CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 31, 2014, 04:47:53 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.
102524 Posts in 12094 Topics by 4669 Members
Latest Member: paulmanta
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 59 60 [61] 62
901  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Buick nut needs help with newly purchased 69 camaro on: November 27, 2005, 05:00:53 PM
And you got this for the $250 it says on the for sale sign?  The cars in better shape than my Pacecar was when I bought it int 83 and I still paid more for mine way back then.  good deal.
902  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Buick nut needs help with newly purchased 69 camaro on: November 27, 2005, 10:38:12 AM
Still have a crappy camera  Wink(at least looking at that image on my monitor).  I take it the number on the build sheet really is 172093 and does match your cowl tag.
903  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Buick nut needs help with newly purchased 69 camaro on: November 27, 2005, 08:41:16 AM
That's not your build sheet.  The body number on the build sheet looks to be 172050, your trim tag says 172093.  It probably belongs to a car made at the same time as yours, or perhaps was attached to an interior peice destined for that car that ended up in yours.

Can you read the VIN number in the third boxon the first row?  Looks like it ends in 354, is that your VIN number?
904  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 AM FM radio options on: November 25, 2005, 03:40:23 PM
Single speaker in the rear well would indicate either an AM or AM/FM mono radio with the U80 auxilliary speaker option.  No Z11 had a Yellow light stereo as they didn't start showing up until Late August or early September of 69, a full 4 to 4 1/2 months after the last Z11 was built.
905  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Spiral Shocks on: November 25, 2005, 10:51:43 AM
Don't often get to comment on Kurts postings (like never) but he really meant those codes are spring codes, not shock codes. Grin
906  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 AM FM radio options on: November 24, 2005, 08:06:24 AM
That's probably a 1970 or later AM/FM mono radio, it will fit into a 69 dash fine but there are a couple of cosmetic and functional differences.  1) the radio dial numbers are white while the 69 ones were green, and the radio light is wired to be on only when the dash lights are one, while the 69s dial was lit whenever the radio was on, on was off when the rado was off.   All 69 AM/FM radios did have the slanted fins on the output amplifiers, theoretically to clear the ductwork behind the radio, but the square finned ones will fit in there as well.  69 radios also had the eltrical and speaker connections on the right (drivers) side or the radio, not on the back side.  All 69 AM/FM units (except the yellow light) have a round plug in the drivers side rear corner of the radio used to connect the unamplified radio signal to the output amps.

AM/FM mono radios are single channel output units that were attached only to the speaker in the dash like the AM unit.  You could order RPO U80 Auxiliary speaker and get a second speaker on the passenger side rear deck with a fader knob under the radio tuning knob.  It was still a mono setup and the fader just split the signal between two speakers.

The Bluelight AM/FM stereo radio, so named because it has a blue stereo lamp in the upper right corner of the dial,  had a separate multiplex unit mounted up behind the glove box that was connected to the head unit in the dash with a 6 or 7 conductor wire and a circular plug with pins on it that looked like the bottom of an old vaccum tube.  The head unit sent unamplified mono signals to the multiplex unit which converted it into a sort of stereo signal and then sent it back to the output amplifiers in the head unit and from there out to the 4 speakers.  The bluelight setup was used from the beginning of the 69 model year to about August of 69 at which time the yellow light stereo unit came into probuction.

The yellow light stereo unit does not have the separate multiplex unit and has a yellow stereo lamp in the dial.  It was probably made for the 70 model year and used in the later camaros when a blue light unit was not available.
907  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Spiral Shocks on: November 21, 2005, 06:53:35 AM
Out of all the 68 broadcast sheets I have this is what I've found.
from body broadcast sheets
Late production L30/M20 with A/C Rear shock UN. (BBC)
L30/M20 rear shock UN (BBC)
L35/M40 rear shock TN (BBC)
Z28/M20 rear shock UN (BBC)

From chassis broadcast sheets
68 L35 front PW, rear TN - front springs are YQ rear are OH.
68 L22 L6 with powerglide front TG rear, TN - front springs are YL rear are BV.
68 L35 with TH400 trans, front PW, rear TN - front springs are YQ and rear are OH.

67 LF7 powerglide front LG, rear LH - front springs are YU rear are BX.
67 LF7 powerglide with A/c front LG, rear LH - front springs are YY, rear are YC.

908  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Spiral Shocks on: November 20, 2005, 10:15:00 PM
Off a 68 L35 big block chassis broadcast sheet and a 69 Z28 chassis broadcast sheet.  Front shocks in 68 are the same in both a 327/275 and the L35, but different shocks were used in 6 cylinder cars.
909  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Spiral Shocks on: November 20, 2005, 06:26:03 PM
1968 L35 equipped Camaro shock broadcast codes are PW front, TN rear.  PS and UN are 69 Z28 shock broadcast codes.
910  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: How rare is my Corvette Bronze 68 SS Camaro? on: November 19, 2005, 02:19:40 PM
Look at the one in front of the 69.   Grin
911  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1968 Z28 - did all have power steering? on: November 13, 2005, 11:30:23 PM
Power steering was an extra cost option, on Z28's and every other car.  It was not required on any 67 thru 69 Camaro.
912  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: rear bumper bracket on: November 06, 2005, 07:33:24 AM
It's black.
913  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1968 Body on: October 30, 2005, 07:38:55 AM
Back in the day, GM (and repro places) only stocked 67 front fenders since the fenders were the same except for the side marker openings.  You had to cut the side marker lights out for 68's.  Apparently some people didn't go to the trouble.  Are the side marker sockets stuffed up in the front corners of the car?
914  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: CE or CEA block codes for small bocks, Got DATA? on: October 27, 2005, 09:07:34 PM
A CE block, or assembly represents a major repair.  You don't get a CE engine because a lifter started ticking, or a valve started leaking oil and started puffing blue smoke and the engine needed to be torn down and individual components replaced.  You had to do some major damage to the engine for GM to even consider replacement.  A 10% failure rate in a major component of any companies product line (or even 5% since I'm sure GM made more than 1 million cars with small blocks in 69 across the Chevy line) would rapidly bankrupt that company.  Probably why you only get a 12 month 12,000 mile warranty today.  Do you know anyone who has ever got a brand new engine (or a short or long block) out of GM under warranty lately?
915  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: CE or CEA block codes for small bocks, Got DATA? on: October 26, 2005, 10:49:12 PM
That would be 90,000 blocks a year too Shocked.  If you blew up your 69 engine in 70, or 71 it would get a CE0, or CE1 stamp on it.
Pages: 1 ... 59 60 [61] 62
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 0.086 seconds with 18 queries.