CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 30, 2014, 08:23:10 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.
102496 Posts in 12091 Topics by 4669 Members
Latest Member: paulmanta
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 104 105 [106] 107 108 ... 152
1576  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 9204 brake booster on ebay on: February 24, 2013, 12:27:46 AM
TO my knowledge it has never been changed.   It was on the car when I bought it in 1976, and it's 'dated' appropriately for my 09C car??   but everything is speculation/educated guesswork after 44 yrs..  Smiley
1577  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 9204 brake booster on ebay on: February 23, 2013, 10:16:26 PM
Mike,

My car is a LATE 09C (Sept 1969)..  I'm sorry if that throws a kink in your data.. Smiley
1578  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 Z/28 motor mounts on: February 23, 2013, 12:24:19 PM
The Lucas restoration photos and others have had the drivers side mount changed sometime in the cars history, probably the engine mount recall program GM had back in 69 by GM dealers . Very common to see that type mount, the original type mounts I posted are very rare to see, especially the drivers side as it allways broke due to Engine Torque.
 When I ran the Corvette/Camaro shop we put lots of headers on and had to manipulate ( Bend) headers into proper postion lots of time. Put the car on a hoist and insert  long 2x4 trimed to fit into the collector and get someone to help you carefully pull down on the 2x4 gradually until you have the clearnce needed. You would be surprised how easily they will move. The trick is to gradually pull so as not to kink tubes or break welds. Done it lots, it works.
I appreciate your comment;  I've leaned on the header a bit when I installed them the first time, but was afraid of breaking apart welds with too much effort?   GIven your suggestion, I suppose I'll just use your 2x4 suggestion and 'lean harder' and see what happens..  Smiley
1579  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 Z/28 motor mounts on: February 23, 2013, 12:15:53 PM
Tmodel66 posted: 
"Gary after re-reading your post I believe your problem is the header. You have changed nothing except the header so it has to be. My reasoning is you said the Anchor are like your originals so your originals were working before the headers.  Correct?"
....

Well.  the GM 3962748 mounts may have come from a '70 LT1 I had, rather than the '69 Z28.    those mounts are shown as 'original' for the '70 350 engines in the '70 P&A catalog.   I now suspect the problem is the headers, although I'm not perfectly confident about the mounts, since I don't have the original 302 mounts.  As many have said, Chevy used non-interlocking mounts from '55 thru '69? and they often broke apart due to engine torque.  I've changed out many over the years on various small block chevys I've owned when the mounts were in 'two parts' when removed. Smiley   Seems chevy tried many solutions to the 'engine torque' issue before they finally addressed it..  ie. the 'tie down' mod/recall, and I suppose finally the interlocking mount.  I still need to decide which of the mounts I have is 'closest' or 'most acceptable in original unrestored judging' or survivor classes before I put my engine back in.
1580  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Where to send starter for rebuild. on: February 22, 2013, 11:09:28 PM
I second what Lynn posted; it's not much to a starter motor..  cleaning, lubing bearings/bushings, and possibly replacement of brushes usually takes care of it.   The solenoid is a separate animal, but can also usually be cleaned and made to work.
1581  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 Z/28 motor mounts on: February 22, 2013, 11:02:37 PM
the mount photos posted by 1968 Z28 (from Lucas Restorations) seem to match at least some of the ones that were said to be original, with one interlocking mount (2748?), and one non-interlocking (GM 3939728?).   Paceme and first gen addict both said their cars had the interlocking mount on the LHS, and the non-interlocking one on the right...  that seems to be what is pictured in the Lucas Restoration photos.
1582  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 Z/28 motor mounts on: February 22, 2013, 10:55:47 PM
The Anchor PN (2283) listed for the '69 big block 396 was ordered last week on the suggestion of Tmodel66, and received today.   
This part seems to be a great 'duplicate' of the GM 3962740/2748 PN, an interlocking design, minus the GM pn's on the side.   Which is what was on my car originally, and which I believed were too tall, causing my new headers to come too close to the floor underneath.  Sad
Now I've got  3 possible pairs of mounts, and unsure of which ones to use...   The Anchor 2283, which *match* the GM 3962740/2748 mounts, both of which are interlocking, and the GM 3886466 mounts (non interlocking).   Any suggestions?

Dang Gary I hate that. They worked for me and I might add it was after I searched and bought from just about every vendor in town. I don't know !!
Well.. maybe that height is correct, and something else is not quite right on my car making the headers hit.  The headers are 'new' so they may not be *right*, or perhaps the rear trans mount is too tall?  Does anyone have a measure for that?  Smiley
1583  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 9204 brake booster on ebay on: February 22, 2013, 10:53:29 PM
I just went down and measured mine..    4/32"  or 1/8" ...   the julian date '199' is inverted (when top is up)..  '9204' is not inverted.
1584  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 9204 brake booster on ebay on: February 22, 2013, 03:43:57 PM
I received my original booster back today, after rebuild by Steve Grigori (Brake Boosters, Inc).   he does a nice job for a very reasonable price.. I'm pleased.   and the stamped codes are much easier to read now after the cleaning and replating.   
My car is a late 09C car, with '9204' booster, date 199.   
1585  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 Z/28 motor mounts on: February 22, 2013, 03:38:17 PM
The Anchor PN (2283) listed for the '69 big block 396 was ordered last week on the suggestion of Tmodel66, and received today.   
This part seems to be a great 'duplicate' of the GM 3962740/2748 PN, an interlocking design, minus the GM pn's on the side.   Which is what was on my car originally, and which I believed were too tall, causing my new headers to come too close to the floor underneath.  Sad
Now I've got  3 possible pairs of mounts, and unsure of which ones to use...   The Anchor 2283, which *match* the GM 3962740/2748 mounts, both of which are interlocking, and the GM 3886466 mounts (non interlocking).   Any suggestions?
1586  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Black booster and brake lines 1969 on: February 21, 2013, 10:21:22 PM
that's an interesting question;  I bought my car (a late 09C Z28) in '76, and it was painted black also, at least partially..  which I of course 'touched up'..  Smiley, but I've no idea if that is the way it came from the factory; I don't have any 'just delivered' photographs of any of these cars..
1587  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: '67 vs '69 302 harmonic dampers on: February 21, 2013, 08:54:05 AM
You're right woodsman, esp if the engine or the parts are 'new' to you.. Smiley   
1588  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Vigilite Light Monitoring System Fiber Optic Cable on: February 21, 2013, 01:10:01 AM
Corvettes had them for several years, late 60's, early '70's?    Probably find some at the large Corvette swap meets...
1589  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: '67 vs '69 302 harmonic dampers on: February 20, 2013, 02:14:19 PM
thanks Ed,  I KNEW there had to  be a reason.. and that one makes sense!.... but it can put a whack into checking timing if you have an inconsistent mix of parts..  Smiley
1590  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: '67 vs '69 302 harmonic dampers on: February 20, 2013, 01:00:25 PM
John,  I'm sure Chevrolet had some reason for changing the keyway / TDC index marking between '68 and '69, but it's not obviuos why they did so??    Can you shed some light on that?
Pages: 1 ... 104 105 [106] 107 108 ... 152
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 0.1 seconds with 19 queries.