Messages

76

Decoding/Numbers / Re: x66 on ebay?

« on: November 27, 2007, 10:26:27 PM »

All those pictures and no trim tag?

Didn't these guys have an orange one of these a couple of months ago?

77

1968 - Orphans / 8N466273 Z/28 engine

« on: November 26, 2007, 10:21:07 PM »

Listed on the Yenko site:

http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/285775/an/0/page/4#Post285775

VIN is 18N466273, engine assembly date and code is VO702MO

78

General Discussion / Re: My new Chip Foose 1969 Camaro

« on: November 15, 2007, 08:35:12 PM »

That is one talented guy!

79

Maintenance / Re: 1969 seat track extender

« on: November 14, 2007, 10:42:46 PM »

I bought a set from Bill (the guy on ebay above).  These are well made, easy to install, and they do what they are advertised to do.  As I understand it, he followed the original design.  Read somewhere that way when the car was being designed the originals were made at the request of John Delorean?  John Z have you heard this?

80

General Discussion / Re: Last weekend to drive

« on: November 08, 2007, 10:54:23 PM »

27 degrees last night and the Camaro is safe in storage........time to get the snowmobile out!

Yahoo!

81

General Discussion / Re: 1969 rs z28 production #'s?

« on: October 26, 2007, 05:25:54 AM »

That's a good point.  There has to be a large enough population for the statistics to be valid.  I've tried to calculate the probabilities of some of the odd and/or rare combinations and the calculations fall apart almost immediately.

And nothing beats good old empirical data from some who was there!

82

General Discussion / Re: 1969 rs z28 production #'s?

« on: October 25, 2007, 10:04:18 PM »

Thanks for the insight, Jerry.  I would have never expected that.  I should buy your book and get more educated about the early years .

45% of 602 would be 271. 

Using the same methodology for 1967 as I used for 1968 and 1969 would yield:

(64,842/220,906 * 602/220,906) * 220,906 =  177  (only about 29%)

Statistically speaking, that’s not really too bad of a guess, since it’s only off by 16%.  The lesson here is to take these estimates with a grain of salt.

“Facts are stubborn, but statistics are more piable”, Mark Twain


Jerry S.

83

General Discussion / Re: 1969 rs z28 production #'s?

« on: October 25, 2007, 05:47:20 AM »

Sure, again, just for fun.  Let’s look at 68 first:  For 1968 there were 235,147 Camaros made, and of that number 40,977 were Rally Sports and 7199 Z/28s.  The calculation is:

(40,977/235,147 * 7199/235,147) * 235,147 = 1254. 

So, if the assumption is reasonable, a ballpark estimate of the number of 68 RS Z/28s made in 68 is 1,254.  And please, please, please, remember this is just an estimate.  These numbers based on a gross assumption.  I’m sure there are plenty of people that would argue that our assumption is wrong.  For example, I’m sure some people might say that the RS option was a “luxury” option and there would be far less ordered on Z/28s than on regular Camaros.

That brings us to the 67s.  Even I don’t think the assumption would be valid for 67.  What I mean is, in 1969, with over 20,000 being ordered, I'm sure there were plenty of Z\28s ordered for racing, but there had to be a lot of regular people ordering Z's because they were cool, and by then, a lot of the public had heard about Zs.  In 1967, the public didn't really know about Z/28s and I suspect that most of the 67's were ordered by racers or people with factory connections.  Some of you 67 guys on here can tell me if that is right. So, I don't think many racers would want to add the weight and cost of the RS option so an assumption that sounds plausible for the 69s is probably not a good one for the 67s.  I'm not really a 67 and 68 guy so anyone feel free to put your 2 cents in here.

Anyway, I still think it’s fun to run through this stuff and see if the numbers make sense.  Until we get better data, it’s the best guess we can make.

84

General Discussion / Re: 1969 rs z28 production #'s?

« on: October 23, 2007, 11:25:49 PM »

Statistical interpolations are worthless.

This is very true.  We have no way of knowing whether or not Rally Sports, for example, were equally distributed through out the entire number of Camaros built.  But, statistical interpolations are kind of fun to do anyway, so so for our new curious owner above:

Let's say we have a big jar full of all the Camaros made in 1969 (243,085).  We know that there are 20,302 Z/28's in there.  If you could reach into the jar and pull out a Camaro, the odds that you would pull out a Z/28 are about 1 in 12 (20,302/243,085).  To pull out a Rally Sport the odds are about 1 in 6 (37,773/243,085).  These are valid statistics because the numbers are known.  Now, just for fun, let's assume that the Rally Sport option IS equally distributed throughout all of the Camaros in the jar, i.e., a normal distribution.  This is assuming that it's just as likely that any Camaro made would have the RS option.  For example, this assumes that plain jane 6 cylinder Camaros were just as likely to get the RS option as a Z/28, or an SS, or a convertible, or any other 1969 Camaro.  We know that's probably not true, but let's assume it is for now.  So then, the probability of pulling out a Rally Sport Z/28 out of the jar is .013 (20,302/243,085 * 37,773/243,085) or about 1 in 77.  So, using only one assumption (and it's a big one), we could guess that there would have been only about 3,160 Rally Sport Z/28s made in 1969 (0.13*243,085).  If the assumption is not too far off from reality, a real RS Z/28 is fairly rare. 

85

General Discussion / Re: Buying a Camaro accross the country...

« on: October 23, 2007, 10:31:05 PM »

Here's something you can't get in pictures:  Smell.  We bought a Camaro in 2001 on Ebay, looked great, low miles, plenty of docs.  Decided to just have it shipped since everything looked good.  When it came off the transporter, we were so happy until we opened the door and the smell of urine poured out.  There was a mouse nest under the back seat and in the cowl.  In hindsite, we were happy that we actually got a car at all, because if a guy is a big enough scumbag to not tell you something like that, anything goes.

If you're paying very much for the car, I have to say fly out and look it over, and take a good whiff, based on my experience.

86

General Discussion / Re: Missing Trim Tag

« on: September 24, 2007, 10:46:10 PM »

Wow, interesting thread.  For what it's worth, here's my take.  I've always kind of been in the "no fake tags" camp but you've really made me think about this.

If you absolutely, positively, knew the body number and X code, and were able to make an exact replacement of the original tag, is there any harm to anyone, anywhere, at anytime?  Only if they are not made aware of the fact that it is a replacement.

On the other hand, if you don't know the number, it's not really an exact replacement, and it never can be no matter how good the fake is.  I understand the aesthetic argument, but I guess the bottom line to me is who are you trying to fool?  Yourself or the buyer?  Please understand this is not an attack or insult, it's a legitamate question.  On my own stuff, I myself want to see the complete picture and can't stand it when something obvious is missing.  So I'll put on a part that isn't right and hope I can find the correct one later.  And it looks better, even though I know it's wrong.

Anyway, after thinking it over, I think I would put on the fake tag if I was keeping the car but would not put it on if I was selling.

Good, thought provoking question though.  Thanks.

87

1969 - Orphans / Re: 9L529043 - L48 engine

« on: September 20, 2007, 07:14:37 PM »

That's getting close to mine, close enough to make a guy dream of the day when I see that magic number come up............

Thanks for posting this stuff, it would be easy to miss.

88

General Discussion / Re: New Camaro in Detroit

« on: August 15, 2007, 08:56:05 PM »

Well, I've been heavily abused becasue I don't like it either.  A like minded individual on another forum said:

"The new Camaro is the best looking Cadillac yet".  That pretty much sums it up for me.

89

General Discussion / Re: Sad but true

« on: June 14, 2007, 08:39:40 PM »

Ya know, there's gonna come a day when us guys that don't have a shred of documentation (and freely admit it) are going to be the only ones that people will know, absolutely for sure, 100%, incontestably, are telling the truth.  It really is sad.

90

General Discussion / Re: 1969 Z28--Mono or multi leaf?

« on: April 25, 2007, 07:22:11 PM »

The cowl tag (which appears to have the original rivets and the VIN matches the dash and the documentation) says the car is an X77 car that decodes to a Z28.

Are you saying the cowl tag number matches the VIN number on the dash?