Messages

646

Restoration / Re: Seat foam and springs.

« on: August 26, 2011, 03:53:28 PM »

I had my black/houndstooth buckets recovered and found the PUI covers were less than satisfactory in workmanship. The seams were too crooked to be fit properly by the interior shop. I ended up asking them to use some of the PUI cover pieces and some of the original GM pieces to get a satisfactory fit. The foam I used was the more expensive style with the wires moulded inside but I can't remember the vendor. The foam was VERY thick - maybe a little too thick?

Al Knoch has a very good reputation on seat covers and he is the guy I would buy from next time I need covers or foam. I wish I had bought from him the first time.

-Mark.

647

Maintenance / Re: I need some help!

« on: August 24, 2011, 01:41:14 AM »

You may have accidentally set the points when it was off the high spot on the point cam. Can you close the gap a bit and get them to make contact? You want to set them to .019" off the highest point on the point cam. You can fine tune it with a meter once you have it running.

If you mistakenly set the gap on a low spot on the cam, the points may never close and you will not get a spark. Have a friend crank the motor while you watch the points with the cap off and coil grounded. You want to see the points make contact if they are close enough to run at all.

-Mark.

648

Originality / Re: 1969 Z28 Dashboard Switch- what is it for?

« on: August 19, 2011, 09:11:25 PM »

See the AIM for UPC "C50". That is a good reference

-Mark.

649

Originality / Re: 1969 Z28 Dashboard Switch- what is it for?

« on: August 19, 2011, 02:30:06 PM »

Power convertible top. ;~)

-Mark.

650

Maintenance / Re: HELP!! Starter problems

« on: August 10, 2011, 07:44:58 AM »

Are your 2 starter bolts original GM?  They need to be.  Is the brace in place?

How much gear clearance do you have?

651

Originality / Re: 69 Camaro front fenders, Nos VRS. after market

« on: August 09, 2011, 08:12:38 AM »

Ed,
I put a lot of replacement sheet metal on my '69 and most of it was good, some was just OK and a few pieces were just trash.
If I were in your shoes I would be weighing the option of paying up for NOS or even some good used pieces before going to repro. Some cars are worth the extra expense. Not all cars need it but the good cars need good parts IMO. Produced on GM tooling means there is a chance it will fit better but not allways. The thinner metal repros are made from high strength steel and are pretty good for driver cars.  Nothing else will fit and look 100% like GM but original GM parts. If you can save any of the the original stuff - DO IT!!

-Mark.

652

General Discussion / Re: camaro chambered exhaust

« on: August 08, 2011, 10:42:15 PM »

The system was standard on all Z/28, L34, L78, and L89 untill Nov 25th, '68

Not quite. It was only standard until August 25th, 1968. After that it was optional until May 19th, 1969, and the official Chevrolet records indicate only 1526 cars came with ROP NC8.

More info HERE.

Ed

Mark you stated November for Z28 and Ed said August. Was the system standard on Z/28 til November but the Big Block cars got cut off in August? I don't have either car but I thought it interesting they stopped so much earlier on the big blocks.

Both Chevelle SS and Camaro BB & Z/28 had the standard chambered exhaust system changed to regular duals on November 25th, '68. After that, the system became available as a separate regular production option NC-8. 

653

Originality / Re: 69 Camaro front fenders, Nos VRS. after market

« on: August 08, 2011, 08:02:49 PM »

The repros I have seen are very thin metal.

-Mark.

654

General Discussion / Re: camaro chambered exhaust

« on: August 08, 2011, 06:32:22 PM »

The system was standard on all Z/28, L34, L78, and L89 untill Nov 25th, '68

Not quite. It was only standard until August 25th, 1968. After that it was optional until May 19th, 1969, and the official Chevrolet records indicate only 1526 cars came with ROP NC8.

More info HERE.


Ed

I know about that chart but it does not take into account any option that was part of another performance package. All SS's or Z/28's built during the time frame would have chambered exhaust as part of that package and it would not be counted in that RPO chart that CRG put together. Chambered exhaust was available but not allways an RPO by itself untill after it was made optional on high performace models (a separate individual RPO).

-Mark.

655

General Discussion / Re: camaro chambered exhaust

« on: August 08, 2011, 02:12:25 AM »

Mark,
That "1526" number is too low. The system was standard on all Z/28, L34, L78, and L89 untill Nov 25th, '68. Still available as an option untill May 19th '69 so that "1526" number could not include all of them. That number may be only the ones that were ordered as "RPO NC8" from Nov to May but that is only my guess. It wasn't an RPO before the cut off.

My car still has about 25% of my original GM hangars back there holdomg up a repro chambered exhaust.  I know it is pretty restrictive but since the car came with it originally, I want to run it for the historical purposes.

-Mark.

656

Restoration / Re: Muncie rebuild - need info for which MFG to go with

« on: August 01, 2011, 02:17:42 PM »

Paul at 5speeds.com is the guy I use.  He has all the "better" parts and tools for these Muncies.  Be sure to ask him for the correct pilot bushing while you are at it. It seems all you can find these days are the "wrong" ones. The "right" ones (non-magnetic) are getting hard to find from local sources.  Paul has written books and sells videos on transmissions and rebuilding them.  I just finished my M-21 myself and it came out perfect.

www.5speeds.com

-Mark.

657

Originality / Re: 1967 Small Journal 350

« on: July 28, 2011, 12:15:27 PM »

You could have been handed main bearings for a 400 SBC on accident when you got the rebuild kit.  Those would have been impossible to install on a 350 block/crank.  Without the original block, crank and original bearig shells "in hand", this discussion is not going to go very far. Clearly a 350 with 327 main bearings would be contrary to accepted "normative practice". 

-Mark.

658

General Discussion / Re: Opinons on tires and wheels for my Camaro

« on: July 25, 2011, 10:32:19 AM »

These are allways good. I have a set of these and a set of rallys to swap when I am in the mood.



-Mark.

659

Mild Modifications / Re: Tranny Swap Issues

« on: July 22, 2011, 12:02:04 PM »

Mike,
One last thing to verify - Check the tailhousing casting number. It should be the 3857584 that fits the 27 spline output shaft and 5 threadded holes where the shifter attaches. 1970 and up used a different tail housing with only 3 shifter mounting holes (totaly different hole pattern) and a bigger output shaft. If it is the right '69 and earlier casting number on the tailhousing you want the '69 Camaro Hurst Competition Plus kit and it should all go together fine. That is the only kit that will work.

Hurst used to have separate install kits for BB and SB but that has changed recently. The original '69 Camaro kit required customers to re-use the original application specific GM shifter mounting bracket. Most other applications used a Hurst supplied universal bracket. At some point in time Hurst began including a 2-piece shifter mounting bracket assembly in the '69 Camaro kits. I think I have one of those 2-piece brackets out in my spare parts bin. It should be interesting to see what they supply these days because it looks like they cover BB and SB in the same kit.

-Mark.

660

General Discussion / Re: Transmission Reverse Lockout

« on: July 22, 2011, 11:39:37 AM »

UPC 7 in the assembly manual shows the back drive linkage to prevent starting the car without being in Reverse. I am not sure that is what you are asking. The shifter has a click detent for reverse but no "Reverse Lockout".

-Mark.