CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 02, 2014, 04:34:01 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.
103807 Posts in 12190 Topics by 4702 Members
Latest Member: Subarurider
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 117 118 [119] 120 121 ... 144
1771  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: tach number on: January 04, 2007, 06:13:19 PM
When you say stamped on the back, exactly where (what plate)?  Is it the head assembly?

FYI, according to the P&A the 67 Camaro Tach Assembly w/console guages (350, 396) was stamped 6468910 (or 6468696 -first design).  It literally says that "(stamped 6468910)".  Ed or someone with more P&A understanding could help.  (And yes, not all p/n from the P&A were the same as what was on the actual part.)
1772  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Will this fit? on: January 04, 2007, 09:08:36 AM
Front = 235/60/15
Rear = 255/60/15
About a year ago, my mechanic's assistant rotated front to back without asking or looking. (He was trying to be helpful.) I knew before I got the car backed out of the stall. 235/60/15 fills up the front well.
Like I said, I felt the scraping, but I haven't had the problem My68SS is describing... yet.
1773  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: L30/M20 on: January 03, 2007, 08:01:54 PM
Daniel's right, but have you looked at information sources:
http://www.camaros.org/geninfo.shtml#InfoSources
--especially Colvin's Chevy By the Numbers?
1774  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: value of my camaro on: January 03, 2007, 07:58:40 PM
How true! I'm slowly but surely "reclaiming" one of those clone-rods right now.  Hang in there and make it right!
On New Year's day I went cruising and a young guy in a 2000 Camaro flagged me over.  He just wanted to look at my car.  That's when you know...
1775  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Will this fit? on: January 03, 2007, 07:54:16 PM
67 and 68 wheel wells are not as condusive to over sized tires as 69 and later --different design.
I've got them (15 x 7) on my 68 (from previous owner --a new set of tires and yes, I'm too cheap to not run them!).  They will work, but they will also bump and rub --even with a firm ride (mine does).
Where do they rub?  Obviously, in a full turn of the wheel, but also over bumps running straight.  And this is different from bottoming out. The actual rub on mine is more on the outside of the wheel and wheel well.  It's actually more of a scrape.  So far --after about 3000 miles-- no noticeable damage to tire or wheel well.
Yes, they do look great --if that's your preference.  But they don't look original.
Take a look at this thread and the other thread(s) it refers to:
http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?topic=1346.msg7824#msg7824
1776  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Best source for resto parts on: December 26, 2006, 04:29:08 PM
"Restored" means different things to different people, and that definition is completely different for "show-n-shine" judging vs. originality judging; the goals are different, and so are the paths to follow to get there.  Smiley

Once again, John brings us to an "ultimate point"...

Dave has a good point that seems to be "truer" with each passing year --as it gets harder and harder to find original parts.  it would be great to know where to go to find the best reproduction part.  But that's not how restoration started.  It started by finding (hunting, scavenging, and begging --not ordering and installing) an orginal part and restoring it. I'm not sure who will decide, but someday reproduction may be the only option beyond a handful of truly original cars...

In the meantime, there are different judging standards (I love the "show-n-shine" comment, John!).  Again, it would be great if someone would set a concise and clear standard for Camaros --especially in terms of originality, but who would follow it and who would not?

I was looking at an "original"  WWI era Chevy the other day that has won a whole room full of trophies.  The owner winked at me and said, "It's the wong exterior color... Just like the Ford, it only came in black!"  Everything else is original (and thus, he wins originality awards), but it's his car and he painted it the way he wanted it...
1777  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Camaro History on: December 23, 2006, 08:22:37 PM
You can already get some info. from GM about the new Camaro on their blogs: GM Fastlane and GM FYI. 
http://www.gmblogs.com/

It does not appear as if GM is placing much emphasis on Camaro history in their new car design...
 Sad  Sad  Sad
1778  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Harrison AC Evaporator Box Decal on: December 23, 2006, 06:46:24 PM
That does not look "vertical", does it?  Oh well...
Thanks! Richard.  And Merry Christmas to you!
1779  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 73 Camaro on: December 23, 2006, 06:43:01 PM
And that picture is Camarosource's example of a 73 RS Z28...
http://www.camarosource.ca/php/camaro_info_db/index.php?year=1973

The Rally Sport package could be ordered with the Z28 (and the sport coupe and the Type LT [Luxury Touring] --there was no SS) in 73.  Technically, those split bumpers were called bumperettes and the nose was resilient frame.  In 73 the Z could get A/C as an option, but the 350-4 V8 only mustered 245 hp.
1780  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Camaro History on: December 23, 2006, 06:37:40 PM
What about the Dec. - Jan intro. of the Z 302 that went racing?
Driven by Mark Donohue, the Team Penske Camaro won 10 of 13 Trans-Am races to dominate the series, winning the 1968 SCCA Trans-Am Series Championship with 222 points. 
Most the Camaro histories, however, say GM executives were reluctant to "break the rules" and get into racing.  That's probably why Camaro has no "big name" and no song.
1781  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 73 Camaro on: December 23, 2006, 06:04:09 PM
Bet it looked like this 73 RS with those split bumpers --the nose was also "bump resistant":
1782  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Harrison AC Evaporator Box Decal on: December 22, 2006, 10:15:10 AM
I know I've read somewhere that the Harrison decal mounted vertically on the evaporator box.  Does anyone have a picture of an original or can you tell me exactly where (and how) it goes?

Appreciate the help!
1783  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 1967-1969 Camaro Original Trunklid Value? on: December 19, 2006, 09:41:00 PM
Limit that to 68 -69... The original 67 design did not have factory-installed spoiler provisions:
http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?topic=1039.msg7316#msg7316
1784  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Tower Clamps on: December 17, 2006, 09:33:34 PM
I've seen varying opinions about when tower clamps were discontinued.  Does anyone have a definitive date or was it a gradual thing, especially for Camaros?
1785  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Window Sticker Font on: December 17, 2006, 02:52:03 PM
Like JohnZ said a while back, GM was (and is) in the business to sell cars, not document them for us to restore years later.  That's part of it...
I did read where for $45, proof of ownership and the VIN, the Chrysler historic group can give you a "build card" on practically any car they build from 32 to 67.  Wouldn't that be nice?!?
GM could insist that any company that does a repo. W/S puts REPO on it...
Pages: 1 ... 117 118 [119] 120 121 ... 144
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 0.654 seconds with 18 queries.