CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 30, 2014, 10:10:08 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.
102488 Posts in 12091 Topics by 4669 Members
Latest Member: paulmanta
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4
31  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 1968 Aircon car? on: June 08, 2009, 01:08:59 AM
Thankyou very much for your close observations rat pack, JohnZ.
I have been for a very close look (now that I knnow what I am looking at) and can now see where the panel work has been done.
I will grab that system from my mates car and store till I pull the engine out.
Thanks a lot for your help.
32  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 1968 Aircon car? on: June 06, 2009, 10:26:57 PM
Hi guys, thanks for your input.
The car is in restored condition.
It was restored by the guy I bought it from and he tells me that it had no air con when it arrived in the country.
In other words, he did not remove it if it was ever there at all.
I have found that there is no ducting behind the ball vents which might explain the controls not working.
However, there are still no penetrations for the ball vent ducting into the firewall to connect to.
There is no evidence of a hole for the ball vent valve lever to poke through.
I cannot see where the cutout area for the plenum has been filled in although my panelbeater syas he can see it. (x-ray vision maybe)
All the glass is definately tinted green.
Rat pack,
Thanks for your input regarding the aftermarket aircon systems.
I would prefer to fit the factory system although it would appear I am in for a lot of body work to do so.
Hopefully some of you experts wall spot some tell tale clues in the pics Ihave uploaded.

Thanks again
Wayne
33  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 1968 Aircon car? on: June 06, 2009, 10:18:30 PM
closeup of heater hoses. Very close to rocker cover
34  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 1968 Aircon car? on: June 06, 2009, 10:16:34 PM
passneger side ball vent, no hole for pull lever
35  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 1968 Aircon car? on: June 06, 2009, 10:14:49 PM
closeup of firewall enginebay side
36  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 1968 Aircon car? on: June 06, 2009, 10:13:26 PM
under glovebox looking up to heaterbox
37  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / 1968 Aircon car? on: June 05, 2009, 02:26:31 AM
Hello again everyone.
While trying to get the "ball vents" in the dash going I seem to have discovered that my  car may have originally had AC.
There are no penetrations from the cabin to the wiper cowl area up behind the dash for the ball vent ducting to connect to , similarly the ball vents do not have the little knob and lever to open and close the "flap" which turns on and off or restricts the air flow.
The heater controils are all out of whack.
There is no central vent in the radio trim panel.
It appears to have a standard heater box fitted in the engine bay and all looks as it should be for a non AC car in that respect.
All the windows have a green tint to them.
A panelbeater here has started all this when he mentioned to me that there was been a small patch or "AC Delete" plate welded into the firewall ( which I cant see ) up by the wiper cowl panel.
My problem is, I would like to get the venting system working correctly.

I have a couple of options.
1: Drill the holes in the firewall for the ball vent connections, I have not been able to get the plastic parts to mount to the firewall however.
2: Resurrect the original AC system, I can acquire a complete system from a firends car here who is making a hot rod and will be removing his AC
3: Install an aftermarket AC system, vintage air or similar.

Option 1 would be pretty much impracticle as I would have to tear the car apart.
Option 2 would be the best option as it retains all the correct parts but again means some serious surgery to undo what has been done.
Option 3 would appear to be the way to go as I understand they dont require a pump and would retro fit to my car fairly easily. Has anyone fitted one of these?

Before I do anything I want to make sure that I am not "barking up the wrong tree", so to speak.

Are there any other tell tale clues as to whether my car really did have AC fitted?
Were there any models that did not have the air vents ducted to the firewall

Thanks
Wayne
38  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: Door weatherstripping on: September 23, 2008, 02:15:29 AM
Ok I have bitten the bullet and have got partial set of Metro Super Softs weatherstrips out of Summit Racing Supplies. Door L & R, Frame L & R and boot (trunk) seal.

I will keep you all posted as to how they perform.
39  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Door weatherstripping on: September 07, 2008, 02:31:36 AM
Hi all.
I have had problems with closing the doors.
Basically I have had to open the door and with a hearty push swing them quite hard to get them to latch properly.
I have tried soaking the seals with Wurth rubber conditioner which didnt really make a lot of difference.
The car has been beautifully restored and in desperation I have removed the "new" seals that had been fitted.
I beieve they were bought from a classic industries agent down here.
I have a panelbeater freind who has had a similar problem and it seems to be the very end of the seal where it is flattened out whereby it is too hard to compress properly when closing the door.
We cut away this part and it was an improvement. However when we removed the entire seal we found that the door closes perfectly.... click....
All of the gaps are near perfect so it would seem that the seal is definately the problem
I have had a browse through the forums and it appears that the general consensus would be that the Metro brand seals provide teh best fit and cushioning when closing the doors.
I am proposing to replace only the seal that goes around the door. Would it be better to replace the door frame seals as well?
I would appreciate any input from other forum members as I am reluctant to place an internet order only to find out that I am no better off.
Thanks in advance
Wayne
40  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Mild Modifications / Wheel clearnces on: June 28, 2008, 12:07:19 AM
Can anyone help me out here.

I have just fitted a pair of 15x8 rally wheels to the back of my 68 and now I am not too happy with the "look".
The wheels I fitted are Classic Industries reproductions with a 4 1/4" backspacing, which I assume is a standard backspacing.
The problem is that now I want to have them altered so that the extra 1" is on the inside of the wheel arch instead of the outside as it looks a bit odd as it is now.
Also I have the car lowered a bit and I think with the extra inch on the outside I will have issues with the tyres rubbing on the inside of the wheel arch trim.
If I alter them they way I want I can also then use the original wheel trim riings and it would appear to be the same as the front and not have a gaping gap between the ring and the centre of the wheel but still have an 8" wheel.
The tyres on the back are BF Goodrich 245x60x15.

Any clues anyone?

Thanks

41  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 68 multi leafs in AIM? on: May 07, 2008, 03:58:40 AM
Amazing what you find in the forums when you have a few hours spare.
I also have a 4 leaf 12 bolt in my car and it has the (as it now appears) the mono bottom plate.
I am having problems with the shocks. The previous owner fitted Koni Adjustables and they seem to be the wrong ones for a number of reasons.
Firstly with the shocks not connected to the bottom plate I can hop in the boot and bounce the rear end quite well. With them bolted up and I try again there is virtually no movement.
Secondly when I checked teh part number on teh Koni site it appears I have the wrong ones fitted.
I checked with a Koni dealer today and aparently the two part number are the same dampening rate but the ones listed for a multi leaf rear end are about 30mm shorter.
Bearing in mind that the adjustable part relates only to the rebound and not the bound.
SO my question is..... does the multi leaf lower mounting plate have the hole for attaching the bottom of the shock at the same distance from the bottom of the plate as the mounting plate for the mono leaf spring?
What is the major diference between the two types of mounting plates other than the number of "wings"?

Furher to all this, just to add to the confusion, the rear springs are brand new Landrums. I am unsure of the spring rate.


I hope this all makes sense. I would like to get it right as at the moment i have two 40kg bags of cement in the boot to inprove the ride.( DONT LAUGH )

Cheers

Wayne
42  Orphans - documentation or VIN-stamped drivetrains - in search of the original cars / 1968 - Orphans / Re: 8L332343 - L48 engine on: May 06, 2008, 05:50:19 AM
Hmmmm

Could be just about perfect for my car.
Almost the same VIN as well.
43  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: I have seached the site........but......... on: May 06, 2008, 05:47:46 AM
Hi again everyone.
Thanks again for all your input.
I have attached some photos of the engine numbers.
I am not totally computer savvy so please excuse me if I get this all worng.
Pic one is pretty obvious. Could this still be a 350?
Pic two is of the front pad. Its really hard to make out the last letter of the suffix. The 01884 appears to be double stamped. The ER has me stumped.
Pic three is the casting date. Hard to tell if its a 6 or a 8 at the end. More experienced eyes may be able to tell.
The heads appear to be early fuelies withoug the water temp sensor hole in them. I will get the casting numbers off them in teh weekend. That may help to nail down what it is.

Thanks again guys for your input.
44  Site Comments / Discussion / Test Drive / test2 on: May 06, 2008, 05:37:45 AM
more test
45  Site Comments / Discussion / Test Drive / test on: May 06, 2008, 05:34:48 AM
test
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4
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 0.095 seconds with 18 queries.