CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 19, 2015, 12:41:55 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.
112111 Posts in 12879 Topics by 4931 Members
Latest Member: Euclid
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 32
376  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1968 Front Spoiler! on: January 29, 2010, 11:43:28 PM
I learn something new every day!  And have to replace my incorrect parts, sell them, and try to survive until I find the next thing I purchased incorrectly... :-P  Though, I do believe that back when I purchased half this stuff, there were few options.  Plus, I don't think there was this wealth of knowledge.  Or the internet... heh heh
That is so true.....Back when I first got the car I tried to find a replacement spoiler and the only thing I could find was the one with the braces.  Now, finally, the original looking first design is available.  And yes back then I didn't know there was more than one design.  Learn new things every day.
377  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1968 Front Spoiler! on: January 29, 2010, 01:31:39 PM
After reading these trhead on the 68 spoiler, I'm thinking for the last 33 years I've had the late design on the 02E car. Who has the most correct early design on the market?
Thanks, Joe
Joe.....Here are a couple that I found...there are a lot of vendors advertising the early spoiler, and even giving the early part number, but when you look at them they don't look like the original early spoiler. These three do look like the original:  (then type 3916673 in the search box)  
378  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1968 Front Spoiler! on: January 27, 2010, 08:57:42 PM step forward and two steps back.  There is a hole in the subframe but it is only a 1/4" and it is centered......don't know if it is there for a center brace....would have thought it would have been larger if it was, more like a 5/16".  That smaller hole got me to thinking again so I called the original owner of the car and asked him if he remembered the spoiler on the car and what it looked like.  He said that for sure it didn't have any braces on it and that it hung down about 5 " and it had a rough texture.  Well to me that sounds like the first design I guess I am back to getting the first design unless someone comes up with any new evidence.

Again....thanks for every ones input.
379  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1968 Front Spoiler! on: January 26, 2010, 08:45:47 PM
Thanks Ken......Yeah I found the hole on the subframe and that is what got me to thinking about which one is correct.  I did find a sentence in the CRG info on spoilers that stated the change in the production line to the later spoiler might have occurred in may '68...So that would place my 07C car in the later category.  I am the second owner and when I purchased the car in '72 the spoiler was already gone so I am pretty sure the hole in the subframe was put there by the factory.  Have you noticed the difference in spoilers on any of your '68 restorations?

Thanks again for your input......BTW....I am considering the prospect of having someone restore my Z28.....would you be interested?  If so, let me know and I will give you a call.

Jerry G.
380  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Cowl Tag vs Vin # on: January 26, 2010, 01:36:17 PM
The vin number is unreadable, ebay # 200432176656, search 68 302, look at the block assembly date???
Looks like there is an 18N and then it looks like the rest of the number runs into a rust spot.  My original 302 block with a date of  F138 does not look like that block does not have the HB on the front and it doesn't have the two big hole plugs under the timing cover...don't know what difference that makes.
381  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 3917291 sbc heads 2.02's or 1.94's on: January 24, 2010, 12:10:19 AM
The castings are the same.  The combustion chamber on the 2.02 heads have some machine work done to unshroud the intake valve.  It is fairly easy to have the 1.94 heads machined for the 2.02 valves and be correct.  A lot of the time the original 2.02 valve heads have had a valve job or more and the seats are deeper in the head so a rebuilt 1.94 is more desireable.
X2 on this idea....I replaced the heads on my Z28 with a good used set of 291's with the 1.94/1.50 valves.....even found the right cast dates.  Had the machinist  replace the old valves with new 2.02/1.60 valves and had him to unshroud the intakes.  Those heads looked like new ones when I got them back.
382  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Lower alternator bracket question on: January 22, 2010, 10:35:19 PM
My original 1968 Z28 valve covers are 2.5" tall with the cover laying flat on workbench and no gasket.  Measure your valve covers and see what the read.
383  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1968 Front Spoiler! on: January 22, 2010, 05:23:29 PM
I'll go back and search again....thanks for advising me.
384  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Lower alternator bracket question on: January 22, 2010, 01:01:17 PM
Got any pictures of the lower bracket? How about pics of the alternator also.
385  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1968 Front Spoiler! on: January 21, 2010, 09:22:55 PM
Thanks.....had already read that one but it didn't mention anything about the production dates.  Just want to make sure that I get the one that would apply to my car build date.....or if it makes no difference then I'll get the later model.  Looks like the later one is heavier and it uses the braces so that it would probably hold up better....and it is usually cheaper.

Thanks again....
386  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / 1968 Front Spoiler! on: January 20, 2010, 11:29:53 PM
I know there were two front spoilers for the 1968, ( 3916673-The first one and I understand that it was just screwed to the valance panel ) and ( 3943249-The second one and I understand that it was supposed to use the braces 3943253 & 3943251 ).  My 1968 Z28, 07C, has the spoiler option ( D80) but didn't have the spoiler when I bought it,  but upon removing the valance panel from the front end I noticed that the screws that mounted the spoiler and a small piece of the plastic under the screws from the old spoiler remained.  I did not find any braces attached so I am presuming that it either had the first design spoiler or it had the second design and when the original spoiler departed that the first owner removed the braces.  I am about to purchase a new spoiler and  I want to get the right one that matches the  date of the car.

So....does anyone know when the first design was deleted and the second design was added to the production line, or even if the second design was ever added to the production line and was only available as a service part?  Also, are both of the spoilers classified as original to the car or is the first one, only, original to the car?

Any pictures showing both of the spoilers would be greatly appreciated.....just to make sure I get the right one.

Thanks in advance for any advice given....
387  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 30 30 cam on: January 19, 2010, 10:02:36 PM
If you are referring to a cam that is exactly equivalent to the old 30/30......I bought the Comp Cams kit #CL12-107-3.  This is a kit that includes the cam and lifters.  It has been highly recommended in the past.
388  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1967 302 fuel pump on: January 19, 2010, 05:08:22 PM
is the correct fuel pump # 40503 for the 67 302 ? Or is there a different one. Huh

Ron -

My '69 Chevrolet P&A list type 40524 (GM part #6416886) as the correct fuel pump for the '67 302.

389  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 302 Cu. In. Crate Motor Availability? on: December 26, 2009, 11:14:57 AM
Easy to build....Yes.   My main difficulty was finding the right pistons.
390  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Why is there some Z28's with 3908326 Rear Proportioning Valves and Some without on: December 23, 2009, 01:01:50 PM
No valve.....see signature for vehicle.
Pages: 1 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 32
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 0.104 seconds with 18 queries.