Messages

1786

Test Drive / Re: Picture Test

« on: September 17, 2007, 04:34:45 AM »

Yea, It posted OK.

I kept on getting file to LARGE error messages when the file was clearly smaller than the indicated limit.

I realy like this pic as it clearly shows some very sharp details and answers a lot of questions for the 68 crowd.

I will work on posting the L78 Test drive eng shot from the 1968 Popular HotRodding issue. It is no nearly as clear as this Zee shot.

Jim

1787

Originality / Re: cooling system decal

« on: September 17, 2007, 04:24:36 AM »

I think they were NOT installed.
One reference that comes to mind is:
February 1968 Popular HOT rodding
'Drag testing the HOT 375-HP Camaro'
Page 37
Eng photo clearly shows a lack of Cooling decal.

Other may know for sure.

(of course I put one on my 68 during a 90's resto) resto houses were selling so many of us incorrectly applied them.
I need to remove it!

Jim

1788

Originality / Re: got my original bill of sale today, 23 years after buying the car!

« on: September 17, 2007, 03:44:28 AM »

 
Great story. It is neat when others take an interest in our TOYs and follow thru.
Cheers!

Jim

1789

General Discussion / Re: Ported vacuum on a Holley?

« on: September 17, 2007, 03:25:45 AM »

John, For us 'Medium' (Hyd Lifters) performance motor guys that are utilizing the quadrajet 4MV.

Would  a 'drive setup' be obtained by "T"ing off the hose that goes from the front of the carb [Manifold-vacumm] port to the A.I.R diverter valve?

Vice as delivered Vac advance hose routing to the tube on the passanger side of the carb by the choke mech.

Reference: Page 47 of HPBooks Rochester Carburetors by Doug Roe.

I will soon be installing my #'s matching Dist Jerry' reworked for me and will set it up with the above drive configuration and enjoy the benefits others have described.

Jim

1790

Test Drive / Picture Test

« on: September 11, 2007, 11:14:05 PM »

 

Picture Test 2nd TRY.

68Z Eng compt FACTORY photo.

Jim

1791

Originality / 1969 Glove box liner surface question

« on: September 11, 2007, 04:29:20 AM »

I have a question on the as built 1969 Camaro glove box liner interior (of the box Liner) surface treatment.
Was the interior of the box coated with a suede texture or just natural box carboard/? surface.

I ask because of two reasons:
My 68 Camaro has the original glove box liner, and it IS coated with a suede type black flock- texture. So I assume YES for 68.

My 69 when purchased in 1984 lacked a liner and a home made liner with stereo, was found as purchased.

Thanks

Jim

1792

General Discussion / Re: Hidden VIN under cowl panel

« on: September 11, 2007, 04:00:29 AM »

Interesting, When I removed the Cowl Panel for some detailing in the 90's I noticed that the cowl VIN was stamped and Chipped the original orange (1969 LOS pace car) paint. I think that was an indicator of an untouched cowl. A lot of times it seems the cowl tops have be restored to a point of filling in the stampings.
Necessitating digging to find the impressions from the stamping.

Jim

1793

Originality / Re: LOWER CONTROL ARM HARDWARE

« on: August 04, 2007, 06:04:41 AM »

My 1968 Camaro (80+k miles) had the same [single] hole elongation problem on the passenger side aft (rear) lower A-arm mounting -pivot subframe hole.
I fabricated a mild steel backing plate out of 3/16" thick stock. Oversized (L x W) and drilled to clear the bolt. The existing bolt has extra length to extend thru the added distance.
I prepared the frame, cleaned of paint, Mocked up the hole - bolt alignment and hired a moon lighting Nuclear qualified Naval civilian welder to (TIG) weld the plate in place using his remote portable gas powered TIG set up. We did this with the enginge in place and suspension in a state of disassy (No springs etc) We watched the heat levels and worked very carefully. Used tons of heat - slag - protection,,,kind of a firberous heat blanket as protection. (Refrecell (spelling?))
Painted black and no one is any the wiser for the reapair. Final assy and front end alignment accomplished and I am good to go.

Jim

1794

General Discussion / Re: Coolant coming out of overflow

« on: June 09, 2007, 04:21:17 AM »

Just for additional information. If you a lucky enough to have your orig RC15 on your car but it has seemed to aged to much you can get them restored by John Prikle. He rebuilt mine on the pace car and it looks awesome! The plating, new gasketing and Orig stlye rivet completed the package. Off the top of my head I can not remember how much it cost but it was worth it.

Jim

1795

Originality / Re: Picture request ...'68 BB AIR bracket installed...

« on: April 11, 2007, 05:45:44 AM »

Kevin, I e-mailed a photo of my set up. The more I think about you wanting it technically correct the more I think the stud/nut mounting should be the correct way. The aim indicates that the bracket is part of the eng assy and therefore does not detail it much. My set up might work with the stud-nut but some where along the road a bolt got installed as a replacment and the bracket is drawn into the waterpump mounting surface, you mentioned  your fits with the stud I would continue searching for a UN touched source car,,,

Funny detail
Small block AIR pump pulley (Note assemble pulley with stamped part number facing rearward)
Big Block AIR pump pulley (Note assemble pulley with stamped part number facing forward)

Jim

1796

Originality / Re: Picture request ...'68 BB AIR bracket installed...

« on: April 10, 2007, 05:40:45 AM »

Does anyone have a photo of their '68 BB (396 325/350) with the AIR pump bracket installed?
  I'm specifically interested in the bolt to the water pump. I believe the bracket goes over the 'hexnut' that is part of the bolt itself, ...then a nut over that (then the Neg. battery cable). I'm not 100% sure on this, ...and the AIM is not clear enough to detail it.
  
    
  Thanks,
               Kevin

Well after looking at my Car and comparing it to the AIM, I think I can see where you are going with this.
1)   The AIM pump mounting sheet (V8) eng vaguely shows a hex collared stud for the water pump with the AIR pump mounting bracket on top of the extension and retained with a hex nut.  (UPC 6 Sheet A6)
2)   The AIM V-8 396 (l35) A.I.R. Equipment sheet illustration does not extend down enough to show the lower water pump mounting details. (UPC L35 Sheet A7)

I am not sure if my car is correct but, My A.I.R. pump BB396/325 mounting bracket is retained to the water pump ear by a single hex head bolt Grade 5 head marking “F”, with a lock washer. Then the battery ground cable lug, Then A.I.R bracket. There does not seem to be any room for the stud mount as indicated in pargh 1 above. Note that the (UPC 6 Sheet A6) looks like a Small Block drawing, So,,,,,

I could shoot you a Dig picture in a day or so.

Jim

1797

Test Drive / Attachment test

« on: March 16, 2007, 05:12:37 AM »

OK, lets see.
Attached

24.7K way to small,,,,,,,,,,,,,

1798

Originality / Re: Big block with auto.

« on: March 16, 2007, 03:55:11 AM »

The mounting bracket for the Kick down switch has a mounting Tang (outboard), that is bent down and interlocks with a hole in the base of the carb (outboard of the rear carb mounting stud hole) (Mine is a quadrajet 4MV) this tang keeps the switch and bracket from rotating and maintains the switch in-line with the actuating arm that is mounted on the throttle shaft. The kickdown switch bracket must be installed under the power brake pipe tube mounting attachment.

P.S.
The switches are servicable, by carefully peening open the Zinc case, you can access the internals and burnish or buff-bright the stationary and sliding copper contacts and relube the switch for care free operation. Make drawings or notes on assembly order and do not stress the zinc case. It can be done (I HAVE REWORKED 2 SWITCHES) and save tons on purchasing a replacment from E-PAY!

I assume a 1969 Holley equiped, 396/375-TH400 with kick down would be same, not sure if the mounting bracket is identical or not.

My source is my 1968 396/325-TH400 I have had for 24 years.

Jim