CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 02, 2014, 04:44:47 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 ... 128 129 [130] 131 132 ... 144
1936  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: a few pics of the '67... on: August 29, 2006, 06:06:49 PM
The CA DMV web site never actually refers to a "title search".
But this seems like a likely place to start from their site:

Who To Contact

Driver License (DL)/Identification (ID) Card or Vehicle Registration
Submit your request on the appropriate form. Forms available online are identified by  For the following forms (up to 15 copies each), call (916) 657-8098 or write DMV Information Release Unit, M/S G199, P.O. Box 944247, Sacramento, CA 94244-2470. For large quantities of forms, write to: DMV Materials Management Unit, 4201 Sierra Point Drive, #112, Sacramento, CA 95834-1998.
1937  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 69 camaro A/C Fan Shroud on: August 29, 2006, 05:57:52 PM
Look at the Shroud chart.  In V-8 looks more like SB vs BB.
1938  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Great reference site with reviews on auto shippers... on: August 29, 2006, 04:56:14 PM
Good point.  And once you mentioned it, I realized that the car could still be covered under a regular policy (like when it is being trailered).
1939  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Great reference site with reviews on auto shippers... on: August 29, 2006, 01:44:05 PM
I've also found that Classic Car dealers (whom you know and trust) can be helpful, since they often ship cars or refer others.

Kevin, did you insure your car in shipping?  If so, what was the rate?
1940  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: How Much Do You Drive? on: August 29, 2006, 01:40:42 PM
OK, we're picking up several votes, but not many comments...
Post a bit about your driving!
I think Hotrod was the first "Regular driver" we've found.  (And man, we'll take up for you and post your bail!)   Grin Grin Grin
1941  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: a few pics of the '67... on: August 29, 2006, 01:34:26 PM
Looks good!  Have you tried the title search?
1942  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Your worst 1st generation Camaro fears - realized on: August 28, 2006, 03:52:49 PM
I'm a tarheel myself... but back to the thread. Grin
Thanks for those pics, Richard.  I'm going back to my first post:  This is not a rebody.  It is a kit car!   Angry
In the case of this particular car, how could you not call it a kit car?  It is not original in any way, shape or form: not an original body, drive train(?), motor.  But from these pictures I can also see how it would be easy to produce a car that could fool a lot of people with an original VIN attached to it.  The kit car market has lots of cars that are registered as the original.  Sadly, it appears that the same may soon be true for Camaros.  All the more reason to check out any car thoroughly before you buy it.  Roll Eyes
1943  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 2009 Camaro is Coming!!! on: August 27, 2006, 02:46:54 PM
Actually, dealers selling "hard to get" new models far above the list price is nothing new.  It's been around for decades.  The Ebay bid approach may be a new wrinkle, but paying a high price for the first one(s) is and has been common practice.
What surprises me is the $10,000 bid!!!  Contrary to the general opinion we keep expressing, there must be somebody out there who is excited about the new Camaro and willing to pay.

GM was a "johnny come lately" with the Camaro to GTOs and Mustangs. If you go back and read about the First Generation in car magazines, etc. you will find some less than sterling reviews.  Motor Trends Car of the Year in 1967 was the Cougar.  (The European Car of the Year in 67 was the Fiat 124?!?)  Yet, the Camaro became the car we love and they sold a lot of them!  (Even though it took several years to catch up with the Mustang.)

GM executives are getting on the band wagon.  The CEOs -Wagoner and Lutz have been talking to the press.  There have been events in August where they were out talking.  As to the Internet, GM has their own blogs.  Lutz quotes J.D. Powers when it comes to the why and what of the new Camaro.  Whoever they are talking to is (gasp) excited about the possibilites.

Trust me, I'm not a current GM fan myself.  (Yes, I drive a Toyota, too!  A Celica... and I'm not thrilled with Toyota doing away with all their "real sportscars"!)  What I hope is that history repeats itself!  I bought a 68 Camaro, thirty-some years later.  I hope my granddaughter buys a classic Camaro in 2040 --even if it's solar powered!
1944  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: How Much Do You Drive? on: August 26, 2006, 04:15:44 PM
Thought I'd bring this one back and see if anyone else wants to chime in.
Down my way, we've had beautiful weather, but cannot seem to find the time to get out and cruise.

Let's hear from you.  Vote!
1945  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: need help deciding how to restore engine compartment on: August 23, 2006, 06:05:42 PM
Before you start take a look at this thread:
Especially heed JohnZ's comment in the second post:
"See the "First-Generation Camaro Assembly Process" paper in the "CRG Reports" block at the top of the page for more Paint Shop process detail."
If you are going to do rattlecan, this could save you later headaches...
1946  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: To stripe or not to stripe? That is the question on: August 23, 2006, 05:56:59 PM
As I read the 68 AIM both the early and the later stripe were available for non SS.  The notation in the AIM for both is for 12000 series and lists no limitations.  For that matter, the 68 AIM has the same notation for the pin stripe, which was definitely available for non SS.
1947  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Finding the Correct Underhood Lamp on: August 22, 2006, 08:01:16 PM
Or maybe a 68 and 69. The 68 AIM speaks of existing holes and appears to show two holes (two lines showing screw placement, but interestingly enough only one screw actually drawn).  Roll Eyes
1948  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Found another one : ) ...'67 with just under 40,000 miles! on: August 22, 2006, 05:09:04 PM

From previous experiences I fear CNORTON may be right.  Any state's DMV reports can dead end fast even for someone with "authority" (dealer, attourney, etc.)
But since that lady owned it so long, you could get lucky.
Here's a place online to start:
This could start you out with a $5 fee or a $5 phone call, but if you're willing to give it a shot...
Good luck!

Post the pictures and let us know what happens.
1949  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Correct Gas Cap on: August 20, 2006, 11:46:11 AM

The reason I ask is twofold:

You ought to take a look at this:
and contact Bertfam (Ed). 

Also, some suppliers advertise  SS caps that really aren't the right one for a particular year. (Like the SS 350 cap that is often advertized for 67 - 68, but then they will disclaim it as original in the fine print for 68.)  That RS cap may have been put on your car from "bad" information.  It happens all the time and sometimes from what you might think is a reliable source.

Sounds like a sweet car... post us a picture!  Grin

1950  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Correct Gas Cap on: August 19, 2006, 04:44:58 PM
What size was the original motor?  Is it the 396 you list?
Pages: 1 ... 128 129 [130] 131 132 ... 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 0.493 seconds with 18 queries.