CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 01, 2015, 02:46:22 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.
109371 Posts in 12660 Topics by 4866 Members
Latest Member: jamejia1967
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 128 129 [130] 131 132 ... 179
1936  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 'EY' coil springs.. update on: March 15, 2013, 06:59:01 AM
I find it very difficult to believe that removing/reinstalling the same springs would make the car sit higher.   
1937  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Starter Date Codes and 'lead' on car assembly on: March 14, 2013, 03:13:23 PM
Can someone please confirm the following for me?

1.  Is 'J' the month code on a starter motor?   It's a stamped code, so I believe the 'I' is skipped and J is the September code...
2.  If 9 days before car assembly too close for a starter motor date?
1938  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 68 AIM Page 151 #3857706 on: March 14, 2013, 02:55:57 PM
I don't have a solution for you Lynn, but I did go down and photograph the original clip on my subframe.   
When I was cleaning the subframe for recoating, I decided not to remove this clip for fear of destroying it.  I know it has never been replaced on my 09C (Sept '69) Z28.   It is either 'push in', or the plug portion is threaded, since there's no screw retaining it.
1939  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 67-Distributor Fake or Real.... learn & stop this crap on: March 14, 2013, 02:25:47 PM
Anyone that believes they know better, can ask a pointed question, without accusation, which informs the uninformed, and causes the seller to answer the question if he wants bidders...
1940  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 68 z fuel pump gph on: March 13, 2013, 11:54:12 PM
if that's a mechanical fuel pump, I think you'd need a special test device to run it at variable 'engine' speeds... in order to measure it's capability.  Smiley
1941  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Mild Modifications / Re: 1969 350 RS header recommendations on: March 13, 2013, 02:07:29 PM
Good tips Jano.. Smiley
1942  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: PCV question on: March 12, 2013, 10:55:09 PM
69Z28 wrote:  "I suppose there is no real way of checking the values of the PCV is there? I have several used ones I picked up through the years. As long as the valve sucks in it is working, correct?"

if it shakes it works...   cleaning in a solvent or gasoline will 'make them like new'..  Smiley

1943  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: A question for the paint system experts on: March 12, 2013, 11:14:56 AM
I'm old enough to remember how they looked *new*.. and that is what I like..   BC/CC is WAY too 'plastic-iky' looking for me.. Smiley    Fortunately, my car has mostly original paint but there is a bit of touch I need to do, and the hood needs to be repainted, which I wil do in lacquer.   If I were to repaint the total car, I'd use single stage and sand/rub/buff it to a lacquer like finish... (that's perfection in my eyes).. Smiley
1944  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 'EY' coil springs.. update on: March 12, 2013, 09:43:20 AM
I have the suspension back together; had to sit the engine/trans in place to compress the springs sufficently to hook up the ball joints.   Just for kicks (and an early indication of where these springs are going to sit), I took it off the jack stands and put it on the tires yesterday.   As you can see from the photo, there are still a LOT of things not installed, so hopefully the front will settle down another inch or so.   I measured the height of the bottom of rocker at the front and at the rear and got 10-3/8" and 9-3/8" respectively. The designed in load rate for the springs are 370 lbs/in.    I probably need for the missing parts on the front to total 450-500 lbs to get the height where I want it.   The rear should also go down a bit with gas in the tank and spare/jack/etc in the trunk.   The car is an RS with cowl hood and dhrome/steel bumper.   the Photo shows all the stuff that's missing still off the front end.   If anyone has a feel for how much it all weighs, I'd love to hear it.  Smiley
1945  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: A question for the paint system experts on: March 11, 2013, 09:14:32 PM
From 1957 thru the late 70's (at least) Chevrolet painted their cars acrylic lacquer.  Prior to '57, they used an even softer nitrocellulose lacquer.   No clear coats were used over this paint in the factory, but all the cars received buffing after painit.   You can still purchase acrylic lacquers in some places I believe although it's said that the formulations are different than in '69?   If your car were not metallic, you could use a single stage urethane, and sand/buff it, and achieve a finish similar to lacquer, but it would be a much better paint job.   It's said that metallic colors are more difficult to achieve an even metallic finish using single stage?
1946  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: original transverse muffler date codes? on: March 11, 2013, 08:57:50 PM
OK..  I checked again.   The 69 Camaro transverse muffler I bought from the dealership in '76 for my Z28 has a 'W' on it.   The Resonators also bought around the same time, have an 'A' on them.  See photo attached (since these parts are off the car currently).
1947  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Thank you 69Z28-RS on: March 11, 2013, 04:40:07 PM
Yes, that is a very nice '68!  Smiley   ..  take lots of pix and share.. Smiley

PS.  The Thanks should go to CRG..  Smiley     I only passed along the Light Image Resizer info that JohnZ posted earlier and that I took advantage of.  I liked it and I'm glad you do too.  Passing along tips and info is part of what of what CRG  is all about. Smiley
1948  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Original Muncie bolts - head markings info on: March 11, 2013, 09:35:26 AM
seems pretty unusual to me to have *incorrect* side cover bolts...?  Are you sure they are incorrect?  Did you piece the trans together from parts?
1949  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: original transverse muffler date codes? on: March 10, 2013, 03:39:27 PM
I can't say about the factory installed muffler, but the one I bought over the counter at the local Chevy dealer in 1976 has a 'W' on the side.
1950  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969, which pinion snubber on: March 10, 2013, 11:25:11 AM
Mine isn't bolted on, so it must be what you're calling the 'push in' type?
Push in type
NOR 09C (Sep 69)
12 bolt  BU 3.73 Posi
Z28 w/M20
Pages: 1 ... 128 129 [130] 131 132 ... 179
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 0.095 seconds with 19 queries.