CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 22, 2014, 07:20:39 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.
104686 Posts in 12247 Topics by 4719 Members
Latest Member: Baconcks
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 64 65 [66] 67 68 ... 160
976  Orphans - documentation or VIN-stamped drivetrains - in search of the original cars / 1969 - Orphans / Re: 9N624309 302 shortblock on: November 27, 2013, 10:58:47 PM
This auction a few days ago listed the VIN incorrectly, which several of us recognized as being impossible, leading many to believe the block was likely a restamp.  I contacted the ebay lister, and obtained better photographs, and he determined the VIN was actually as he's posted it now (verified partially via the better photo he supplied to me), and also he sent a good pad photo, which shows a good stamping, and evidence of original broach marks, and I told him I believed the engine was proper and original.  Kurt verified the stamping also as original below.  I was very interested in this engine, due to it's low wear condition (std block, std crank as checked by a machine shop), AND it's proximity to my own car and engine (The engine was assembled 2 days before my own, and the car VIN appears to also be 2 days or so in front of my car).   If someone knows of the car this engine came from, it would be an outstanding purchase... and also great to reunite the parts.   Smiley   Although I could not verify the complete VIN from the photo supplied, the owner says he is certain now that he has the VIN correct and would guarantee it's accuracy if the car owner can be found.
977  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: clips and seal for RH side inner fender brace on: November 27, 2013, 10:52:20 PM
Yes, it's the splash shield; The AIM simply refers to both sides as 'brace assembly' to include the splash shields and necessary clips.  My car did have the driver side in place, but not the splash shield on the passenger side.    When I saw the following ebay auction the other day, it made me think I was missing something, and I also bid on this auction, but did not and it was sold to someone else (This one included the braces and shields on both sides).
http://www.ebay.com/itm/290987857632?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649

The AIM, and I indicated, was not very helpful, but it did reference both braces as 'assemblies' meaning more than one part each, as PN 3919135-6, Brace ASM -L. & RH.  in UPC 11-13, sheet B2, and on Sheet B1, it shows View B, and references a shield/clips on the passenger side (Seal pn 3949606, Clip pn 3921872, and several staples pn 9985029).  I do not have that passenger side seal/clips and I'd like to find one?
978  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: More pics of an old Z on: November 27, 2013, 01:38:16 PM
Thanks Kurt. 
That company appears to do a nice job for a decent price...  but being a 'hands on' car guy, I probably will do my own~ Smiley

George:  Thanks for the sample images.   When I began looking at the ION unit, I actually ordered one, then canceled it as I learned about several other inexpensive units, so now I'm in the 'evaluation' mode..   thanks again!! Smiley
979  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / clips and seal for RH side inner fender brace on: November 27, 2013, 11:08:29 AM
When I disassembled my front clip, I found my driver side inner fender brace still had the seals and clips installed, but on the passenger side, the seal/clips were missing (maybe from a body shop repair early in it's life?)..  Does anyone have an extra original one for the RH side?  The brace was there, but not the seal with clips.  Does anyone reproduce the seals and clips?   Per the AIM, the part numbers called out for each is for a 'brace assembly', implying that the brace with the seals/clips is a single PN, but the only repros I've found have been for the brace only..  no seals or clips.   Any information on this part is appreciated..
980  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Fuel Pump Stampings on: November 27, 2013, 10:58:40 AM
Sorry to be dense.. *L*...  I could have figured that one out, even under anesthetic...  Smiley

I think I need one stamped 'HI 40669'..    Could one of you fellas with a pile of those in a box somewhere give me a buzz? *G*

Dang.. Did I screw up that again?    What is Aug or Sept 1969?    Hi and II ??   Smiley
981  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: What is the breakdown of 4 speed transmision types in 1969 Z/28's? on: November 27, 2013, 08:48:37 AM
Nope.. Z28s are *athletes*...   Haven't you ever heard athletes on TV tell you they are giving 105% or more?  Smiley
982  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: What is the breakdown of 4 speed transmision types in 1969 Z/28's? on: November 26, 2013, 07:48:09 PM
I could guess..  Smiley     

65% M20,  35% M21, and 5% M22   .... (purely a guess based on the ones I've seen and knew about, including many back in '69). 

I suspect that if a Z28 was 'dealership/factory specified', it was M20.   If it was special ordered, then MOST buyers went with the M21, and a few with the M22 (who knew about it, planned some HD racing and wanted to spend the extra $).   The 'close ratio' 4-speed was the term you 'heard' from those ordering a new Z28 back then; it was sorta a buzz word, like 'high lift' racing cam!  Smiley   I doubt all of them really knew the difference in how their car was going to drive.  By 1969, there were a lot of people ordering new Z28's who weren't not 'racing inspired'. 
983  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Sand blasting... Chassis on: November 26, 2013, 07:40:24 PM
I too do my own sandblasting, using a TIP 100 lbs pressure unit and a large commercial compressor, 3/4" air hose, and pressure set to 85-95 psi, and keep the spot moving, esp on sheet metal.   I've never warped my parts, but I have seen cars 'commercially' blasted by people not accustomed to 'autos', that did warp every panel on the car (it takes more pressure and more concentrated blasting' than I choose to do!   And even on totally stripped down  body hulls and frame components, the sand STILL GETS everywhere.. and takes time to clean out of the nooks and crannies!   I also have a TIP bead blasting cabinet for smaller parts, where I use either glass bead, or walnut shell particles, and I have used the Metal Rescue type of chemicals? which work well on small clean items.

The process and 'Safest Rust Remover' suggested by Charley seems a viable altenative to stripping rust of even larger items, but I suspect it's like the Metal Rescue chemicals we've all used for rust stripping smaller parts.  With an assembled car, as he's proposed, I'd be concerned about it getting into nooks, crevices, etc..  even if it's 'safe'...?   I might try that sometime though, as the photo results sure looked good *S*
984  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Fuel Pump Stampings on: November 26, 2013, 07:31:08 PM
Sorry to be dense.. *L*...  I could have figured that one out, even under anesthetic...  Smiley

I think I need one stamped 'HI 40669'..    Could one of you fellas with a pile of those in a box somewhere give me a buzz? *G*
985  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Fuel Pump Stampings on: November 26, 2013, 03:11:04 PM
so what is the application code for the Z28?  Smiley
986  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Sand blasting... Chassis on: November 26, 2013, 12:57:47 PM
I thought soda blasting wasn't supposed to take down rust.
Little surface rust when its used with water. If its pretty rusty then use sand or something more aggressive than soda. My buddy has a professional blaster and he blasts high end cars! Ferraris, Porsche, Rolls Royce, Corvettes, etc. The soda is so gentle but works great, especially those fiberglass bodies.

Yes, on *fiberglass*, either soda or chemical is preferred to remove paint (but fiberglass doesn't rust).. Smiley   Rust on steel is totally different, and I would not use soda solutions..
987  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: rear axel code chart on: November 25, 2013, 04:58:55 PM
I had to hunt down my 'Fact Book' to check out the BE info from McNeish.   I'd read that before, but quickly since it doesn't relate to my car.   It seems that the predominant difference in the BE posi unit was the larger (and fewer) teeth in the spider/axle gear set, with the same posi clutches, but with different posi springs with slightly higher spring pressure (75 vs 50 psi).   I suspect that in turns, the BE rear makes a bit more noise in the rear than the standard rear, due to the fewer number of spider teeth, has that been noted previously?   In reading that section again, I noted a small error in Jerry's book, when he says the change  in the differential housing from the .3894860NF to the 3989341NF pn occurred in September'69.   The differential in my mid Sept '69 Z28 has the 341 housing assembly dated '0829', so that change occurred earlier than stated.

Is the BE (4.10 gear set) the only such COPO differential?   The differential section in Jerry's book also states there were higher numbered gear sets (4.56 nd .488) available in 1969 via COPO/9511, but the implication is that these rears had the standard Posi setup, since the BE was the only one singled out for the larger spider/axle gear differences??

Note: I just checked my Hooper book *69 Camaro Reference Book*, and on page 362 he lists the DT rear (4.56) with a similar note (with heat treared ring and pinion and spider gears), but notes the DT as being for COPO 9560/9561 HD, and the BE for COPO ZL-1 HD.   Is all of this information accurate?
988  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: More pics of an old Z on: November 25, 2013, 03:50:16 PM
George,  Thanks.. 
via Amazon, new ones are a little less than $100, with almost new used ones about half of that..  I'm considering ordering one of them.   Can you post a couple of good example photos that you've digitized from a slide?  Smiley
989  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: rear axel code chart on: November 25, 2013, 12:14:31 PM
Nope; a BE axle has a different posi unit in addition to the HD ring & pinion.

Does the BE axle include the HD posi unit that was used in the 'Service Duty' disk brake differentials?   That one had more plates, and higher spring pressures than the standard 12 bold posi unit.  I didn't know there was a third one, OR that the HD unit was put into passenger car rears.  IS the BE unit the only one having such a Posi unit?  If you or anyone have more information on the whys/wherefores of this differential, I think it would be very interesting reading for us all.
990  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: First attempt at Zinc Plating on: November 25, 2013, 10:50:49 AM
Good response!   Grin  Roll Eyes
Pages: 1 ... 64 65 [66] 67 68 ... 160
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 0.103 seconds with 18 queries.