Messages

31

Originality / Re: Thoughts on the undercarriage?

« on: January 03, 2024, 04:58:06 PM »

Hello Dave K,

Here is the VIN plate on the car. Car looks great!

Ed,

Any chance you can post a pic of the center axle snubber? I started a post on this topic under the "Originality" tab. The goal is to determine about when the change was made from the push-in style snubbers to the screw-in style.  This car appears to be very original and unrestored so would like to see the snubber on this Camaro!

Thanks!

Dave

32

Originality / Re: 69 Center axle bumper - two styles?

« on: January 03, 2024, 04:33:12 PM »

Thanks Jim (169INDY)!

Updated list:

01B, NW, push in Iowa Jon
02D, NW, push in, from RikerZ28
04C, plant? push in, from L78 steve
04C, VN, push in, from 169INDY
June, VN, bolt in, from KevinW
05A, NW, push in, Dave69x33
05A, NW, push in, from Iowa Jon
05E, NW, bolt in from copo
06A, NW bolt in, from copo
08E, NW, bush in, from x66 714
09D, NW, push in, from R68 GTO

33

Originality / Re: 69 Center axle bumper - two styles?

« on: January 02, 2024, 04:30:22 PM »

Updated list with the info folks have provided so far. I included the CRG contributor to keep from duplicating input. I did not include the X-code of the '69 Camaro assuming it did not effect the body construction and use of the center axle bumper (snubber) usage. We will have this CRG thread to look back on to see that Camaro build type info.

01B, NW, push in Iowa Jon
02D, NW, push in, from RikerZ28
04C, plant? push in, from L78 steve
June, VN, bolt in, from KevinW
05A, NW, push in, Dave69x33
05A, NW, push in, from Iowa Jon
05E, NW, bolt in from copo
06A, NW bolt in, from copo
08E, NW, bush in, from x66 714
09D, NW, push in, from R68 GTO

34

Originality / Re: 69 Center axle bumper - two styles?

« on: January 01, 2024, 12:43:47 AM »

RikerZ28…thank you for your response.

R69GTO, forgot to mention that my car also had the two holes for the screw in style but had the push in style snubber. During my restoration I looked closely at the holes and there was no evidence they were ever tapped for the screw in style.

So far, this is what we have, NW = Norwood, VN = Van Nuys:

01B, NW, push in
02D, NW, push in
04C, plant? push in
June, VN, bolt in
05A, NW, push in
05A, NW, push in
09D, NW, push in

Let’s keep in going!

35

Originality / Re: 69 Center axle bumper - two styles?

« on: January 01, 2024, 12:08:12 AM »

Interesting R69GTO! Thanks.

36

Originality / Re: 69 Center axle bumper - two styles?

« on: December 31, 2023, 09:47:49 PM »

Thanks Jon!

We need to compare notes as my X33 Z28 is an 05A!

37

Originality / Re: 69 Center axle bumper - two styles?

« on: December 31, 2023, 08:43:23 PM »

And... a full view of the factory assembly manual page 59 highlighting the engineering change I mentioned regarding the change to the center axle bumper.

38

Originality / Re: 69 Center axle bumper - two styles?

« on: December 31, 2023, 08:34:29 PM »

Here is snap shot of the info from the GM Parts Catalog, Group 5.395 Bumper, Rear Axle Pinion.

39

General Discussion / Re: Vintage Certification @ Camaro Nationals 2024

« on: December 31, 2023, 08:26:33 PM »

Great.  Thanks Pacecar!

40

Originality / Re: 69 Center axle bumper - two styles?

« on: December 31, 2023, 08:21:20 PM »

I would revisit this topic I originally posted it back in 2008.

Since 2008, CRG has added a section dedicated to original and unrestored Camaros so hopefully feedback from the owners of those Camaro can comment and hopefully show photos! 

With your feedback we need to know the plant and build date of your car. Your VIN will also help more closely determine when the change took place.

Question: Is it known when the center rear axle bumper changed from the push in style to the bolted in style on the ‘69?

I saw in the ‘69 AIM, section 4, page 59 assembly manual, an engineering change dated 8-29-68, where the center bumper changed from the push in style 3923564to the bolt on style 3962763.

My July 1969 GM Parts Catalog, “Group 5.395 Bumper, Rear Axle Pinion,” calls for screw in type 3962763 for “1969/ALL” along with this note: “When used in place of a push in CN bumper it will necessary to drill two 9/32 holes, using bumper as a template, and attach with 5/16-18 tap screws.”  It also calls for screw 3958062 which is a self tapping screw.

When I posted on this question on CRG back in 2008, I got two responses. An 04C ‘69 had a push in style, my 45k mile 05A Norwood build N639712 ‘69 had the original push in style still on the car when I started my restoration. One other ‘69 Camaro owner responded with a ‘69 June car from Van Nuys had the bolt in style.  I recently discovered on CRG the low mileage LeMans Blue X77 Z28 survivor, late build 10E Norwood car had the screw in center axle bumper.

All told, based on the GM documentation dates and this very small (4) sampling of ‘69s, it appears the change phased in between mid-May and June 1969.

Can anyone with an unrestored survivor, or documented original restored ‘69, share on this topic?

The photo attached is from the 10E blue survivor.

I’ll start photo documenting this anytime a see a ‘69 survivor!

Happy New Years!

Dave

41

General Discussion / Re: Vintage Certification @ Camaro Nationals 2024

« on: December 11, 2023, 06:03:20 PM »

Hello Steve,

We met at the Nationals this year (2023) while you, Larry C., Dale M., Jerry M., and the team were evaluating Dr. Slone's 1969 X33 (non-RS) LeMans Blue, blue interior Z28 for Vintage Certification.  We meet briefly again this year at the MCACN show in Chicago while the group were certifying (2) '69 Camaros.  I worked with Bill Nichols and some of this same crew in June at the 2023 Corvette Bloomington Gold Camaro certification program in Bloomington, IL. It was an honor to work with them. I think they invited me because I was the youngest and smallest person in the group designated to crawl under the cars to inspect items...LoL!  They need a 4-post lift!!

I consulted with and helped Dr. Slone get his Z28 ready for the Nationals and it was a fun experience to attend the event!  Only drawback is Morgantown, PA is a long way from Indianapolis, IN!

I would like to get my highly optioned 05A Norwood build '69 RS Z28 certified but unfortunately it does not have its numbers matching VIN engine. My Camaro is a very correct and mostly all original Z28, but I assume the engine was replaced back in 1971 with a donor DZ block dated coded February 1969, and it had a 1971 dated coded distributor and water pump on the engine. During the engine rebuild, I was able to ready enough of the VIN stamped (could not read the entire VIN) in the casting flange above the oil filter to confirm the engine is not the original.  The car only had just over 45K miles on the odometer when I purchased and started the restoration back in November 1995.  My Z28 had a trailer hitch on it at some point as a portion of the hitch was still on the car when I took possession. It has its original date coded 4:10 "BV" rear gear which makes be believe it towed a drag car to the races at some point in it's past and the reason why I don't have the original VIN stamped engine.

If I am not mistaken, does the Bow Tie Class at the Nationals accepts Camaros that do not have their original "numbers matching" engines/transmissions?  The Bloomington Gold cert has a class provision for Camaros like mine. You simply declare this on your entry form the judges skip over this engine block detail but assess everything else on the car.

I thought about having Jerry M. certify my Camaro, but $2,500 is a heavy investment when I already know what Jerry will deduct from my Camaro, and honestly, I can point out the restoration and component issues on my Camaro. I did a 5-year concourse level restoration on my Camaro from 1995 - 2000. I am very honored my Z28 scored 973/1000 Gold Award at the Camaro Nationals held in Columbus, OH back in 2000, when the process was under the direction of the Worldwide Camaro Club.  I have made numerous improvements since 2000, consulted with Larry C, and had Jerry M. restore several components on my car.  Having Jerry certify my car is still an option; however, my goal at this point is to get an updated "official" assessment/certification on the technical correctness and restoration should I decide to sell it in the coming years. 

Do you have a judge contact for the Camaro Nats Bow Tie Class that I can consult with?

Thanks in advance for your advice!

Dave 

 

42

General Discussion / Re: Orange stripe on RS vacuum hose

« on: August 14, 2023, 05:28:21 PM »

Hose finished...

43

General Discussion / Re: Orange stripe on RS vacuum hose

« on: August 14, 2023, 05:27:33 PM »

A few more...

44

General Discussion / Re: Orange stripe on RS vacuum hose

« on: August 14, 2023, 05:26:20 PM »

All,

I ran into and met DaveK at the Camaro Nationals this year. We discussed the process how we applied (reworked) the correct paint color on the orange RS vacuum feed hose between the head light switch and the RS relay switch mounted to the reserve vacuum tank on a ’69 Camaro.  I need to give credit to Edgemontvillage (Lloyd Crosley) over on Camaros.net and is Brooklyn Project, an outstanding restoration on this '69 RS Z28.  I copied his process to prep and paint the hose.

Since my RS feed hoses were already cut to length and installed, I had to remove them from the firewall along with the firewall grommet as an assembly. That allowed me to measure how long to the two vacuum hoses extend from the grommet and then reinstall them to the same length after painting the orange stripe hose.   

Steps:
1.) Cleaned the hose with Xylol Xylene, an enamel paint thinner that is milder than lacquer thinner and does not harm the rubber hose.
2.) Stretched the hose along a 2x4 and clamped it on both end using a Philips screwdriver in both ends of the hose.  As shown below, I clamped the screw drivers to the board to hold the hose in place and straight along the board.  Don’t over stretch the hose but pull it snug to keep in place without rolling to the side.
3.)  I had leftover pin stripping tape that had the approximate correct gap width as the existing stripe on the hole. I applied the pin stripe tape along the entire length of hose.
4.) Used making tape to hold the hose down to the board and mask the hose from paint except the gap between the pin stripe tape.
5.) I used the same Liquitex paint DaveK shows above in Reply #6. I purchased it from a local Hobby Lobby Store.
6.) Placed a small dab of paint on cardboard and ran a foam paint roller (1" dia. x 4" long) thru the paint. The goal is to get enough paint in the roller to apply several light coats but not apply the paint too thick.  Apply enough coats of paint to get good coverage.
7.) The Liquitex paint skins (dries) quickly. While the paint is still tacky to the touch, peel the tape from the hole so dry paint does not chip away from the edges of the masking tape. Paint that is still lightly wet will leave a crisp clean paint line (an old painter's tip...I used to paint residentially!)
8.) Allow the color paint stripe to fully dry and cure over night before installing (or reinstalling) the hose in the grommet and into the car.
9.) Carefully insert the grommet, with both hose pre-installed in the grommet, through the firewall. Carefully work one lip around the grommet into the hole in the firewall.  Patience is key for this task!  You can work from under the dash into the engine bay or vice versa depending on the state of the build of the car.  It’s a real "bi%*H*" to work from the engine bay if the brake booster and master cylinder is installed.  If they are installed, you can remove the brake booter mounting nuts, pull and tie the booster/master cylinder forward to gain access down along the firewall.

The pics attached are in the sequence I did the work.

Good Luck! 
I hope I never need to do this task again…LOL!

 

45

Originality / Re: 1969 Z/28 40669 Fuel Pump - Correct Plating

« on: July 24, 2023, 03:22:54 PM »

Hope this old thread will still be active.  I had Fred Ballard restore a fuel pump for my ‘69 Z28 about 2-3 years ago. He did a good job and a very knowledgeable guy. I had fuel seep around the crimp when I first installed the pump. I took pictures of the fuel leak and sent them to Fred to confirm the source of the the leak which was from the weep holes in the upper fuel pump body.  Fred had me send the pump back to him and he replaced the diaphragm.  He included the diaphragm he removed when he shipped the pump back. He did not find an issue with the diaphragm so the leaks may have come from the diaphragm seal in the crimp.  This was odd as the fuel was seen in the weep holes and probably seeped down and but around the crimp.

I ran the pump up until about two weeks ago until it developed an oil leak from the weep holes.  I assume the oil seal has gone bad above the diaphragm and oil that naturally lubes the pump cam arm area is leaking into the backside of the diaphragm. Once a sufficient amount of oil collects, the pressure generated buy the diaphragm starts pumping it out of the weep holes. The weep holes are necessary to relieve pressure on the backside (opposite the fuel chamber side) of the pump so that it operates correctly.  If the diaphragm tears or becomes damaged and allows fuel on the top side of the diaphragm, fuel will leak from the weep holes to let you know the pump is bad.  If fuel is allowed to build up on the top side of the diagram, it can leak into the pump push area behind the fuel pump mounting plate, and down the oil drain hole into the oil plan. That would be a bad thing!

I will contact Fred this week to discuss the oil seal issue and keep you posted if/how Fred handles this issue. Since I installed the pump, my Camaro has only been driven about 300-600 miles so the oil seal failure in the pump is not due to high mileage wear and tear. 

So perhaps it a hit or miss on the restoration of the crimped style GM fuel pumps?

Dave