CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 25, 2015, 11:00:40 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.
112273 Posts in 12899 Topics by 4936 Members
Latest Member: Rallyred
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 47
541  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: I need a cross ram intake for a dz 302 on: December 27, 2007, 10:28:09 AM
I do agree totally that the cross ram is impressive. I just do not see why someone would pay two arms and half a leg for a GM setup that is not original. Now if the person buying believed that it was original equipment, I could see where they would be convinced that they need the GM setup. And perhaps, that is who is paying these prices. There is certainly a lot of info along with people out there who are at least implying that these were original equipment, dealer installed, etc.

Jimmy V.
542  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: I need a cross ram intake for a dz 302 on: December 26, 2007, 03:58:32 PM
Since the "original GM crossrams" were not original to the Z/28, why would anyone care whether is it an "original GM crossram"or a repro? Either way, the setup on the car is not original. Only thing missing from this stuff  these days is a conspiracy theory. But then again, I guess there is one with regards to the Chevrolet documentation that some believe supposedly still exists in some Michigan secret vault.

Jimmy V.
543  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Trim Tag VIN correlation on: December 21, 2007, 09:48:33 AM
Does a 69 Norwood trim tag with build date 02D correlate to VIN 614044? CRG chart shows end of Feb as approx 607164. Almost 7,000 units difference? Is this a significant difference?

Jimmy V.
544  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: '69 Z28 fuel pump on: December 07, 2007, 03:45:03 PM
I have been told that the correct  AC fuel pump is part number 6470008 with a number stamped on the side of 4G40669.

An October 1969 GM parts book shows this as correct for the “( 327, 350)”. The book does not list one for a 1969 “302”.

Several “correct” ones on ebay do NOT have these numbers.

The pump is for a quality resto, so any information as to what was original will be appreciated.


I see the 40669 on different pumps but the prefix changes. jdv69z's pictures (email) shows HH40669. Is the prefix (HH) a date code?

Note that my cars build date is 10B, Oct 68. I assume this correlates to the "HH"?

Jimmy V.
545  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: How do you tell a real owners manual from a re-print? on: December 07, 2007, 03:41:09 PM
The green/yellowish? cover (I'm going from memory) booklet which would usually be in the glove box? I do not have any original paperwork for my 69 z, but I do have that. I can give it a look see if needed. What should I look for? As I recall, it is still in the plastic pouch it came in, with the key on it? (again from memory)

Jimmy V.
546  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Value for insurance on: December 06, 2007, 12:13:29 PM
I am very close to finishing my car. 1969 Z/28 (X33) with original differential, non-matching DZ and M20. All the dated components are matched to the engine. All original GM sheetmetal was refinished. I have used the best trim etc. (most NOS) and restored as many parts I could. The paint is a quality job. Everything was rebuilt except the differential which did not need it. NADA lists the low, med, hi prices as $25K, $45K and $84K. I don't consider this car a 100 point car by any means. I haven't added all the receipts but I am sure it is less than $45K. I am thinking $45-50K agreed value. Am I too low? Any opinions? Thanks.

My 69 Z is pretty much unrestored other than 1 repaint 25 years ago, so I'm sure yours is much nicer than mine overall, and I insured my last year for 50K, no questions asked from the insurance company other than some pics, and my driving, etc. Might want to think higher depending on how much more the coverage costs. I don't recall it being that much cheaper to insure for a lower agreed value, eg 40K

Jimmy V.
547  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: YH wheels on: December 05, 2007, 05:00:20 PM
What are the chances of finding a set of AD wheels for a 10B (Oct 68)  build car?  The proverbial "needle in a haystack"? My original ones are MIA.

Jimmy -

Here's one for sale now, although it might be a tiny bit late (10-24) for your car...

http://www.camaros.net/classifieds/showproduct.php?product=22385&cat=8

Paul

Thanks Paul, but unless I could get a matched set of 4 with correct date code, I might as well keep the 14x7 YJ wheels I have now. Mine were apparently swapped one for one from another car, as they are all the same June 69 mfg date. They are valuable in themselves to the right guy trying to restore a June 69 or so Camaro or Nova.

Jimmy V.
548  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Should I drive my classic Camaro as a daily driver? on: December 05, 2007, 02:58:37 PM
My personal opinion is that if you want a car to stay really nice, you can't drive it everyday. Occasional nice days in the summer, etc. maybe. But  rain, snow, and even  sunlight will take their toll on metal, rubber, paint, etc.

Jimmy V.
549  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: YH wheels on: December 05, 2007, 08:19:24 AM
What are the chances of finding a set of AD wheels for a 10B (Oct 68)  build car?  The proverbial "needle in a haystack"? My original ones are MIA.

Jimmy V.
550  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: '69 Z28 fuel pump on: December 04, 2007, 09:04:39 AM
Ed, I have the original fuel pump from my 69 Z and have some pic's I can e mail you. E mail me at jdvmooreindhdwe@aol.com, and I'll forward you the pics. They are too large (1+ GB) to post here. I have view showing numbers stamped onto mounting flange, which is what I think you are looking for.

Jimmy V.
551  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 302 Engine blocks on: December 03, 2007, 04:46:33 PM
Thanks Jerry, I have your books, have had since they came out, and am planning on getting the new editions as soon as they are both available. I have both 1st editions. It is easy to see why there is so much myth and mystery out there when there is so much mistaken info published.

Jimmy V.
552  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / 302 Engine blocks on: December 03, 2007, 10:55:23 AM
I'm just reading www.chevy-camaro.com frequently asked questions on the 302 Z/28 and it says that all 302's had 4 bolt mains blocks. I thought 4 bolt main blocks were new for, and 69 only? Am I misreading or??

Jimmy V.
553  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Mild Modifications / Re: 327 radiator on: November 28, 2007, 11:29:34 AM
Are you sure your 180 degree thermostat isn't opening at 160 degrees? Defective?

Jimmy V.
554  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 302 vs. 70 LT1 on: November 15, 2007, 09:04:45 AM
I call the 302 flange the "Pac Man" to help remember it.

Jimmy V.
555  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / 69 ZL-1 Camaros on: November 05, 2007, 04:44:46 PM
Anybody know how many of the 69 ZL-1 Camaros mfg in 1969 are accounted for? I assume there is a registry??

Jimmy V.
Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 47
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 0.088 seconds with 18 queries.