CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 18, 2014, 03:34:26 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.
107455 Posts in 12500 Topics by 4810 Members
Latest Member: rustoleumm
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 128 129 [130] 131 132 ... 146
1936  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Charlotte Autofair on: September 16, 2006, 08:21:21 PM
A 68 Camaro (no not mine) won the Class 27H (includes 67 and 68), second time in a row for Charlotte AACA. 

There were over 50 1st Generation Camaros for sale in the car corral.  Prices are WAY UP --the AACA treasurer told me, it looked like Camaro prices had increased by about a third since the Spring show in April.

I had been saying that prices were lower in the South --NOT ANY MORE!  Good News if you've got one...
1937  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 68 Radio on: September 16, 2006, 08:03:15 PM
This is not going to come as a big surprise... But no, I didn't find original radios cheap at Charlotte this weekend.  Although I did find a few misrepresented, thanks to you guys!

As to the question of repo. original radios.  The rep for Antique Automobile Radios said "Not yet, but we're getting there."  These guys are offering an original radio look with brand new "insides".  They are up to about 64 on the repo.  But the ones I saw looked pretty good.  Price is still high --$450 to $700, but considering the price of an quality original, I suppose it's in the ballpark.  Anyway, here's their site:
http://www.antiqueautomobileradio.com/
1938  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Questions on 68 RS SS 396 smog set-up on: September 14, 2006, 10:15:51 AM
This one's not "apples for apples", but it could help you on your price:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1968-68-Camaro-Chevelle-Z28-SS-Small-Blk-Smog-System_W0QQitemZ270022983016QQcmdZViewItem

As Kevin said, in the boxes and with the manifolds, it's obviously worth more than this example.
1939  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 1967 Washer Pump on: September 12, 2006, 10:07:39 PM
There was a change from 67 to 68 in the washer pump.  The cover for 67 and 68 should look the same (which may explain why vendors offer one replacement).  But the 67 used a straight hose valve assembly and the 68 used a 90 degree angle valve assembly.  (Somewhere in all these posts that valve assembly question has come up before...)
As to where you might find one: if you're looking in the junkyard, also look for an early Corvair (60-62) both 67 Camaro and those Corvairs used the same straight hose pipes valve assembly. Not sure if the Corvair 2 speed motor is the same... probably not.  But what you need is that straight hose valve assembly for 67.
You'll have to get Ed's attention with his P&A for part numbers.
1940  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1967 SS350 Fuel Pump #'s on: September 12, 2006, 09:12:13 PM
Ed,
A cell phone call got this out of the October 1, 1967 P&A:

No listing of 6416148.

67 ALL (327, 350) (2nd design),
67 Camaro (302),
67 Chevy w/dual exh. (283) (1st design),
68 ALL w/4BC (327, 350).....................(type 40524)  .............6416886

[some Chevy & Chevelle info. on 40503]
67 ALL (327, 350) (1st design),
68 ALL (307) .........................(type 40503)...........................6416712

1941  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: U46 Light Monitoring on: September 12, 2006, 08:41:21 PM
Thanks a bunch Steve!
The jewel information was what I was looking for... but I really didn't know the lingo.
Do you happen to know the RPO on the ashtray option?
I've not seen the 68 Finger Tip Facts book.  Obviously, I need to get one.

Appreciate it.
1942  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: PTB stamps on: September 12, 2006, 08:32:24 PM
x-77,

I'd like to see those 67 pics.  You cannot use the Quick Reply to post a picture.  You have to use the Reply at the beginning or the end of the whole thread.  On that Reply page, use Additional Options and Attach the picture.  If you use the standard email size picture (640x480, 128K or less), you shouldn't have a problem.
1943  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Car show judging on: September 10, 2006, 02:15:12 PM
Not worth getting upset at a local show...
Modified --yes; or even worst, imporperly restored.
At a local show (or any show), you need to know what the judging standards are.  Which organization sets the standards?  Some give feedback, some don't!  What are the categories of judging?  Who decides which category? The worst thing in the world is to put your car in a show where the standards don't match what you have tried to do with the car.  Sounds like that's what happened to you.
Although in this case, it was probably folks who like "old cars" and they "liked" the other car more than yours.  By most anyone's standards that's not judging...  It's just a good afternoon... And that's not worth being upset...
1944  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 68 Radio on: September 10, 2006, 07:07:09 AM
Thanks Sebastien.  Their prices seem to be right in the middle of the range that Ed provided.  That at least gives me a good starting point.  You guys have been really helpful!  Thanks again!
1945  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: PTB stamps on: September 09, 2006, 05:45:51 PM
Hotrod,

Here's a good example of why we should all go slow with the rattle can...
1946  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 68 Radio on: September 09, 2006, 05:32:23 PM
Ed,

Thanks for the "frame of reference" on the radios.

I'm thinking seriously about finding an AM that looks good, even if it doesn't play, for juding purposes.  I understand from a previous post that some of the hideaway radio/CD players are pretty good.  Don't play the radio now that much.  I'd rather listen to the car and the road.

You're on the list...
1947  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 68 Radio on: September 09, 2006, 05:06:01 PM
Soooooo, now that I know what to look for.  What do you guys think an AM or AM/FM is worth?  I see them on Ebay, but you can't really tell what shape they are in.  So next week in Charlotte, what should I pay?  I've gotten emails from three others besides myself asking me to look...

Marty, are any of those "several" sitting on a shelf?
1948  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 68 Radio on: September 08, 2006, 09:03:20 AM
Well, my part of this little mystery seems solved.  Judging by the clear glass it must be from a Firebird.  Looking closely at the faceplate and knobs, you can see little swirl marks, which I'm guessing came from something like a jewelers cloth.  That would explain how "new" it looks.  (But since we have no history on the car, there's no real way to know.) Can't get good enough detail in a picture to really show the swirls.  He says we'll pull the faceplate after the show.
I appreciate the help.  Now, if I can find anything that looks half that good...
1949  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: cowl trim tag on: September 07, 2006, 09:16:53 AM
Great on the Yellow!  I know everybody paints red nowadays, but in 68 yellow was cool!  Grin

OK, the Impala Rochester is an obvious sign of a shade tree rebuild.  But the hobby has coined a sutable name for such a car: "a driver".  For now, that's what mine is...

The D66 console was certainly a popular option and lots of Plain Janes were ordered with it.  Don't have my RPO codes with me, but the M-21 is a a shade tree stretch for a 327.  I think that was for Zs and BBs.  Do any numbers confirm your 3-speed guess?  (I know you know all this... In the end we driver owners still research through the numbers to unravel the mystery of what was done to the car over the years; and yes, get an idea of what it looked like originally.  Somewhere in Florida near where my car got rebuilt (by an unknow person --that much I know from the previous owner) there was a wrecked Chevy II and my Camaro got its motor and drive train.)

The front end was a common problem.  Coke bottle bodies were bad for that.  The Mustang was the worst.  I had a 65 Mustang in the 70s that drove like a battleship until I reworked the whole front end.  Frankly, any car over 20 years old, you ought to check the suspension and electrical first.  (I know we all look at the motor first!) I've got a restorer friend who rips out the wiring harness first thing --no matter how good it looks.

You say it had a vinyl top.  Needless to say, I think Butternut Yellow needs a black vinyl top.  Grin  Grin  Grin
1950  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: camaros.net site gone! on: September 07, 2006, 08:13:36 AM
Johnny,
The same thing happened for some folks with this site several months ago.  In a few cases it took several days to get back on. In fact, for about 2 hours last night I couldn't connect with CRG.  Contrary to popular belief, most web sites do not have an endless capacity, and sometimes they are down for maintenance.  Even large corporate sites like utility companies experience slow response periods.  RamAirDave gave you the best advice.  Clear everything out and start from scratch with your link.  Beyond that be patient.  If everything else connects with your computer, it's probably not you.

Come to think of it, on really hot days some 50s and 60s cars had this "mysterious" starting problem.  After they had been driven for several hours, if you turned them off and then tried to start them right back up, they wouldn't start.  Some owners spend big bucks on new starters, batteries, etc; but the problem still persisted.  I knew a shade tree mechanic who gave the best advice, "Wait five minutes and see what happens." 
Pages: 1 ... 128 129 [130] 131 132 ... 146
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 0.097 seconds with 18 queries.