CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
January 30, 2015, 03:04:43 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.
109292 Posts in 12657 Topics by 4866 Members
Latest Member: jamejia1967
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16
196  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 68 Tail Light Bezels - Which Ones? on: August 26, 2008, 11:18:50 PM
Jeff, I think I sprung for the molded repops (gaskets) and used them to mount on fresh paint. The Orig GMs were intact but had taken a 'SET' and were not going to transfer well. The CHQ bezels had no issues with fitment to the tail panel.
I did use the OE style nuts and pre threaded them on the bench VERY, VERY carefully so the in car install would go smoother and minimize potential for stud shear when leaning in trunk to tighten.

An interesting side note: I took the GM tail lamp housing sheet metal backs and had them clear (silver) zinc plated [I know they were galv plated originally] but they look awesome! Also there is a small hole in the sheet metal back that has a little white/beige fiber plug installed allowing venting of the housing, they get browned out from age, just turn it around and stick the fresh side out for a clean restored look.

197  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 68 Tail Light Bezels - Which Ones? on: August 24, 2008, 01:36:23 PM
My experiance with the CHQ bezels (1968) was as Follows:
Order NEW Bezels, Receive NEW bezels;
Order NEW RS lenses, Receive NEW Lenes (RS).
Try to install NEW Plastic Lens into NEW Bezels,
NO FIT!!!!!!

So in the end I found that the raised RS platstic lens required machining a very small portion of the raised area around the inboard short side of the lens. I took the lens to a mill machine at my dads and chucked up a 3/8" end mill and shaved a very small portion of the raised area of the plastic lens so that the lens would seat into the new bezel. (Note: I think the NEW lens would not fit into the GM OLD bezel as well) If I remember it was only about a 1/64" required removal to allow the lens to (pop!) in and be fully seated. I tryed to File fit at first but the lens material was tough and it was hard to maintian parrallel etc. Lenses were from a vendor and I can not remember what the packaging was like (i.e. whom sold-mfg?)

BTW: I was very happy with the CHQ -vs- OER quality of the bezel, as others have stated you should be happy with CHQ offerings at this time.

198  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1968 camaro (BIG BLOCK?) on: July 22, 2008, 09:11:33 PM
Post a picture of the fuel line.
It contains a clue
3/8" single with BB specific termination.

Details avail in the Assy Manual.

199  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: sleeves for power steering hoses on: June 15, 2008, 01:38:35 PM
.75" ID
1.250" OD

Oil soaked, deteriorated originals on a PS 1968 396 LOS car.

I have not found it avail via repop houses. We use a very similar material to insulate pipes on Submarines trade name 'Aramflex Insulation' I need to see if they have it in the above size. The color, density, shape, feel is very similar.

200  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Correct locaton of proportionong valve on sub frame on: June 15, 2008, 01:23:09 AM
Here is an disassy view of the valve from the subframe:

201  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / 67-68 Brake Line Clip attachment on: June 08, 2008, 03:06:26 PM
What Method or Tool is used to properly secure NEW 1967-1968 Brake line (also 3/8" Fuel Line) Clip asm Part Number 3881339 to the Body or subframe.

The new clip is in the AMK book Page 150 Part Number B-10317, Red, double ended clip w/ 0.27" rivet.

The ASM manual (68) shows a detail of the clip with a "PUSH RIVET". page 123.

The new clips from AMK & Others appear to have the rivet as part of the clip. I am not sure how folks have been Clinching or Bucking this tight to the car structure?


202  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Correct locaton of proportionong valve on sub frame on: June 06, 2008, 12:39:33 AM
Does anyone know of a source for the soft goods for owner rebuild of the subframe mounted:
"pressure regulating valve" or "proportioning valve" by whatever name,,,
1968 disc brake car w/ drivers side subframe mounted in-line pressure <do-hickey>

I have unmounted mine and removed the hex head cap screw and 1 rubber "V"-grooved cup seal and washer, to the point of a external snap ring and am not sure what lies beneath,,,,Lots of 'gunk' so I was interested in further disassy and cleaning, just was checking if others have dug into this component and sources for the soft goods needed to PROPERLY rebuild it, otherwise its just a careful cleaning and reassembly,,,


203  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 68 RS/SS Camaro 396? on: June 03, 2008, 02:17:09 PM
Post a DETAILED picture of the Fuel line termination and retension (Clips style and location) in the saddle of the subframe.
If it is untouched (Hacked) it provides a BB specific clue,,,one of many
Above link is great.

204  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 69 Z28 leaf spring finish/Plastic pads on: May 25, 2008, 11:15:28 PM
Has anybody had any luck finding the anti-squeek pads ? Eaton detroit spring said they don't have them and can't get them .Steve .

When I "REBUILT" [Disasy, Blast, Prime, Paint, New Center bolt, New pads, Press in new bushing, & Assemble], my original 5 leaf (68) springs. I found that I had to search for local spring shops and encountered sourcing issues with the black plastic 'PADS'. Eventually found a shop in seattle that had some laying around 0.50$ each.

My advise is to ask around your area shops and see if they have any.

I was under the impression they were avail as part of the Camaro rest vendor rebuild Kits for 50$ a few years back?

205  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Unusual 69 paint inspection marks - are these correct? on: May 25, 2008, 10:40:29 PM
first time you washed your car that stuff was gone.  as a former chevrolet dealer i know this as fact.

I would counter that when I cleaned up the front end and rear end on my 1968 ssrs 396/325 80K mile car I found that years of grease, road dirt, oil and dealer undercoating preserved tons of Factory (VN) applied graffiti.

Interesting Examples found:
Green dabs on rear axle centers.
Yellow dabs on the front disk brake wheel stud ends
White and Orange on the spindles.
Yellow on the tie rod sleeves
Large orange dab on the rear axel center housing
Drive line stripes

Now do not get me wrong,,, I have made a TON of mistakes on my car over the years and am slow to correct.
I do enjoy the details!

206  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Research Topics & Reports / Re: 69 decklid emblem holes on: April 19, 2008, 08:58:06 PM
Z11 (04C) VN build
2 sets.

207  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 68 bumper jack on: April 07, 2008, 08:17:49 PM

Jim, that’s apparently the correct sticker for a 68 but IMO it's only correct for cars built after that date.  I know my car had the 3909124; I took a picture of the original Thank God!  I would say that would be the correct one for your car also.  Thanks for the info.


Do they repop the instruction sheet (coupe) #  3909124?
208  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 68 bumper jack on: April 06, 2008, 11:03:32 PM
I think (Positive) my load rest is orig.

Now the jack is 36" long & Square and does not appear as your sample 1 or 2 so I do not think what I have is F body, btw no stamped rivets either. (Form Fit and function similar)

The jacking instructions are REPOP circa 1987 classic Camaro ( I painted my car that year and likely desrtoyed the orig) and applied the repop 3949516 3-6-68 version (My Car is a (E) 5th week of DEC 1967 build) I did not find this number in the 68 AIM?

209  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 68 bumper jack on: April 06, 2008, 02:27:57 PM
My orig load rest is stamped on the 'back' not the face
face = mating surface with the bumper.


your stampings look comparable, they might have not been very concered at the time of manufacture and stamped them both ways.

210  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 68 exhaust tips on: March 28, 2008, 11:11:24 PM
I am partial to the 2 & 1/4 Set up that Gardner Sells.

VERY nice, and  worth every cent, if it suits you goals for the car.

Will attach pic.

Coating is a nice treat (aluminized pipe)

Please excuse the FLAP (MUD) Used as temp protection during Friday Test and Tune track day.

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16
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 0.093 seconds with 18 queries.