Messages

4651

Originality / Re: *original* 69 Trunk Mat ?

« on: August 31, 2013, 02:59:15 AM »

I wouldn't term the 'socalled NOS' one I had in my hands as 'too nice', or even 'nice', in fact it was totally unacceptable to even be 'called a reproduction.  It had a thin white cloth backing, and the front seemed to be a thin plasticized cloth as well.  It's thickness and weight were  approx. 1/10 of the original rubber mat.   Surely there must be some decent reproductions?  ie. with pebbled black rubber backing, and smooth vinyl top surface?   I took some photographs of my original (I've always assumed this to be the original mat, as it was in my Z28/RS when I purchased the car in 1976, and was worn, torn, and dirty even then.   It still today is in the same condition as it was then since the car has been in storage since 1980.   I'm attaching a couple of photographs in hope someone can confirm for certain this is an original mat, and hopefully tell me if there exists a decent reproduction of the original mat.     Attached are photos of:  1) the full mat removed from the car, 2) a folded back end of it showing both the top pattern and the bottom texture, and 3) a small detailed image of the mat pattern (not houndstooth as generally described).
Thanks.

4652

Restoration / Re: Sound Dampening

« on: August 31, 2013, 02:33:55 AM »

Assuming it's rubber or tar based, it's effectiveness as a sound dampener has to be much more significant than it's thermal barrier capabilities.

4653

Maintenance / Re: Remote Mirror bezel/cable removal??

« on: August 31, 2013, 12:59:51 AM »

FANTASTIC!!      I posted that request, and then went to dinner, come home, and Ed has the answer.. 
Thank you very much ED!! 

4654

General Discussion / Re: 1969 Chevrolet Camaro Z/28 with Rally Sport... RESTAMP

« on: August 31, 2013, 12:57:44 AM »

From the photos/info supplied, it *appears* to be a nice car, so it would be a real shame if the someone who said 'RESTAMP' was only guessing, or if he's wrong.

4655

Maintenance / Remote Mirror bezel/cable removal??

« on: August 30, 2013, 10:16:22 PM »

Hey guys,  I could sure use some help/tips from someone who has removed a '69 Camaro remote mirror bezel and cable.   I need to remove my driver side door panel to adjust and lubricate my door glass mechanism, and I cannot see out how to remove the bezel from the remote adjuster; the bezel doesn't seem to fit thru the hole in the door panel.   
I'm thinking there MUST be a trick, something I'm unfamiliar with and I do not want to destroy anything..     The only potential means to remove it that I can see is to use pliers to release the cables from the adjuster, but there are three of them, and once released (assuming they will release as I imagine), I've no idea how I would get them back into the correct location.   Pictures attached for reference.   Any help appreciated, and Thanks in advance!

4656

Restoration / Re: Sound Dampening

« on: August 30, 2013, 03:46:25 PM »

IMO, the *best material for the money* is to do what the new car manufacturers did (or do)...  they use a similar decision criteria ... to be 'good enough', but not waste $$....

4657

Originality / Re: Tag found on passenger rear quarter of a 69/Z28 LOS car

« on: August 30, 2013, 01:22:52 PM »

thanks George...  explains why I've never seen those on my car, since I've never had my interior panels off the car, but then I've only owned it for 37 yrs (so far)..

4658

General Discussion / Re: 1969 Chevrolet Camaro Z/28 with Rally Sport... RESTAMP

« on: August 30, 2013, 05:32:01 AM »

I made a mis statement earlier when I said (about my car):   
"... all the stamped VINs matched, on the transmission, the hidden stamps, and the engine, but the stamping on the engine wasn't as deep as the others (being on cast iron) nor as deep as it appeared to be on this car..."

I looked again, and the 'hidden VINs' under the cowl and under the heater housing do NOT begin with the '1', instead start with the '9' digit, whereas the Transmission and engine vin stampings begin with '1 9 ..'.   Other than the existence or missing of the leading 1 digit, the stamps appeared identical...

4659

Trans-Am Camaros / Re: 2013 Monterey motorsports reunion: Who's going?

« on: August 30, 2013, 04:44:12 AM »

Per an April 2013 report....
"In total, the Z/28 weighs 300 lbs. less than the mighty ZL1, or about 3,820 lbs.
This puts it at 40 lbs. lighter than a Camaro SS with a manual transmission
and 200 lbs. heavier than the recently (and sadly) discontinued Ford Mustang Boss 302,,:

4660

General Discussion / Re: 1969 Chevrolet Camaro Z/28 with Rally Sport... RESTAMP

« on: August 30, 2013, 04:29:47 AM »

All I was trying to say Austin, was that I couldn't see anything in the information/photos supplied that would indicate (for certain) that it was not original...  although the VIN stamping in the block material was deeper than any I've seen, but I've only seen mine and a handful of others.... so that's not a huge sample size.  if someone says it's a restamp, then they should supply justifying information, otherwise...  what does it mean?

4661

Originality / Re: Tag found on passenger rear quarter of a 69/Z28 LOS car

« on: August 30, 2013, 03:38:34 AM »

Where were those stickers found?  Underneath interior panels??

4662

General Discussion / Re: 1969 Chevrolet Camaro Z/28 with Rally Sport... RESTAMP

« on: August 30, 2013, 03:15:00 AM »

The only thing I could tell from his photos was that his VIN on the engine block was MUCH more distinct than any others I've ever seen.   On my original one, it took a lot of effort on my part to even find it, but once I did I was able to make it out, and it matched the Trans stamping.   On mine, all the stamped VINs matched, on the transmission, the hidden stamps, and the engine, but the stamping on the engine wasn't as deep as the others (being on cast iron) nor as deep as it appeared to be on this car...   but I think one would have to examine *hundreds* of cast engine stampings to judge whether it was  'wrong' or not.  Based on what is shown in the pictures, it appears to be a 'real car' to me... with an original engine..  as the DZ stamp also looked good (the strange '6' was a bit odd, but I've seen other 'odd' characters used in engine codes before on original cars.)

4663

Originality / *original* 69 Trunk Mat ?

« on: August 28, 2013, 07:32:03 PM »

Are there any available reproduction trunk mats for a '69 that *match* the original mat?   I just ordered (and received today) an advertised NOS trunk mat (and obviously it was NOT NOS)...    It wasn't the same material, nothing was like the original.   My original is still in my car, but it has many tears that I've attempted to repair.   It is *thick* vinyl, and is a black on the back with a built in texture.   The top side is smooth vinyl, and 'simulates' the houndstooth look (but on closer inspection, seems to be more 'checkered' than the houndstooth pattern).   

Is there any company making a viable replacement mat, that matches the original?

4664

Restoration / Re: Drive Shaft Restoration

« on: August 28, 2013, 06:45:01 PM »

Evaporust isn't supposed to removed paint, so apparently there wasn't much there that wasn't 'integrated' with the rust/dirt...   I don't think GM expected anything to be there after 44 yrs anyway..

4665

Restoration / Re: Drive Shaft Restoration

« on: August 28, 2013, 03:00:57 PM »

I used the Evaporust in a 5" PVC tube method to clean up my drive shaft and was amazed at the results. I soaked it for 2 days and rinsed with scotch-brite pad.
Thanks CRG members. Finished pictures & before.  George.

Did you consider not scrubbing the area with the paint stripes?   Were the paint stripes still legible after the soaking with evaporust?