CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 28, 2014, 06:15:12 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.
103594 Posts in 12177 Topics by 4697 Members
Latest Member: greygoose01
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 205 206 [207] 208 209 ... 211
3091  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Rear Brake Casting Numbers on: November 25, 2009, 02:16:45 PM
I believe the "560" drums are service replacement parts which began in the early '70s.

-Jon
3092  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Rear Brake Casting Numbers on: November 23, 2009, 10:05:05 PM
Kerry,

The instruction sheet for the metallic brake shoes states as follows:

"Mount brake drums in grinder and true up bore by taking a light cut. Using a dressed #80 abrasive wheel and a slow feed, grind the bore and maintaining the same setting, repeat the grind operation. This second grind operation should give the required finish which is essential for satisfactory operation of these brakes.  Note: Finish of brake drums should be comparable to the finish on engine cylinder walls. Since no oversize shoe and facing assemblies are available at present, the drums should not be machined to more than .030 oversize."

I have some NOS front J65 metallic brake shoes if you are looking for some.

-Jon
3093  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Rear Brake Casting Numbers on: November 21, 2009, 01:46:44 PM
Metallic brake '67 Camaros used the same 3841177 drums on the rear as other Camaros but with a different surface finish inside to allow better seating with the metallic brake shoes. I have not personally observed other casting numbers besides the 3841177 in use on '67 Camaros.

-Jon
3094  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 67 Standard Grille on: October 03, 2009, 12:33:36 AM
On my riveted together original grille the tabs you speak of are on the top.

-Jon
3095  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 67 Standard Grille on: October 02, 2009, 11:13:36 PM
Top.

-Jon
3096  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1967 Camaro paint on: September 26, 2009, 12:10:26 AM
Look for paint overspray on places that should not have it such as bumper brackets, window stainless, hood hinges and the like. Unless it is a very high quality repaint, most paint jobs show some signs of overspray (some more easily seen than others).

-Jon
3097  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: pitman arm casting #9789158AG &idler #3917581B on: September 20, 2009, 03:53:04 PM
This is what the early Firebird pitman arm looks like. I assume it was curved to clear the Pontiac V8 exhaust manifold although I have heard a straight pitman arm will also work and is what is typically sold to Firebird owners as the replacement part.

-Jon
3098  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: UOIT cards? on: September 20, 2009, 03:28:53 PM
Correction. I checked a UOIT I have in my possession and the dimensions are closer to 8.5" x 15".

-Jon
3099  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: pitman arm casting #9789158AG &idler #3917581B on: September 20, 2009, 01:29:28 AM
I have seen the C-shaped pitman arms used on 1st-gen Firebirds. No idea why they went with that design but that is probably what that is.

-Jon
3100  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Decode help- steer box/ pitman arm on: September 20, 2009, 01:25:09 AM
Sorry to say it but that steering box is the slow steering unit used on some '67 Camaro applications. It has a fourth mounting ear on it on the top side which does not line up with any hole in the frame. The 339 date, I'm sure it the 339th day of 1966. The pitman arm is the one which was used for the 1967 model year. In all honesty, the box is not a desirable unit.

-Jon
3101  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: UOIT cards? on: September 20, 2009, 01:05:07 AM
They are a big sheet of paper. About 11" x 15". They are not what I would consider a card. Post what you have and we'll help you ID it.

-Jon
3102  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Early '67 Sub-frame on: August 17, 2009, 11:07:37 PM
Thanks for the info. Can you let us know the dates on the quarters (example H 38 2) and trunk lid (example T40). Also, can you describe or provide a photo of the quarter panel door jamb? Probably has the full phone indentation and two long skinny indentations as well but would like to know for sure as there are 4 known variations for '67 models.

-Jon
3103  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Correct starter for '67 - 327 on: August 17, 2009, 11:02:54 PM
I have had three '67 327 2bbl cars and they all had 1107496 starters in them. If I remember correctly, the solenoids were 1114344.

-Jon
3104  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Correct 67 Control Arm Shaft on: August 09, 2009, 11:20:41 PM
Yes, one style on one side and another style for the other side is seen on many original LOS-built '67s. Keep an eye out for this when you have an opportunity to view other '67s. It sounds goofy but it is just another example of a production anomaly (of which there were many on first-gen Camaros). I don't think it matters which side has the straight one but I'm thinking I usually have seen them on the passenger side.

-Jon
3105  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Correct 67 Control Arm Shaft on: August 08, 2009, 12:46:22 AM
I'm not sure what you are meaning by NOS ones. Do you mean are they originals and not service parts? Most likely they are originals. As production moved closer to the end of the '67 model year, the dog bone style becomes more prevalent on LOS cars.

-Jon
Pages: 1 ... 205 206 [207] 208 209 ... 211
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 0.416 seconds with 19 queries.