicated trim package.  The differences are many - the RS variations from the  "standard body" include:

different outer fenders, different inner fenders, different grille, hideaway headlights (based on vacuum actuated, articulating, headlight mounting bracket to rotate the headlight covers in and back in the open position), inner and outer headlight door covers, vacuum cannisters, mounting brackets for the vacuum cannisters, vacuum reservoir, relay valve and the associated vacuum lines, different headlight switch with vacuum hose connections, different windshield wiper switch (2 dentent positions, first detent routes water to the windshield washer nozzles, second detent routes water to the headlight washer nozzles which spray water on the headlights), headlight washer nozzles, diverter valve on the windshield washer pump, water tubing from the diverter valve to the headlight washers, and even a difference in the front header panel to accomodate the headlight washers themselves --- even down to the miniscule items like the bracket that holds the windshield washer bottle - it is different on a RS vs. a base coupe or a base coupe Z28.  And this doesn't include the Style Trim RPO items that are a part of RPO Z22, the RS package.

It is very true that a base V8 RS Camaro is not valued as highly as a Z28 or other high performance variants.   However, you would probably be very surprised as to what a very nice 69 RS will sell for.  Just try to find one listed in Hemmings, not a RS/SS or a Z28 w/ RS.  Try and find a nice, fully functional 69 RS, they are very few and far between.

In a lot of ways, if done accurately and correctly, a more difficult conversion than a base coupe to Z28.  Now a Z28 with the RS package - that is a very cool ride.
Pages: 1 ... 54 55 [56] 57 58 59
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.384 seconds with 18 queries.