CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 01, 2015, 01:59:08 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.
110363 Posts in 12748 Topics by 4887 Members
Latest Member: Calz11
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 140 cam.........................how much vacuum ? on: January 23, 2015, 09:46:45 AM
6-7"hg. Use an adjustable vacuum advance unit. Change power valve(s) to 3.5 and add power valve blow-out protection as engine will pop sometiimes when cold. And nothing sounds like these cams!
2  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: GM Heritage Center Documentation / Underbody color on: January 02, 2015, 09:29:12 PM
So good to see overspray being properly sprayed on the underbody!

Now here is the proper rocker black-out on original paint car, mistakes and all:











3  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Round 2: Going to see a '68 Z/28 - Need some help w/pics on: December 19, 2014, 09:21:45 AM
look at the glove box tire pressure sticker. it should be for 15 inch tires.

That sticker is no longer proof of Z/28. A documented 68 SS was found with the 15" tire option. But it is a good place to start.
4  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: if you could go back and redesign the 67/8 .. or that other one, on: December 11, 2014, 07:13:48 PM
  Them ole Camaros,  best damn sporty car for the buck avalable to us US Americans,  but--Nothing is perfect.....
 Myself -I have always been pre-occupied with styling, and annoyed by  styling glitches that seem  last minute additions to clay full scale models added my ignoramous's'

The 67-and 8 got pretty close to perfect proportions for what they were, but having sufferd the same  abuse all you guys also agonized over..door dings...... The crease running down the length i would have  smoothed over and eliminated,  also since i have done custom pieces like a road racing front faring -even before  , I did not like the indented wheel well lips stamped in just to fit  the tacky  wheel opening trim ,  i would have just had a 1/2" flat vertical edge all the way around , those are the two basic changes i wish the cars had when they came out,  but i can turn my imagination loose,,,, You guys would not believe what would have been


There, I fixed the style problem:



5  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: if you could go back and redesign the 67/8 .. or that other one, on: December 10, 2014, 05:04:33 PM
Back then, we WERE trying to improve on the factory. The more you changed, the better! If the M50-14 tires didnt fit, you MADE them fit:

6  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: if you could go back and redesign the 67/8 .. or that other one, on: December 10, 2014, 03:56:02 PM
PERFECT

7  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Slick Tire Size on: December 08, 2014, 03:03:35 PM
These are 27" x 8 x 15 on 15 x 7 Ralley wheels:






These are M/T ET Streets 26 x 10.5 x 15 on 15 x 7 Ralley wheels:


8  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Original front spoiler for a 69 on: December 03, 2014, 09:27:04 PM
Did the original front spoilers for 69's have any GM numbers on them Huh  I have one with just a GM sticker on it.  There are no letters or numbers on the spoiler, other than the GM sticker.

Mine had an ink stamp
9  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: VE3 bumper on: December 02, 2014, 01:56:30 PM
Another question: Where does the blue load rest go in the trunk? Does it attach to the jack mast piece or is it held secure separately? Hate to see it smash the inside of the quarters!!!
Thanks.

Its part of the jack, and mounts under the spare tire like a standard jack does



10  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Air cleaner Decal needed on: July 29, 2014, 08:00:59 PM
To clearify my ? (Vaccum advance diaphram) not can . So why is it there if it has no funtion?



The vacuum can still has the advance rod, although it does not move, the rod still needs to hold the advance plate in position and limit it.
11  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Air cleaner Decal needed on: July 22, 2014, 09:32:32 PM

[/quote]
Thanks for the dyno chart.You posted as I was typing.lol
I had thought the L88/ZL1 to be in that ballpark.
[/quote]

Man, the idle of a l-88 or a ZL-1 is like NOTHING out there! your going to love it!
12  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Air cleaner Decal needed on: July 22, 2014, 09:28:33 PM




What is the deal with the Vacuum can in the L88 pic. ?  There is no port.
[/quote]

L-88 AND ZL-1 did not use vacuum advance, only mechanical, as they were intended to be strickly race cars. So the stock vacuum can is factory sealed. These motors run much better with an adjustable vacuum can and manifold vacuum advance, as these motors love LOTS of advance due to the high piston dome.
13  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Air cleaner Decal needed on: July 22, 2014, 10:22:17 AM
Old Chevrolet engineering dyno test show 575@6800rpm for the ZL-1. Mine was right on that figure.

14  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Need help/picture to correct my 69 Z28 write up from Jerry MacNeish. on: June 19, 2014, 09:31:54 AM
Not bare metal, just the flash. Heres a better photo. You can see the paint line:

15  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Need help/picture to correct my 69 Z28 write up from Jerry MacNeish. on: June 18, 2014, 07:41:18 PM
Van Nuys was different then Norwood. They must have used something, because the bottom just got body overspray. Original paint car.







Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
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 0.081 seconds with 18 queries.