CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 20, 2014, 07:16:57 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.
107551 Posts in 12507 Topics by 4812 Members
Latest Member: oldbop88
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 29
376  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: GM Mark of Excellence Decal on: July 20, 2009, 09:16:08 AM
You should visit the AIM to see which decals were included and where they go. If it isn't shown there, it wasn't supposed to be installed there.

LOTS of improperly restored cars out there that show the GM decals wrong. I also own a Camaro reference book with lots of improperly restored car pictures in it so even there you need to use the AIM to get it 100% right.

-Mark.
377  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Anyone run the LT1 (178) cam in their DZ302??? on: July 18, 2009, 04:45:57 PM
I tried the 30-30 both with cast iron manifold and with 1-3/4" headers. The rest of the exhaust was factory style chambered exhaust so it was not the best. Not real thrilled with the results either way.

The car runs a LOT better for me now that I switched to the Crane F-278. The opening and closing points are almost identical to the LT-1 cam BUT the lift is higher so it is like an LT-1 grind with a little bit more. VERY nice improvement in the low end and it still pulls hard at higher RPM. I doubt it leaves much on the table. I have no plans to swap it again any time soon. I guess Crane is no longer in the business but maybe you could have one ground with the same specs?

I think John H. runs the LT-1 cam in his 302. Maybe he will have something to add.

-Mark.
378  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Info for rebuilding a 1969 Muncie M21 on: July 16, 2009, 01:55:04 PM
http://www.5speeds.com/

There is a good link above for parts and info. I own the book and it is pretty good. Paul also sells a video that is supposed to be a great reference.

The gear stack can be pressed off. Some people will drop the mainshaft on a piece of plywood using inertia to dislodge the gears but that seems a bit too crude for my taste.

I have never reskined a tranny case but Jerry has done a set of valve covers for me. Reskinning looks great but you can't do it yourself. For a tranny I would probably just use simple green and a scrub brush.

You might have a magnet in the bottom of your case. It would be there to catch steel chips from gear teeth etc.

Hope this helps,

-Mark.
379  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Help with 302 MO block repair on: July 13, 2009, 03:11:20 PM
Get a different block. This one you have is not original to your car so there isn't any sensible reason to take expensive drastic measures to save it. Nobody really cares unless it is the block it was born with.

-Mark.
380  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: what if on: July 10, 2009, 06:36:42 AM
We frame-offed a 307 car 1.5-2 years ago.  Back to factory specs aside from a PDB conversion that was done prior (would prefer an OE setup) and a set of Cragars (owner's preference).  Flat hood, no stripes, no spoilers.

From a strictly financial stanpoint, and whether or not you'll get your money back out of it when it comes time to sell, might not be the best choice.  That wasn't the issue with the one we did, it carries heavy sentimental value.

But I dig the car.  One, Azure is beautiful.  Secondly, it's very unique.


Did I see that car at Toad Suck Daze? I swear I  have seen it before. The brake booster and 307 was the tip off for me. You don't see restored 307's too often. The car looks even better in person than it does here and it looks great here. I don't remember the Cragars but they may have been on there.

Great Job - Pretty car. Smiley

-Mark.
381  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Early Production 1969 on: July 06, 2009, 12:53:34 PM
It has been messed with. VIN rivets are not OE.
I saw that but did not comment. The hidden VIN derivative stamps migt not match the VIN tag. If the tags were swapped, you have to ask the question "why"? It wasn't a HP car in the first place so there must be another reason. If the tag and the hidden stamps do match the owner may have planned to change the rusty dash panel before giving up on the project.

-Mark.
382  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: what if on: July 06, 2009, 07:33:56 AM
Restoring that car is a labor of love not a sound financial investment. You do it because you want to spend your money on it as a hobby. It will cost you more than it will sell for.

-Mark.
383  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: M20 poping out of gear? on: July 03, 2009, 02:33:20 AM
You can try adjusting the shifter but I would be looking for a worn 3-4 slider (part of the synchronizer assembly). The tiny clutch teeth on the perimeter of the gear fit inside the slider grooves and will get worn open after many miles. This can cause the tranny to pop out of gear when you get on and off the gas. It might be something else in the front bearing or input gear/mainshaft rollers but either way it is time to overhaul the tranny and replace the worn parts.

-Mark.
384  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 1969 camaro 3927184 intake on: June 28, 2009, 08:41:35 AM
Based on the date it would probably be service replacement manifold. It would apply to a variety of applications.

Fill tubes can be added at any time. The '69 Z/28 manifold had a soft plug where the fill tube would have been installed but they never used the hole for anything.

-Mark.
385  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 1969 Gas Tank on: June 27, 2009, 06:16:36 AM
the GM tanks will probably be pretty well beat up if you can find one. They were shipped/stocked loose without any box or packaging for all those years. They probably cost a bunch too. I went repro and they look and fit great. The functional quality of the repro is excellent. I can not say either way if the repro is 100% correct or not but I really like it.

-Mark.
386  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: Timing in the distributor on: June 26, 2009, 09:29:03 AM
This is usualy a semantic discussion whe  ever it comes up. The best answer includes all the ignition advance information or else somebody will get confused every time. Roll Eyes

If you include initial advance plus all the centrifugal plus all the vacuum advance it should usualy add up to around 52 degrees for our old school wedge head SBC's.  Grin This would be at a high rpm cruise situation. Like driving down the highway and not under any additional load.

More advance than that is typicaly too much, and less than that may leave efficency (power) on the table.

If you want to address wide open throttle ignition advance, you do not count the vacuum advance in that calculation. Vacuum advance does not function with your foot to the floor so it does not add anything to the equation. The rule of thumb for that sum of initial plus all the centrifugal is about 36 degrees. That is the number to shoot for.

This "36 degrees" is the field you play in when you are trying to pin down the curve for high preformance, improve the idle, and have a good transition from idle to part throttle . The 2 components of this "36 degrees" are initial setting plus all of the available centrifugal advance. If your car likes it when you give it a higher initial setting, then you can increase the inital setting BUT you would want to decrese the available centrfugal advance available in the distributor centrifugal advance menchaniaism. The goal is to keep the sum of your initial plus all the available centrifugal advance equal to about 36 degrees. One goes up, the other needs to come down. You either hurt power or hurt the engine with more or less than 36.

If you follow the math you will see that the vacuum advance mechanisim is probably best if it provides about 16 degrees of advance at cruise. It just ends up that way. 36 + 16 = 52   Smiley

Typicaly you may find your car likes maybe 12 degrees initial advance and a centrifugal with about 24 degrees available in it. That works as a baseline for a performance ignition curve for many applications. You may need less initial and more centrifugal but the sum should remain close to 36. Bigger cams may enjoy even more initial advance. You would have to play with it to get it perfect.

Hope this helps somebody.

-Mark.
387  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: sealing compound on: June 25, 2009, 03:10:16 PM
It was very close to the gray 3M Dum Dum but it had a string in it, presumably to help with handling the stuff. You can use the 3M strip caulk in a box to be very close to original minus the string. Plumbers putty works well too.  Smiley

-Mark.
388  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Mild Modifications / Re: Clutch won't disengage on: June 24, 2009, 02:37:35 PM
Yes I can see the markings on the disc.  I have decided that I am going to try the GM fork(3892632) which is shorter and more angler.

Thanks
-Jon

Jon,
If you can see the disk markings on the disk while the pressure plate is installed then that is the problem. The "flywheel side" sticker goes tward the flywheel so you could not see it with the pressure plate installed. If that is all that is wrong it is an easy fix.



-Mark.
389  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Mild Modifications / Re: Clutch won't disengage on: June 24, 2009, 11:15:43 AM
The clutch disc is in the right way (marked flywheel side), and centered.  I wonder if the fork is right.  Mine is the 14066235, but somebody mentioned the 3892632 is the one I need.  Who knows??


Can you see the marking/sticker through the pressure plate fingers while it is bolted together? You mentioned the "flywheel side" markings so that makes me ask. Sorry if that seems to be a strange question but I want to help rule out the possibilities.  It may have been marked wrong? The symptoms are pointing right at the disk or the pressure plate. The other possibilties include some lost motion in the linkage.

I once had to remove and replace the tranny and clutch 3 times in one day. The parts looked fine on the bench but the clutch would not release when installed. The final diagnosis was discovered when the counterman and myself assembled the flywheel to the clutch assy on the bench. The pressure plate fingers were warped but this was not visualy obvious when you looked at the parts just sitting there loose. We could see the warped fingers problem when we assembled them together but when apart the PP fingers looked perfectly straight. A replacement clutch was the solution.

-Mark.
390  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Mild Modifications / Re: Clutch won't disengage on: June 23, 2009, 05:42:26 AM
The 621 is fine. They were used on 350's as well as BB's so that should not be an issue. The fork needs to be right but so does the bellcrank.

I suspect your disk is in backwards. The disk spring hub is rubbing on the heads of the flywheel bolts and the extra "thickness" causes the pressure plate fingers to be already partially depressed due to the disk interfearance. Rip it all back out and verify the disk is installed properly. If this is the case, it would explain the adjustment rod being all the way out. I know that is not good news but if this is the case, it is better to know now.

William - the Z/28 used the smaller "403" setup and all the 327's did too. The 350's are a mixed bag in general with some using the "621" bellhousing and some using the "403" smaller bellhousing setup.
Pages: 1 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 29
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 0.08 seconds with 18 queries.