CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 20, 2014, 05:26:48 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.
107551 Posts in 12507 Topics by 4812 Members
Latest Member: oldbop88
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 54 55 [56] 57 58 ... 64
826  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 69 x11 on: April 01, 2007, 07:48:49 PM
Not with an X11 Trim tag.  Best it could be is a small block SS with style trim, worst would be an L6 with style trim.  X11 does not indicate the car is an SS, justthat the car has style trim.  An X11 can be a small block SS but it doesn't have to be.
827  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: BETTER TO POST VIN OR NOT?? on: April 01, 2007, 11:56:35 AM
As long as you don't tell them what it is, ie a small block SS with a 4speed transmission, you shouldn't have a problem.  Just ask if anyone has a small block (or big block, or 6 cylinder) motor for VIN XYZ and you shouldn't have any issues.
828  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: X mark on rear bulkhead on: March 31, 2007, 10:19:09 PM
Correct.
829  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: X mark on rear bulkhead on: March 31, 2007, 02:28:39 PM
I wouldn't use an X making on the bulkhead as absolute proof of the car being anything.  I've seen atleast 2 on Ebay where people have added a code to the rear bulkhead.  Fortunately they were stupid enough to put it over the glue residue holding the rear trim upholstery onto the bulkhead.  My point is this marking and alot of other items can and are being faked.  Documentation is the only thing that is going to hold any meaning in the not to distant future, because of all the fakes out there.
830  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: cowl tag 12437 used for both coupe and convertible? on: March 30, 2007, 11:09:16 AM
Its not a production error, the tag indicates the car has a bench seat, which was not available in a convertible.  so the tag has either been swapped, its a fake, or someone made a convertible out of a coupe (that would be really bad).  Can we assume the VIN starts with 12467 (or 12367) so we can rule out the coupe to convertible conversion?
831  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Engine compartment restoration on: March 28, 2007, 07:28:25 PM
The chalk and crayon markings in the engine compartment were for the most part placed on the bare steel of the body before it was painted and they do not show on original cars.  The one exception is the PTB inspection stamps that were placed on the firewall of Norwood cars as the car was built indicating the body had been inspected for paint, trim and body irregularities.  These were placedon the body before the front end was installed and are usually under the fenders on either side of the car.  All the pretty restorations you see now with chalk markings and script on the firewall is utter BS and you can bet no car left the factory that way.  If you can't see it on your car now, don't add it.
832  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: crayon marks behind rear seat on: March 28, 2007, 04:15:51 PM
Pace cars have X0 on them (I assume to indicate the need for Z28 style stripe override).  I have never looked at mine to see if its there or not, but next time the seat is out I will.  Don't know if anyone has ever looked on a Z10 (at least I don't recall a discussion on it) maybe they have an X0 as well.
833  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Muncie vin #'s on: March 25, 2007, 08:03:12 AM
Never seen a transmission stamped more than once (except for maybe an overstrike).
834  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Z28 on: March 25, 2007, 08:01:49 AM
To early a build to be an L30 with the 4P code.  No 4S code, only 4F, L, K, N, P, and at the time this car was built only the 4F and P were in use.  2S is the rear antenna, I missed that one.
835  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Rear antenna hole on: March 24, 2007, 07:30:25 PM
Had a math error, the AIM says 114.25" back from the 0 point not 110", so a position 15" forward from the rear edge of the quarter, or 4" back from the rear end of the trunk lid opening arc is correct.  Still seems like it moved from 68 to 69 (or my memory is bad) .  Anyone have a 68 with a rear mounted antenna that they can measure?
836  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Z28 on: March 24, 2007, 07:04:57 PM
Its an SS.

1 = Chevrolet
2 = Camaro
4 = 8-cylinder engine
37 = coupe body
7 = 1967 model year
L = Los Angeles, CA assembly plant (Van Nuys)
 
Decode for body number: 004646
 
10B = Built the Second week of October.
67-12437 = Standard Interior Coupe.
LOS = Built in Van Nuys California.
760 = Standard Black Bucket Seats.
Z = (A50) Strato Bucket Seats.
R-R = Car Color is Bolero Red
J371 = internal plant scheduling code.
Options:
1W = (A02) Tinted W/S only
2L = (M20) 4-speed floor shifter
2G = (D55) Console front compartment
4P = (L48) SS 350
5Y = (A39) Belts All Deluxe  (guessing the the 54 is 5Y- since there is no Y code in the 5th option group)
837  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Muncie vin #'s on: March 24, 2007, 02:01:41 PM
It's stamped by the same machine that stamped your engine VIN.  Not only should the 1 be there, but the characters will always match the one on the engine pad.
838  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 69 argent grille paint on: March 24, 2007, 11:36:52 AM
Original paint code was PPG DQE-8598 and it was an alkyd enamel paint.  Don't think it would have been a gloss, more likely a satin (80% gloss).
839  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Rear antenna hole on: March 24, 2007, 11:35:02 AM
I just went out and measured my car (I don't have a read antenna) and found the the 110.25" measurment referenced in the AIM places places the antenna just at the end of the arc of the trunklid opening.  I measured 100 " back from my front antenna (The AIM says it is 10" behind the firewall- or the 0 reference point) and the point ended up just about at the rear edge of the arc (plus or minus 1/4") and the rear edge of the top of the quarter panel was 119" back (or 129" back from the 0 point).  Looks like the antenna is supposed to be located 19" forward of the rear edge of the quarter, assuming the AIM dimensions are correct.
840  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Rear antenna hole on: March 24, 2007, 10:53:30 AM
Wow, that looks awfully far back on the fender.  I had one on a 68 eons ago and it seems (from memory) it was alot closer to the corner of the trunklid like right at the end of the trunk corner radius (about 3" forward of the one in these pictures).  Since I don't think I've ever seen a real one on a 69 are the 68s in a different location than the 69s?
Pages: 1 ... 54 55 [56] 57 58 ... 64
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 0.102 seconds with 18 queries.