CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 26, 2014, 02:16:00 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.
102391 Posts in 12081 Topics by 4665 Members
Latest Member: 67RagTop
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23
316  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Hurst Shifter on: May 02, 2007, 08:33:39 AM
I have collected and researched Hurst shifters over the last 20 years and have pictures that I marked with the applications

In my opinion ,
The one in the picture is not the same as 1970 Camaro Hurst
The 73 Camaro used a ITM shifter that is a copy of a Hurst shifter and has a chrome round stick but is not Hurst stamped

SS Chevelle 68-72 OEM used a Muncie shifter

317  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Hurst Shifter on: May 01, 2007, 03:54:47 PM
You may not have had the original shifter in your 73 Camaro.
From what I have read, Camaro only used the OEM round stick Hurst in 69,70,71
318  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Hurst Shifter on: April 30, 2007, 03:27:16 PM
looks like early 70s Firebird. Pull out the stick and check the numbers
319  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: NOS Yenko ZL1 Engine on: April 19, 2007, 09:26:23 AM
Yenko sold a few different versions of the alum big block.
 I don't believe the first ones Yenko sold had any Yenko ID cast in.
 Yenko was granted permission by Chevrolet to purchase blocks directly from Winters Foundry in Aug 1974.
Blocks were to be machined by Sevakis Industries in Detroit.
 This info is from the Yenko estate paperwork.
 Yenko sold alum big blocks over about a 10 year period but I am not sure if they were all made and machined by the same companies.
I know there are different versions that have been found.
320  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 3 speed shifter problem on: April 06, 2007, 02:55:39 PM
I guess this is an original shifter not a Hurst?
If parts have alot of wear it will need to be rebuilt
The original shifters needs to be clean and well greased to work correctly
Does it have the neutral gate spring? I see these missing alot on original shifters. There is just a little hat shaped metal piece that holds the spring in on one side.
These springs seem to disapear with age/use.
321  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: NOS Yenko ZL1 Engine on: April 06, 2007, 02:44:16 PM
they have been trying to sell that engine for a long time with the same ad. 
not sure where they got that info
322  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Jerry MacNeish's Minnesota visit on: March 08, 2007, 08:15:55 AM
Hi Ken
that is a good first post.
always nice to see you and "little Hoss" at a show
323  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Warranty Engines on: March 08, 2007, 08:12:35 AM
thanks for posting the letters. I am one of the nuts who like reading this stuff.

It looks like the Georgia law was made to "prohibit duplicating serial numbers" 
 I could be wrong but this law could have been made to prevent the stamping of a blank pad of a replacement engine with engine codes and vin serial numbers.

I heard from some machanics who said they would at one time stamp replacement engines at the dealership.
The Georgia complaint may have led GM to use the CExxxx code stamped at the plant so this number can be used in the warentee info instead of having a blank pad where someone can stamp a duplicate number?

GM must have seen this as a problem that the other states would complain about in addition to Georgia law.
324  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 67 Pace cars on: February 28, 2007, 03:25:05 PM
What are C B C vehicles? Maybe some type of test car or engineering fleet car?

In the last paragraph of the 2nd page of the GM documentation Phil posted above  it says that
" C B C vehicles" will be used to provide components then says power trains removed to be reinstalled in fleet vehicles.

Sounds like the work order is saying to swap the power trains from the pace cars with the power trains C B C vehicles?

Charlie, does your car have any numbers on the engine stamp pad?
325  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1967 396 on: February 26, 2007, 12:22:49 PM
What was the first race for the Jenkins 67 Camaro?
The Winternationals are normally in Feb but his car is 03D ?
The car was the 1967 Super Stock national champ so he could not have missed many races .
It would be interesting to find the first race date for this car.

I know the Grump would go to GM Tech center for meetings and get parts. I bought the 1970 Camaro prototype cowl hood from him which he said he got from Chevy engineering. (It was going to be scrapped) I picked it up at Jenkins Comp. shop and he showed me a prototype tall deck block so who knows what else Chevy gave him.
326  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 1968 Yenko COPO Camaro's on: February 23, 2007, 08:57:45 AM
Fran nice to see you post here.

I have some info on the 68 Yenkos. Are you looking for info on the MV code engine?

It is believed that Yenko special ordered COPO 9737 SS396 375hp Camaros in 1968 for conversion to the 427 Super Camaros. They had a MV code engine. A few years ago there was some debate on whether 1968 Yenko Camaros had the 427 factory installed or were 396 from factory.
  There were magazine articles claiming documented MV code 427 factory installed 1968 Yenko Camaros and Jim M also stated he remembered them to be 427 factory installed.
A long story, but two 1968 COPO 9737 SS396 375hp Camaros have been found with documentation of MV code 396 engines and are believed to be unconverted 68 Yenko Camaros so most people (I think) today believe they were 396 MV code.
327  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1967 396 on: February 22, 2007, 09:45:09 AM
        Was the Jenkins 67 car picked up at the GM Tech Center or the Norwood assembly plant?
I asked Bill J this at Carlise when he was with the car on display and he said he was not sure.

If it was the Tech Center, was it built from a SS350?
 If it was factory assembled L78 it would have come from Norwood I would think but I guess could have been sent to Tech Center for some reason.
I know there are well known stories of Corvettes picked up right off the assembly line to get the cars as soon as possible to start the race prep.

That is a great Camaro.
328  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Hurst Shifter on: February 10, 2007, 10:55:47 AM
hard to say without seeing it.  most of the Hurst shifters I see have mismatched parts where OEM is mixed with aftermarket Hurst parts or OEM parts from another year.
Your mount plate HURST 2223 sounds like an aftermarket Hurst part.
 You can find it's application in the Hurst pdf files on the Mr Gasket site.
 Hurst OEM used 3 different style bushings between 1964-1970 so the bushing style can date it also.
my opinion is -best way to sell it is ebay
put good pictures showing front view, side view, and bushings and list all the numbers and list the stick as 67 GTO
329  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Hurst Shifter on: February 09, 2007, 08:30:08 AM
4178 is the 1967 GTO stick bucket seat with or without console
330  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Hurst Shifter on: February 07, 2007, 06:59:37 PM

If the shifter does not have the big offset neck it could be a GTO Hurst.
(9 7D6) I believe is a 1969 GTO number. The stick should have a number on it to ID it but the number is on the pressed in stick flange so has to be removed to see it.

the number 3138 on the front is a 4 digit Hurst part number used for the shifter body stamping only and was used on many OEM Hurst shifters.

Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23
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 0.097 seconds with 18 queries.