CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 23, 2014, 03:40:39 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.
105697 Posts in 12340 Topics by 4754 Members
Latest Member: Jake
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 56 57 [58] 59 60
856  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Sorry the forum was down on: September 07, 2010, 10:44:30 AM
WOW!! What a rush!! I needed my fix bad. I started reading the older posts and then I was cut off. All is good now.
857  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Car assembly question on: August 10, 2010, 09:31:56 PM
Cars are built on what the demand is is from what I noticed then. The 69 Camaro was one wanted car if 203,000 or so were ordered and of course that was an extented year for them but still. Anybody make anymore cars than that in 69?
858  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Car assembly question on: August 09, 2010, 05:13:53 PM
I was always curious about that. Thanks for the insight.
859  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Car assembly question on: August 08, 2010, 04:47:42 PM
So all dealers, other than customer order cars, ordered every car they wanted, with what options they wanted. I always thought that the Camaros (and of course other makes) where built however GM wanted to build them. So what would be the difference if GM did it instead of the dealer, like Chrysler? Was the way Chrysler did it that bad?
It sounds like it wasn't a good thing for the manufactures to build there own cars that they themselves designed.
860  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Car assembly question on: August 08, 2010, 10:15:08 AM
I've had some questions banging around for a while. How was it desided how a car was to be built if it wasn't special ordered for a customer? Not all the Camaros built were customer ordered correct? Did the dealers order them the way they wanted or did Chevrolet have some kind of system?

Thanks
861  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 1969 Camaro RS/SS or Clone ? on: July 24, 2010, 02:40:16 PM
C
What's wrong with the interior? 712 is black custom correct? Is it because it has houndstooth? or should have comfort weave?

Correct, it should have comfort weave (712) per the cowl tag, not houndstooth (713) which is what is in the car...    Sad

Paul

Good to know. He probably went to houndstooth for lack of finding the correct comfort weave. Is anyone doing correct comfort weave these days? I noticed that the auction for the car has ended. I wonder if graycamaro got it.
862  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 1969 Camaro RS/SS or Clone ? on: July 23, 2010, 06:39:01 PM
graycamaro -

If you are serious about this car, you need to contact Jerry MacNeish (410-781-0418) and have him check it out for you.

Now that you have the correct link posted, I see one big red flag; the car has the wrong interior per the cowl tag!

Good luck and proceed with caution!

Paul

What's wrong with the interior? 712 is black custom correct? Is it because it has houndstooth? or should have comfort weave?
863  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Camaro for database on: March 22, 2010, 05:57:31 AM
Hi Kurt.

The owner of the lot who is the owner of the car wasn't around so I didn't go any deeper than looking at what was obvious.

Gary
864  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Camaro for database on: March 19, 2010, 05:47:21 AM
KurtS...Found this 69 Camaro at a local used car lot yesterday. Non power drum brakes, manual steering, 4 speed, console no gages, a/c. Not a restored car and the TT appears to not have been touched.

124379N676676

N104721

711  59   B

08E   X44

Gary


865  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Did my 69 Z have manual or power steering??? on: March 16, 2010, 12:37:07 PM

Ok. Great information. Is it safe to say the drag link size is the determining factor on whether or not you had power steering or manual steering? I would like to find out if my car was an original M.S. or P.S. car so I'll know what to say when someone asks me questions about the car.

I'm thinking it was M.S. based on the equipment that was installed on the car when I bought it. (67 P.S. box and pump, 68 Z28 mounting brackets) I did get all the correct mounting brackets for 69. The  P.S. pump I bought LOOKS like what is on most Camaros in pics I have looked at, but I understand there is a difference between the BB and the SB. Can I assume the pump by it self was the same for all models? Are they dated? The P.S. box is out of an 80 WS Trans AM. I like the way the car steers but it is really really jerky and took a while to get used to it.

I like both manual and power steering on these cars. If it is originally a M.S. car I think I'll find a manual box and put it away for the next owner.

Thanks,
G  
866  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 302 question for JM on: February 22, 2010, 11:15:49 PM
Thanks
867  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 302 question for JM on: February 22, 2010, 09:38:09 PM
I would use the 711 gasket.  When you get into this quench topics then it becomes more of a Stock Eliminator get every last HP issue rather than a good running 302 for the street.  Don't worry about what everyone thinks, I've been in this hobby long enough to know that you will get 100 different answers from 100 different people.  We get about 360-380 out of a stock rebuild on a pedigree 302 on pump gas.  We can step it up from that if requested. 

Jerry


Thanks for the info. Where can I get this 711 gasket?
868  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 302 question for JM on: February 21, 2010, 08:04:21 PM
We usually use the 711 or the composition GM gasket that's about .030" compressed.  Depends on where the piston is at TDC.

Jerry

Hello. I was asking about what gasket to use on the T.C. site. I have a .030 over bore stock rebuilt DZ engine, balanced. The pistons are .021 below the deck and block surface has not been decked. Just a little confused from the answers provide due to the quench specs. What would be recommended in this application?

Thanks, Gary
869  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Question about Fisher Body date on: February 18, 2010, 04:35:14 AM
My VIN is 653104 and body is 344579. My original driveline has not been in my car since it came to Delaware in 1987 as far as I know so I haven't anything to go by in regards to those numbers. On a side note when I got the car I found a V0604DZ dated E 27 9 and 186 heads E 27 9 and F 1 9. I believe Kurt has this engine number in his data base. Vin stamp by oil filter reads 661 something, I can't remember all of it at the moment. Is it too close or OK?

Any opinions would be appreciated.

Gary

N653104 is an early June VIN. Cars in that time frame have mid-late May engines.

So are the dates on the block and heads I have too close, acceptable or not acceptable for my build date?
870  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Question about Fisher Body date on: February 17, 2010, 01:46:19 PM
Hello everyone. I hope I'm not highjacking this post..and if I am shame on me.

 I have been following this post with interest hoping I can find some info on my build date as well. I have one of those 06A built Z28's. I'm not really positive about this, but I was told some time ago that my car was probably built the first week of June... 2 thru 7...that was a monday thru saturday in 69. Based on the info in Jerry M's book, 2 edition page 199, it really is hard to say for sure since the book states my VIN as being built May (05) with VINs starting at 636000 and ending 654000. My VIN is 653104 and body is 344579. My original driveline has not been in my car since it came to Delaware in 1987 as far as I know so I haven't anything to go by in regards to those numbers. On a side note when I got the car I found a V0604DZ dated E 27 9 and 186 heads E 27 9 and F 1 9. I believe Kurt has this engine number in his data base. Vin stamp by oil filter reads 661 something, I can't remember all of it at the moment. Is it too close or OK?

Any opinions would be appreciated.
Gary
Pages: 1 ... 56 57 [58] 59 60
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 0.134 seconds with 18 queries.