CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 29, 2014, 04:47:33 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.
106672 Posts in 12435 Topics by 4791 Members
Latest Member: DEL
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 116 117 [118] 119 120 ... 166
1756  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: 302 valve setting with roller rockers on: March 09, 2013, 09:28:39 AM
Original was 1.5...        1.6 rockers happened in the aftermarket much much later...
1757  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: CRG t-shirt results on: March 09, 2013, 09:24:17 AM
GaryW
Huntsville, AL
XL
2 total  (1 each way)
1758  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 'EY' coil springs.. update on: March 09, 2013, 12:41:12 AM
Lynn,

I mic'ed them at 0.595 .. that was after bead blasting, so  I figured they lost 0.005 to 'rust' over the years.  *L*
My car is an RS with ZL-2 hood vinyl top.. custom interior.. rem mirror...   trying to recall the heavy options...  RS was the biggie I think?   my total went about 65-90 lbs over if I recall...
1759  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: Front Brake pads - 69 Z on: March 08, 2013, 12:52:21 PM
Thanks..  I might do that..  OR modify the new pads to look like the old... 
1760  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: undercoating on: March 08, 2013, 12:49:39 PM
JohnZ provided a great tip on an easy to use 'image reducer' recently.   I've been using it and it's very easy.   Go to
http://download.cnet.com/Light-Image-Resizer/3000-12511_4-10529104.html
and download it..  It's free.. and works great on single images or as many as you select at one time.
1761  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: original transverse muffler date codes? on: March 08, 2013, 12:47:42 PM
pics are pretty easy to do here, but  you have to realize no single image can be larger than 150 kb, and the totaly cannot be more than like 400 kb?   4 image limit I think but they would have to avg less than100 kb to do 4... 
1762  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969, which pinion snubber on: March 08, 2013, 11:10:25 AM
You might want to include 'build date' in that data, Lynn..  in case it changed during the year?
1763  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Exhaust System Configuration on 69Z'z on: March 07, 2013, 01:30:29 PM
Apparently that was the configuration at the latter part of the '69 model year, and is the configuration my car is supposed to be in, although I've never had the resonators on it.   Do you have an audio file of how it sounds?  Smiley    do you run headers or stock manifolds?  I'd love to hear how it sounds, as I have recently acquired good original resonators for my car.   I'm concerned they will make it *too quiet*.. Smiley
1764  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: undercoating on: March 07, 2013, 11:39:01 AM
Welcome jano..  there are several of us in *similar boats* re our Z's...    mine has been in storage since 1980, now going thru it to make it roadworthy and preserve it.. Smiley   I'm looking forward to hearing and seeing more about yours!
1765  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1968 special customized promotional car on: March 05, 2013, 09:45:24 PM
Why do you think it's a promotional Chevy car, if everything on it is standard or optional equipment?
1766  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Azure 1969 Z on: March 05, 2013, 03:34:13 PM
Unless one pulls the cover (or chunk, in the case of the older rears), and counts teeth, or reads the numbers written on the gears, the way to know your ratio is to check rotations of the driveshaft and tires, and there's not much difference in 4.10 and 4.11..  Smiley          4.10 has 41 teeth on the ring gear and 10 on the pinion, whereas 4.11's have 37 teeth on the ring and 9 on the pinion.
1767  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Camaro on Ebay on: March 04, 2013, 03:33:51 PM
The letter C in the axle code shows it is not a '69 Camaro rear, but a '70 Nova rear. The the '661 tranny case was not used until the '70 model year, or the late '69 production Camaros.  Should have a '660 Muncie case being an early built car.

FYI..  There's another thread concerning the use of the 'C' prefix (3 char codes) for late '69 Camaro rears as well...
1768  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Front Brake pads - 69 Z on: March 04, 2013, 03:12:09 PM
I'm reworking my front brakes.    I have rebuilt my calipers, and had the rotors surfaced.   I thought I should probably put new pads on at this point, since the *original* ones (I think they are actually pads I installed in the mid 70's and drove on for a couple of years), which are worn about 1/2 down, and the car has 'sat' for 33 yrs.

Alas!  When I started looking for replacement pads, all of them I've found are a *different configuration* than what was original on the car.   All of the ones I've found available now have added area for holes which the caliper mounting pins go thru (on the outboard pad).   They *look* totally different, although it seems they will work, and might even have some advantage over the original configuration.   A mfg photo showing the addition is attached.

Since I'm attempting to maintain the factory originality of the car, what should I do?   
1)  Use my existing pads, even though worn, as the car probably won't be driven very much?
2)  buy the available pads, and *remove* the additional metal from them before use?, or
3)  Do the judges overlook such changes?   
4)  Another option I've heard of, is to send the original pad metal backing to a 'brake rebuilder' who will rivet new pads to the old metal?   

PS.  I haven't yet found a source for option 4, but I've been told it's possible..

What say you fellas?
1769  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 'EY' coil springs.. update on: March 01, 2013, 12:29:16 AM
I talked to all the suppliers, even bought a couple of sets of springs as recommended.   None of them even came close to matching the appearance (number of coils,etc) so I was not going to iistall them...  now, if these springs don't make my car sit/ride right, then I might have to go wtih one of the others, but first I wanted to try with a matched appearance spring.   I'll update when I get some weight on my front end...
1770  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 'EY' coil springs.. update on: February 28, 2013, 09:18:22 PM
I was unable to find any springs which matched in appearance, coil wire thickness, and number of coils to the original EY springs..   I went to more trouble, more time, and more $$ in trying to match up the physical characteristics as well as the functional characteristics.   My original EY springs had 8-1/8 loops, and were ~0.60" wire size.   I haven't yet got the weight back on these springs to check static height, so that is my last question to be answered.
Pages: 1 ... 116 117 [118] 119 120 ... 166
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.127 seconds with 19 queries.