CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 18, 2015, 03:47:04 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.
112099 Posts in 12879 Topics by 4931 Members
Latest Member: Euclid
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: [1]
1  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: New subframe bushings and fender alignment problem on: June 13, 2008, 06:05:37 PM
I got everything level and plumb and...... Still need the 3/4" of spacing on the firewall bushings.  Huh With those in, everything lines up and is level.   Unless someone knows the thickness of the bushings, I am going to order a new set just to make sure they are right.  Door gaps are good, so I don't think the body is tweaked.  Very, very frustrating.
2  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: New subframe bushings and fender alignment problem on: June 13, 2008, 11:31:21 AM
I really appreciate all the help - thanks very much.  I am in the process of leveling everything right now.  I have the car leveled and the subframe loose.  I am going to run and get a dowel this afternoon to make sure it is plumb.  The kit came with 6 bushings.  2 of the larger diameter bushings were thin and two were thick.  The smaller diameter ones that go with the rad support (I am assuming) are the same thickness as the thin set from the larger diameter.  I have the large diameter thin ones in the back of the subframe, the thick ones in the front, and the small diameter thins in the core support.   I will post the results after I level everything.

To give some background as I have been working on this for months now:
I was pretty sure I put the bushings in the right way as I have the assembly manual.  I put the bushings in the way I have them now the first time and the issue was obvious when I laid the first fender on the car.  So I went through several iterations of pulling the subframe, changing the bushings around, switching the order in which I tightened, etc.  I tried about everything I could think of.  The holes all line up fine, so I didn't think the subframe was bent.  However, I did notice that the subframe has had one of those mount repair kits welded in.  Whomever put the repair kit in cut out the top of the rear subframe and welded the 1/4" plate in. They welded the firewall mount repair underneath the existing subframe mount - so it seems like the rear subframe mounts are ~ 1/8" higher than they would be stock, and then the firewall mounts would be the same - but I don't have another subframe to compare it to.  My thinking was that this would pull the rear of the subframe down a little bit and cause the subframe to sit tilted. Run that small tilt all the way out to where the radiator support is and it might be the problem as it would sit higher.  So I had a friend of mine who is a machinist make me some spacers 1/4", 3/8", and 1/2" thick that I could put on top of the firewall bushings.  The thicker the spacer, the better the gap gets.  With the 1/2" spacers in, the gap is the best, but it looks like I'd need about 3/4" spacers to get it even.  Something about that just didn't seem right to me. It didn't seem like that little difference would justify needing 3/4" more spacing a couple feet forward where the firewall mounts hook up. I even dusted off the geometry skills to try and figure it out.

So thanks again for the help - I just want to make sure I find out what the problem really is, as fixing it later would be much more work. 
3  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: New subframe bushings and fender alignment problem on: June 12, 2008, 12:10:21 PM
Thanks for the advice.  I did not level the car before putting the subframe in, so I'll give that a try.  There are 6 bushings - I have tried all combinations, but I have them in now this way:  The two small diameter bushings under the radiator core support. Of the 4 larger diameter bushings, I have the thick ones in the front/firewall mounts and the thin ones in the rear mounts.
4  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / New subframe bushings and fender alignment problem on: June 11, 2008, 08:37:40 PM
I finally got to a point where I could put the subframe back under the car.  I installed it with new bushings and now the fender gap is way off.  It is tight against the door on the top and about an inch wide at the bottom.   I don't remember any fender alignment issues with the car when I bought it, but truth be told, I didn't pay much attention, threw out the old bushings, and it has been about 3 years.  I've tried every possible combination of the bushings with no success.  The only way I can even get it close it to add about 1/2" of spacers to the front subframe mounts in order to bring the radiator support down far enough to even get it close.  Has anyone experienced anything like this?  I bought the kit from DR Classic, but it did not come with instructions and there are no p/n's on them to try a reference against the assembly manual.
I am really starting to wonder if I got the wrong kit and am about ready to pull my hair out.  TIA for any help
5  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Odd 427 stamp on: July 18, 2007, 11:24:10 AM
I have a 427 that I am trying to decode.  I tried a while ago and had basically given up as nobody could figure it out and the general consensus was that it was a marine application.  There was a new thread on a different site that I go to about odd 427 codes which renewed my interest as they said it was not one of the known marine codes.  I bought the engine from from a guy who purchased it from an old racer who claimed it came out of a vette that was wrecked during a drag race in 1972.  After he pulled it from the vette, it just basically sat until about a year ago.    I have no way to verify any of this and I bought it simply because it was a complete standard bore 4 bolt 427.  It is more of a curiosity thing at this point.

It is a 3963512 block, casting date of L 30 8, and has a stamp of T03257BL.  You can tell it is low mileage as everything is standard and it wouldn't need any boring, etc.  All the parts are GM as well.  The crank is a 7115, the rods are 7/16 dimples still with the green paint, and the pistons are floating pin high domes.  Heads are 840's with casting dates of B 18 9 and C 12 9.  The intake is a 3933163 with original patina but it has no date code.  The winters logo is very clear. The distributor is a cast iron vette distributor, but the tag is gone and it was converted to some type of early electronic ignition.   It does have what looks like "7 9 0" cast in it, but the "0" is cut off halfway so it may be a "C". It came with basically everything except the carb, cam, starter, and exhaust manifolds.  The oil pan is the large pan with baffling. If anyone has any information about this, it would be appreciated.  Thanks

I have a pic of the stamp here:
6  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / 2000 Z28 engine replacement on: June 02, 2006, 09:28:24 AM
This might not be the best board to post for this, but I am posting on every board I go to regarding camaros to get as many opinions as possible.  One of my camaros is a 2000 Z28 convert.  I have had it since new and it only has 30k on it. For anyone that has one of these, it has the dreaded piston slap and burns about 1 - 1.5 qts per 3000 miles.  After getting nowhere for years, I moved and got to know the service manager at the dealership near me pretty well.  Long story short - since I had it into dealers while it was still under the factory warranty, he is willing to replace the engine.  I almost feel bad for debating this as most people get nothing for this issue.  My concern is that the car someday increases in value and no longer has the original engine.  I didn't buy the car thinking it would be worth a bunch of $$$ someday, but you never know.  I don't think GM still stamps vins, etc on the engine, but the casting date would obviously be way off.  I have only put about 5k on the car in the last 3 years, so I don't use it that much.   Should I keep the original engine, or go ahead and get the new one?  I did ask about buying the original one, but that can't happen.
7  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / #'s from 69 SS 396/375 on: December 12, 2005, 06:59:10 PM
Hey guys.   It's been a while since I posted last (last time was the old forum).  Anyway, a moderator or someone from this site wanted me to get #'s and pics from a #'s matching Camaro I have. I have it stored 3 hours from me and it has just taken me a while to get down there.  I have the information now, but I can't find the email anymore.  Can anybody help out?
8  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Members from old forum version please post here on: December 12, 2005, 06:54:45 PM
I was dmleonard in the old forum and dmleonard in the new one.  Thanks
Pages: [1]
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 0.479 seconds with 19 queries.