CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 18, 2014, 08:42:21 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.
97153 Posts in 11687 Topics by 4578 Members
Latest Member: ronhill
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4
1  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 1967 - Y-1 (Butternut with White top) - Anyone have any pictures? on: April 07, 2014, 12:45:33 AM
There's about 30 Y-1 cars in the database.

How many T-1 cars are there in the database?
2  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Were 'Pacesetter' VIN's period different? on: February 24, 2014, 05:24:33 PM
Fwiw I believe I have a pacesetter promo car. The original L6 is gone but from the broken badge on fender it looked like a 250.
Obviously nothing special , possibly build date coincides with the promo?
I could be wrong.


O3D                           E
TR 760-Z           T-1
2B     3SK
5B
3  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Lacquer Vs. Enamel for the Camaro on: June 08, 2013, 06:04:47 PM
FWIW I have a Norwood 1980 Camaro that I bought new and it still sports the original lacquer paint.
4  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: I have a 1967 Camaro with no antenna..... on: April 10, 2012, 06:28:32 PM
My 67 had a rear antenna hole in original quarter although no S on TT.
The hole was very clean factory looking (circular w/notch) I am guessing the dealer had a tool to punch the holes?
5  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1967 rear wheelhouse plugs on: March 17, 2012, 06:10:00 PM
I believe they are different I have some somewhere I will post pics later.
6  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: New reproduction 1967 door lock knobs on: March 17, 2012, 06:08:39 PM
Fwiw my 67 convt. w/standard black interior & RPO Z23 came with the (chrome looking) bright metal door knobs.

It's entirely possible that someone changed them out but I have my doubts.

http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?topic=4947.0
7  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1967 rear antenna nut NOS GM ? on: June 29, 2010, 02:29:45 AM
I have a rear antenna bezel that is also supposed to be nos. It says WARD also fwiw.
8  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 67 V32 rear bumper guard on: June 03, 2010, 10:30:07 PM
Here is some nos hardware from some nos rear bumper guards I have. I am not positive these are just like the factory installed ones.
Scroll down for the pics I posted on TC.

http://www.camaros.net/forums/showthread.php?t=171217&highlight=nos+bumper+guards
9  Model Specific Discussions / 6-cylinder Camaros / Re: 230 OR 250 C.I. 6 cylinder on: April 29, 2010, 10:40:29 PM
In 67, only the 250 engine got the fender emblems, if the fenders are original.
Other than that, none that I know of (68 & 69 too). The L6 engines were pretty much the same except for the displacement.


I remember seeing a broken piece of a red white & blue shield that came off original fender but don't remember seeing any engine designation and I can't remember if it had holes for it either.
10  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 67 6cyl Car on: April 29, 2010, 10:36:27 PM
Cool how about some pics? Mine is a 6banger vert originally and I must admit it is tempting to put it back stock because seems like you see more and more modified Camaro's very few 6 cylinder ones to boot.
11  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Correct subframe bolts on: April 29, 2010, 10:31:31 PM
I was the first to remove my 67 bolts 23 years ago. The heads are all the same w/ integral washers and hash marks as the first post. Core supports are 1/2", S.frame are 5/8". My 68 subframe has bolts as shown in Reply#8, slide 2, Core support bolts MIA.

Are the subframe bolts on the 68 original also? If so your saying they are different than 67 or do you think G.M. used both ....bolts w/ integral washer and without on 67-69 Camaro's? Thanks in advance.
12  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Correct subframe bolts on: April 27, 2010, 11:28:31 AM
Is your core support bolts also 5/8" as mine are 1/2"?  And yes, there is a spring washer for the core support.  I think mine were too weathered to save.

I cannot find them don't know what I did with them.
13  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Correct subframe bolts on: April 27, 2010, 10:42:33 AM
Hogdaddy - Good deal on the fit.  Now I'm curious to what the diameter of the bolt is.  Do you know?   Is it 5/8" or 1/2"?  

It's also clear the GM used different suppliers through the years and even during the same year as the same plant.   So long it met the bolt spec, it was probably on the approved list.    

It is 5/8" I checked.
Btw the 68 AIM shows 3 washers for the core support : SPL. (spring)washer ,P(fender washer?) washer and L (lock) washer
14  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Correct subframe bolts on: April 27, 2010, 10:40:11 AM
I just double checked the 68 AIM and accordingly the "retainer" retains 1,2,3, & 8 to the CORE SUPPORT prior to assembly to the frame.
 Also, I checked core support....... it is a much bigger hole and the retainer looks like it would function correctly there. I believe it is correct afterall.
15  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Correct subframe bolts on: April 26, 2010, 10:51:41 PM
I was going to say that the subframe bolts have quite a bit bigger diameter than the core support bolts.   Go try this - take one of your core support bolts and see if it screws into a body mount.  I'd bet it doesn't and that should answer the question whether your's came with all the same bolts.

It screws into the body mount hole perfectly! There can be little doubt that it is not the right bolts imho.

Heartbeat City shows the core support bolts smaller too like you say so that couldn't be an original core retainer in pic above I guess.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4
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 0.1 seconds with 18 queries.