CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 18, 2014, 04:45:55 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.
104529 Posts in 12235 Topics by 4716 Members
Latest Member: Hgtech
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 112 113 [114] 115 116 ... 159
1696  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?
1697  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..
1698  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   
1699  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...
1700  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
1701  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?
1702  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Research Topics & Reports / Re: Earliest 3969341 and Latest 3894860 axles on: February 20, 2013, 09:11:23 AM
I went back to the CRG data on differentials, and it says the 3 letter code began wtih the '70 model year, and the 'C' represented 'cars' (I supposed as opposed to truck differentials?)..  Given that, it makes sense that at the time they would have normally began building the new model year (late July or August or so?), they would have began using the new parts; as they did for a number of different items on our late '69 cars; several items are labeled as, or carry characteristics of the '70 model year, rather than the '69 model year.
1703  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: '67 vs '69 302 harmonic dampers on: February 19, 2013, 08:21:40 PM
I don't see a picture, but the timing mark on 1968 and earlier balancers is in line with the crankshaft keyway. In 1969, the timing mark was rotated about 10 to 12 degrees toward the Advance (A) mark.
Ed

Thanks Ed,  the keyway to TDC relationships  you describe are consistent wtih the '67 and '69 balancers I have.   The '67 is pictured on the left wtih the '69 on the right.   The '69 has the 7708 stamping, while the '67 has a '1' and a '7', although the numbers appear to be inverted to one another?    What is the coding on a '67 supposed to be?   Both balancers appear to have similar cast in 'codes' on the rear inside...
1704  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / '67 vs '69 302 harmonic dampers on: February 19, 2013, 01:18:16 PM
in digging thru my parts, trying to find all the '69 parts to put my 302 back together, I found a couple of seemingly appropriate harmonic dampers, but there are some differences.   I have identified the '69 302 damper, since I stamped my initials on it when I rebuilt the engine back in the mid 70's, and had the machine shop add grooves at 30, 90, 180, and 270.  It's stamped on the front '7708', which I believe I've read is correct for the '69 Z28.
The other large damper I had, which I believe to be from the '67 302 which I disassembled once upon a time.. Smiley    It only has a '1' and a '7' on the front (see photo).  but I also noticed the keyway vs TDC is not the same as for the '69 damper.   Is one of these weights 'slipped'?  or is there supposed to be a keyway difference?  and if so, why?   If so, I assume the crankshaft keyways are also appropriately different?  Can someone point me to a document that clarifies this?  or perhaps provide clarification here?
1705  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 67-68 Z28 Crank Pulley pn 3858533 BJ ? on: February 19, 2013, 01:02:56 PM
Yes, that's the way it appears, given the stamped number on the front...   I've also got a couple of questions concerning the difference in damper between the '67 and '69 302, but I'll start a new thread for that.   Since you have a '67 Z28, Jon..  I Hope you can help me out again!  Smiley
1706  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 69 smallblock (302) Oil dip sticks on: February 19, 2013, 09:30:35 AM

Re: 69 smallblock V8 (302, 307, 350) Oil dip sticks  (reorganizing per Kurt's suggestion)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
type 1)   Flattened handle on end, no PN, no plastic tip, stamped "ADD |         | FULL   USE GM 6041-M QUALITY MS OIL   E ".  (E turned 90 deg).
type 2)   Green tip on handle, no PN, no dimple,  stamped             "ADD |         | FULL   USE GM 6041-M QUALITY MS OIL   M ".

Member            Production            Dipstick
                    Plant       Week           Type

jdv69z            NOR        10(68)        flat
firstgenaddict   NOR       10D (68)     flat
LatebuildZ         ??         Nov(68 )     green tip
68CamaroZ28  NOR       11 (68)        green tip
Boston14        NOR        11D (68)     flat
z28z11           NOR         01C            flat
JOHNZ            NOR        02D            flat
Hans L              ??         04B             flat
X77-69Z28      NOR        05A             flat
RSZMJT          NOR        06A             flat
BULLITT65      NOR        08C             flat
69Z28-RS        NOR        09C             flat
LatebuildZ       NOR        10C             flat

Where are the LA cars?? 
Each new poster should copy this and add his information appropriately to the list before posting.



1707  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 Z/28 motor mounts on: February 19, 2013, 09:10:52 AM
Let's shoot for 'restoration', Steve!!  Smiley
PS.  Are you in Murfreesboro?  I'm just north of Huntsville;  we should try to get together sometime... compare notes!

Gary
1708  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 Z/28 motor mounts on: February 18, 2013, 11:35:09 PM
Steve,  Were they still functional?  or were they broken apart?  if functional, why did you change them?
1709  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Zl-2 Cowl Hood Production on: February 18, 2013, 12:49:49 AM
and try to find out the date code on his hood? *S*
1710  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 Z/28 motor mounts on: February 17, 2013, 10:08:50 PM
thanks for the additional photos!   They show a very interesting motor mount design, and also a very complicated one.   I'm pretty sure I've never seen one quite like that, although I did participate in pulling some original engines from Z28's back around '71-'72..  but motor mounts did not get a lot of my attention back then either.. Smiley
PS.  Does the additional height of that mount cause you any other issues, such as the one I had using the '3962748 mount' which caused my header collector to come too close to the bottom of my floor?  Or do you think my problem likely stemmed from either the header fabrication/design, or the trans mount?
Pages: 1 ... 112 113 [114] 115 116 ... 159
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 0.338 seconds with 19 queries.