CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 19, 2014, 10:15:29 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.
107506 Posts in 12505 Topics by 4810 Members
Latest Member: rustoleumm
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 194 195 [196] 197 198 ... 223
2926  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: decoding rear gear numbers on: March 16, 2007, 09:38:20 PM
A differential is a gear driven adding device. 1 output rev of both tires = (ratio) rev of input.  Only 1 side turning, only 1/2 of (ratio) input rev. 2 revs of 1 wheel = (ratio) rev of input.
Pretty need when you get into the gear theory behind it.

The ratio does show up here. Smiley
2927  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1969 LM1 could this be one on: March 16, 2007, 09:04:28 PM
Different year, different plant, different production usage patterns. Smiley

Thanks! That looks a lot better!
2928  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1969 LM1 could this be one on: March 16, 2007, 03:23:25 AM
Actually, that's a long time between the axle and a body in that timeframe. Could it be PY1201G1?
Unusual if it is PY1101G1, but with that code and application, I highly suspect that it is original.
2929  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Big block with auto. on: March 15, 2007, 03:46:18 PM
Though my car is pretty original, that area of the car has been changed and the kickdown was missing. So no help, sorry.
2930  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Car Insurance on: March 13, 2007, 12:17:04 AM
In certain states, State Farm offers a true 'Agreed Value' policy, IL being one of them.
I pursued this, it is not offered in MI.

I have Hagerty. A friend got hit and Hagerty paid, no hassles.
2931  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: is this vin in the data base 9n560527? on: March 13, 2007, 12:04:54 AM
2932  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Two Black 1969 Z28s! on: March 12, 2007, 11:53:19 PM
There's 23 black 69 Z's in the db.  Doubtless there's more out there, I know there's several that I've seen but not entered.
2933  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Warranty Engines on: March 12, 2007, 10:29:05 PM
Make this note :
        "In addition to these service only assemblies, any current production passenger engine assemblies that are ordered by the Parts and Accessories Department for service usage must have a service identification number".
         I'm going to jump to a conclusion here. If they ordered an engine for a specific application, say an L-34 350hp/396 engine for a 1968 Camaro it would be stamped "T0309XX" and ALSO a "CEx50001" (with X being the year it was ordered in). That's a lot to stamp on that small pad. But that's what the instructions say they have to do to COMPLETE engine assemblies (as opposed to partial assemblies or universels). 

After doing some more research and talking to Al Grenning (Corvette engine guru), I believe that complete engine assemblies that were used for service were only stamped with the CE code. Fran's supposition had a solid premise, but no CE blocks have ever been found that have an engine assembly stamp on them, either in a Camaro, Corvette, or out of a car.
Which means the engine plant would have known that those assemblies were destined for service and did not stamp an assembly code on them.
That also means there's no easy way to distinguish between a CE short block and a CE engine assembly. Heads and other components would be dated for the block, if those components are still on the block.

Are the totals for engine production by engine assembly part # or by application code? Do any of the sheets indicate where the assemblies were destined (i.e. assembly plant or service)?

2934  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: is this car in the DB 68Z VIN# 8N477646 on: March 12, 2007, 03:02:04 PM
He post here,, and I replied. Smiley
Nothing on that VIN.
2935  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: New Decode pages on: March 11, 2007, 02:03:55 AM
Rich did most of the work by generating the decode page originally. And the group has continued to update the pages as time went by. So there's a lot of people who have had input into those pages.

I'm an editor at heart. It was nice to have a solid foundation of info to start with. Smiley

Rich did an amazing job of implementing the change; there was a lot of things on the site that needed to change to make it work right.
2936  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Warranty Engines on: March 11, 2007, 01:51:50 AM
Please eliminate the insults from your posts. We welcome your knowledge and information here, but just because everyone doesn't immediately agree does not mean we need a war of words.
This is a discussion board that holds itself to a higher standard. Stick to the facts and you will make you point much more effectively.

I have never seen a CE stamp and a production stamp (T1012xx) on the same block, but that's not to say it couldn't happen on a service block.
I've seen several CE8xxxx blocks, confiming it was implemented for 68 model year.

But, the data shows that they modified the CE stamp procedure.
CE blocks have CE9B46015, CE0A965 0 9,  and CE72 502 stamped on them. Those do not follow the procedure that is outlined.

Here's a pic of that last stamp:
2937  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / New Decode pages on: March 10, 2007, 02:04:22 PM
The general Decode page received a major revision and I split apart the drivetrain info into a new Drivetrain page, with a lot of pictures and which includes all the 67-69 axle codes.
This change to the pages also changed the header links that are at the top of the pages.

Let us know if you find any errant links or errors in the pages.

2938  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Warranty Engines on: March 08, 2007, 11:07:38 AM
I take the GA law to mean that you couldn't have 20 service engines all stamped T1010EE, they had to be uniquely stamped. And that unique # was then traceable to being installed in xxx VIN car.
Don't quote out of context; "prohibit duplicating serial numbers of like components" is different than "prohibit duplicating serial numbers". Smiley

Federal law already made sure that all factory engines were uniquely stamped - with the VIN. This was only for service
2939  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Warranty Engines on: March 08, 2007, 02:26:12 AM
Fran was able to scan the docs to me (Yeah!) and here they are. I linked them since I left them a little large to be clearly legible.

Thank you for sharing these docs with us Fran!

And I don't think any other government ever required this, hence why it faded away and the traceability between the CE engine and VIN was not maintained (or if it was, it wasn't a priority).
2940  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Warranty Engines on: March 07, 2007, 03:58:08 PM
I remember this GA state law. It's shown up in some other docs, IIRC. Seems like there was some efforts to comply with it, but it didn't go far.

It's hard to draw conclusions without seeing the context of those quotes.

Unfortunately, I don't think Fran has the capabilities of scanning documents and I don't live near enough to help. Smiley
Pages: 1 ... 194 195 [196] 197 198 ... 223
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 0.098 seconds with 18 queries.