CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 23, 2014, 03:21:48 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.
97442 Posts in 11712 Topics by 4581 Members
Latest Member: Cooper48
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 85 86 [87] 88 89 ... 131
1291  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: NCIB on: February 15, 2013, 11:17:59 PM

How to Become a Member-Only User









from the NICB website:

"Access to the members' section is only available to current NICB members. Law enforcement is not eligible for members' access.
 
If you are already a member and would like to obtain access or have misplaced your login information, contact NICB Technical Support at 800-447-6282, ext. 7003 or techsupport@nicb.org. If you know your user ID but not your password, click here.
 
NICB membership is open to insurance companies licensed in any of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, or the insular possessions of the United States as well as auto rental companies, auto finance companies, auto auctions and certain self-insured entities may be eligible for membership in the NICB. For more information, contact Kym Forester at kforester@nicb.org or 714-277-3611."


I didn't check, but from the above, I'd guess there's a significant fee for membership.
1292  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Original P T B marks on: February 15, 2013, 11:11:03 PM
I found the P T B on the drivers side, and in fact, down under the Trim Tab is a second 'T'..  but have been unable to find any stamps on the passenger side.  My understanding was that each side was done independently and marked independently...?
1293  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: NCIB on: February 15, 2013, 11:08:19 PM
Are you referring to the NICB?   National Insurance Crime Bureau?
1294  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 Z/28 motor mounts on: February 15, 2013, 04:50:19 PM
The two photos below are of:
1)  the 3886466 mounts,  
2)  a top down view of three different mounts showing the width across the frame stand:
     On Left)  parts store mount for 302 (3" wide),
     in middle)   3886466 mount
     on right)  The 3962478 mount

The 3886466 mount is only maybe 1/8" wider than the 3962478 mount, but the parts store mount is WAY wide (3").
The 3962478 mount has a round hole for the attachment to the frame stand, the other two mounts have oblong holes.
The 3962478 mount is approximately 1-1/2" high/thick, the other two are almost the same height, or thickness, about 1".
1295  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Zl-2 Cowl Hood Production on: February 15, 2013, 03:01:25 PM
Hey what happened to our running list of car info and hood date? Did it get removed for some reason?
I don't think we had such a 'running' list, Austin...  we are all waiting for you to tally up the summary from the individual posts made in this thread.. Smiley

I made an incorrect statement early in this thread that Kurt had such a tally, but I think I was thinking about the gas tank tally he has, so that was an incorrect statement on my part;  no reason you can't do the tally from the information posted in this thread though.. Smiley
1296  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 Z/28 motor mounts on: February 15, 2013, 02:56:44 PM
Thanks for the digging Ed..   It's at least good that someone agrees with me that it's a screwed up mess..  Smiley
My main concern was the 'height' of the mount.  Today, I retreived another part number from my 'old garage', and did some photographs showing 3 different motor mounts.   The ones the parts store sold me for the 302 actually don't even fit the engine stand (on the frame).    The frame stand has a width of ~ 2.5".   The mount the parts store sold me has a 3" wide saddle to fit over that 2.5" stand, so there's a lot of slop and I'm inclined to believe that would be a problem.    Another difference I noted was the thru hole for the bolts that hold the motor mount to the frame stand.   Two of the engine mounts I looked at had an 'oblong' thru hole, which would allow a little alignment wiggle, while the 3962748 motor mount has a round hole sized to the bolt (no wiggle at all).   I think my memory tells me that the original mounts had an oblong thru hole... but I've got no data for that.
1297  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 67-68 Z28 Crank Pulley pn 3858533 BJ ? on: February 15, 2013, 10:51:12 AM
Generally, the pulleys aren't balanced as part of the rotating assembly.  I've had several engines balanced over the years, and never did the shop allow me to include the pulleys.. Smiley   .   They balance the internals, and then balance the damper and flywheel. 
1298  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Research Topics & Reports / Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles on: February 15, 2013, 08:46:37 AM
..  then you have better eyes or a better imagination than I, Kurt..  Smiley
Do you have a photo of a CBU stamp?  I don't think I've ever seen one, so maybe it's not like I was expecting..?
or maybe Bryon can post a pix of his as he has a C BU code??
1299  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 67-68 Z28 Crank Pulley pn 3858533 BJ ? on: February 15, 2013, 01:05:03 AM
thanks guys..  Smiley
I'm looking forward to seeing some detail of the 2-groove pulley, as it is interesting to me that a drag racer would have gone to that much trouble ?
1300  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 67-68 Z28 Crank Pulley pn 3858533 BJ ? on: February 14, 2013, 10:47:25 PM
Jerry,

Can you post pix of your original pulley for comparison purposes?   I suppose I could see machining off one pulley groove if that gave them some kind of advantage drag racing..  but it seems a lot of trouble even for that?  This pulley supposed came from one of the early '67 Z28 engines, but I think the same PN may have been used on earlier SHP engines as well?
1301  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 Z/28 motor mounts on: February 14, 2013, 10:42:49 PM
The 3962748 seems to be a bit thicker (as much as 1/2") than the 3990918 part... which raises the motor a little, enough to cause my headers to hit my floorboard of my car.   I put 'parts store' mounts in and they are shorter than the 3962748 parts.   I don't have 'new' 3990918 parts to directly compare.
1302  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 Z/28 motor mounts on: February 14, 2013, 01:29:22 PM
Anyone got a suggestion for the *best* source for a compatible motor mount (for the 3990918 chevy pn)?   I don't really feel like paying several hundred $$ for NOS gm versions.. Smiley
1303  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 Z/28 motor mounts on: February 14, 2013, 12:06:38 PM
That was an old post by Dave69x33 (from 2006) which (no one ever corrected) which stated the incorrect PN for the mount, referencing McNeish's fact book.   Either he made a typo, or Jerry has corrected the mistake, because in the 4th edition (revised) of Jerry's fact book, the correct PN (3990918) is now correctly referenced!
1304  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 67-68 Z28 Crank Pulley pn 3858533 BJ ? on: February 14, 2013, 11:57:57 AM
Our discussion on the pulley prompted me to call Jack Cooley; I've had his contact information for awhile now, but haven't talked to him until today.  He didn't recall the pulley or doing any machining on it, but the engine was modified when I purchased it (as far as they could go in the stock classes at the time).  Jack told me he is 87 yrs old (on 10 Jan this year), so anything he remembers is great.. Smiley     I had heard that he bought the car from Dickie Hairrel, but he told me that wasn't correct; he bought it direct from Chevrolet (one of the earliest '67 Z28s).   By 1971, he was running under the national record in his 'stock' class (11.6's) with the high revving 302!

Prior to the 67 Z, he raced a '63 Z11 aluminum bodied Chevrolet which he also purchased new from Chevrolet in '63!
 
When I purchased the 302 (short block only) it was 0.030" over, running Forgedtrue pistons (teflon guides in the skirts), Dykes rings, and the pistons were running right to the top of the deck and to the valves - there was light carbon on the top of the pistons, EXCEPT for where the valves opened, and a 1/8" ring around the piston top where it *touched* the head or gasket when TDC!  The deck had been milled to the point that the stamped numbers were gone.  Supposedly the stock crank and rods had had the 'DynaRev' treatment from Hank the Crank (of the Crank Shaft Co) at the time.   The cam was a Lunati, blueprinted to the '67 Z28 specs.  I isntalled 202 valve FI heads and a Tarantula intake and homemade headers in my Henry J..   What I recall is when that engine revved, it sent waves of adrenaline thru my body!  Smiley  I can still feel it.. Smiley
1305  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 68 tilt steering column too long on: February 14, 2013, 11:18:55 AM
Guys, I must be missing something (or am just an idiot). I am adding power steering (got the Saginaw gear from a 68 bird). I am trying to install my original tilt column, but it seems nearly an inch too long when I try to line-up the three holes for the the under dash studs. Any one run across this?
Is it possible taht you are attempting to install the under-column brace 'backwards'?   Try rotating it around, so the open end of the brace holes are towards the front and let me know?
Pages: 1 ... 85 86 [87] 88 89 ... 131
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 0.101 seconds with 19 queries.