16
General Discussion / Re: Question about rear of car being to low
« on: July 10, 2023, 12:07:48 PM »
One needs to understand that NEW Springs purchased today are NOT the same as new springs installed in '69...
News:
Welcome to the CRG Discussion Forum!
Classified ads are not allowed on the forum.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
17
General Discussion / Re: Question on this.
« on: July 10, 2023, 12:03:50 PM »
It's much more likely that the stamping was modified than the casting no modified.
3956618 68-79 302/327/350 2 & 4-Bolt
If the stamping was modified it appears to me that this engine suffix was originally 'EH' .. but someone overstamped the B (or 3) over the E... producing a BH which I don't have in my reference.
Of course the engine deck/pad has also been milled (or otherwise modified) so it doesn't show the original machine marks, so it could also be a complete RESTAMP, but I'm leaning towards an overstamp as above...
The EH suffix was used in '68 on 250hp/327 ci engines in Chevelles...as well as some earlier occurrences...
3956618 68-79 302/327/350 2 & 4-Bolt
If the stamping was modified it appears to me that this engine suffix was originally 'EH' .. but someone overstamped the B (or 3) over the E... producing a BH which I don't have in my reference.
Of course the engine deck/pad has also been milled (or otherwise modified) so it doesn't show the original machine marks, so it could also be a complete RESTAMP, but I'm leaning towards an overstamp as above...
The EH suffix was used in '68 on 250hp/327 ci engines in Chevelles...as well as some earlier occurrences...
18
General Discussion / Re: Question about rear of car being to low
« on: July 09, 2023, 11:35:31 AM »
I have to agree with Gars and Mo.... front is an inch too high.... 
19
General Discussion / Re: Interesting period photos.... :)
« on: June 11, 2023, 12:53:13 PM »
Here are a couple of photos of my '69 Z28-RS with an early owner (Cindy in 1973)...
20
Originality / Re: great body/chassis photos of original paint VN 69
« on: May 02, 2023, 01:00:44 PM »
That appears to be a VERY NICE '69 Camaro, and I love the color combo (surprisingly), and it's options 350 4-spd AC and a few select updates.
21
Originality / Re: Rally Wheel dates
« on: April 26, 2023, 03:08:49 AM »
Bad shifter wrote:
"I don’t know what second round of 09 means, but the Vin is 685XXX."
That means your car was a VERY late year production, during the August-Dec '69 period that would in a normal year have been used for 1970 model production, but '69 was an extended production year...
"I don’t know what second round of 09 means, but the Vin is 685XXX."
That means your car was a VERY late year production, during the August-Dec '69 period that would in a normal year have been used for 1970 model production, but '69 was an extended production year...
22
General Discussion / Re: Rapid Transit Cuda Found
« on: April 22, 2023, 03:38:28 PM »
That article is misleading. The Rapid Transit System was a part of Chrysler's advertising campaign to sell 1970 model high performance cars, including the Roadrunner, The Cuda, the R/T, etc.. I bought two of them in 1970 (A '70 Roadrunner I special ordered), and later that year after I got married and my wife couldn't drive the 4speed, I sold it to a buddy and bought a '70 Challenger RT/SE with auto (and practically every option available).. The Chrysler RTS ads were good, some having the production cars pictured, and some with 'cartoonish' enhancements but with all the RTS cars lined up. I have some of those original 1970 magazine ads somewhere in my mags.
BUT this article and those 'modified' cars presented are not only UGLY as heck, but I don't recall seeing ANY chrysler ads with them depicted. Those are enough to discourage a prospective buyer!
BUT this article and those 'modified' cars presented are not only UGLY as heck, but I don't recall seeing ANY chrysler ads with them depicted. Those are enough to discourage a prospective buyer!
23
General Discussion / Re: Factory Chambered Exhaust-69’ 396
« on: April 22, 2023, 02:34:57 PM »
The OP's memory is likely about like my own.. but I'm pretty certain I recall correctly that the bigblock chambered pipes were different (1/4-1/2" Larger dia) than the small block chambered.
John Z told me once that the chambered exhaust for a small block on a Z28 in '69 produced 7 hp less than the std transverse muffler system. I'm sure it would be more on a big block engine than that.
PS. Only the early cars received the chambered system, as due to noise tickets in various states, the factory changed from the chambered stock system to the transverse muffler initially, and then ADD dual resonators by May or June of '69...
but I'm pretty certain I recall correctly that the bigblock chambered pipes were different (1/4-1/2" Larger dia) than the small block chambered. John Z told me once that the chambered exhaust for a small block on a Z28 in '69 produced 7 hp less than the std transverse muffler system. I'm sure it would be more on a big block engine than that.
PS. Only the early cars received the chambered system, as due to noise tickets in various states, the factory changed from the chambered stock system to the transverse muffler initially, and then ADD dual resonators by May or June of '69...
24
Originality / Re: Trunk lid emblem holes D80 car 09C
« on: April 22, 2023, 02:23:01 PM »
I also have an original 09C 69 Z28-RS car with D80, and the original trunk lid did NOT have the two sets of holes... just the one utilized above the spoiler.. so you are OK..
25
General Discussion / Re: 1969 z28 Briggs Chevrolet
« on: February 27, 2023, 04:14:56 PM »
Such posts are much more informative and productive, IF you include a bit more information (based on info you have).. I'm sure there's MORE than one Briggs Chevrolet in the country.. in fact, just doing a quick google, I find references to Briggs Chevrolet in Fort Scott, Manhattan, and Topeka (Kansas), and So Amboy, NJ.... 
26
General Discussion / Re: Alternator stamping date
« on: February 25, 2023, 10:15:14 PM »
That looks like an 'M' to me....
27
General Discussion / Re: Big Blocks built at the Tonawanda Factory
« on: February 25, 2023, 01:05:52 PM »
Since the JH suffix code was used in multiple years, you also need the casting date of the block...
28
General Discussion / Re: Camaro Books
« on: February 24, 2023, 08:37:39 PM »
Hooper's books are 'Coffee Table Books', with pretty pictures for the novice and lots of inaccurate information...
29
General Discussion / Re: Marking on rear seat support
« on: February 12, 2023, 10:47:09 PM »
What other parts or indications does your car exhibit which might support it's being an X33 car, or otherwise?
30
General Discussion / Re: New library of documentation page
« on: December 28, 2022, 02:24:50 PM »
Outstanding ! Some great new factory information ... Thanks!
When I saw the 1969 Order Form, I got excited, but then I found out it didn't include any of the Z28 ...?
Did I miss this somewhere else? or ??
When I saw the 1969 Order Form, I got excited, but then I found out it didn't include any of the Z28 ...?
Did I miss this somewhere else? or ??