CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 19, 2014, 06:58:53 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.
97194 Posts in 11690 Topics by 4578 Members
Latest Member: ronhill
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10
121  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 Z/28 open element air cleaner lid on: February 16, 2012, 03:46:12 PM
I realize it's an older topic, but still it's not 100% clear to me.

The guy with the barn find Z/28 only has 8,000 miles on it.  It's hard to believe this car had it's air cleaner lid changed in the first 8,000 miles.

Here is a pic of his:

My 69Z had the same owner since 1974.  The former owner did very little on the car except let it rust.  Jerry M certified it as being in original survivor condition in need of restoration.  It has approx 60,000 miles on it.

Here are two pics of mine:

I would really hate to have it restored with the curved silkscreen and different text if that is not correct.  I wish I could be 100% certain of how it should be.
122  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Shock absorbers on: February 04, 2012, 08:31:55 AM
For my 69 Z/28 I am going with spiral shocks but after 6 months I am still looking for one of the front 477ís.  I have read a lot of postings that say the ride with the NOS spiral shocks are terrible and that repops arenít much better.

For my other 69 Camaro, I bought Edelbrock Classics from Summit.

Rear, Edelbrock EDL-34046, $46.13 each:

Front, Edelbrock EDL-33041:

Cost is unknown on the fronts because itís out of stock and I donít think their substitute shock is for Camaros.

123  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / 69 Starter Nose color on: February 03, 2012, 11:14:16 PM
Are 69 Starter noses supposed to be painted black? 

Specifically, # 1108367.  On HBC, there are two:

Dec 9 1968, HBC #1577

May 10 1968, HBC #1576

Which one is correct?
124  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 69 Camaro Horns on: February 03, 2012, 09:40:13 PM
Thanks Kevin!!!  I can stop doing futile searches for pictures on these horn numbers and just send them both out to be restored.

125  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / 69 Camaro Horns on: February 02, 2012, 03:49:00 PM
I think my 2nd week of January 69Z has the original horns but I am not 100% certain.  

The one marked 9000290 has two circles with an "H" inside each circle for high note.  One circle w/"H" is inside the horn and the other circle w/"H" is on the outside.

The one marked 9000289 has the two circles but does not have anything inside the circles.  Should there be a "L" inside the circles?

pictures of 9000289, date 8K1= 1968, Nov, 1st week:

pictures of 9000290, date 8C3 (blurry, but I think it's a C) = 1968, March, 3rd week

Can anyone with a 69 Camaro confirm if their Low note horn has an "L" on it?
126  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 69 Z28 valve cover hardware on: January 29, 2012, 08:43:47 AM
Got it.  No retainers.

Thanks guys for straightening me out on this!!!
127  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / 69 Z28 valve cover hardware on: January 28, 2012, 10:52:16 PM
For a 69 Z/28 built the 2nd week of January (don't know if that matters) what is the correct valve cover hardware?

I have done a lot of searches, but I am not sure if it is supposed to have retainers.

On the HBC website, they list a package for 69's with a 302 except aluminum covers: and these have retainers.  All Z/28's have a 302 with aluminum covers so I am not sure what is correct.

128  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Dash Panel Mystery on: January 24, 2012, 12:53:23 PM
I worked in a Camaro business from 1983-1997. We did a weekly GMPD order as many parts were still available during that time. GMPD regularly substituted parts. Heres's a few I remember:

'68 Z/28 rocker covers - sent chromed '69s
2 piece rotors - sent later 1 piece
'69 Camaro 396 emblem - sent '70 Nova emblem
'68-'69 rear spring anchor - sent '70 Camaro version w/sway bar bracket
12 bolt axle cover - sent '70 version with notch for bracket

Certain parts were never serviced, particularly plastic interior parts in colors other than black. "Paint to match" I guess.

Late model stuff was worse. They would supply a generic fender; you would have to cut brackets off the original and weld them yourself.

Careful buying "NOS"...

Ah.  Now that is clear!  Thanks!!!  I had been giving myself a headache trying to figure this out.
129  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Dash Panel Mystery on: January 24, 2012, 10:41:06 AM
Not true. The Nova dash does not have the two square cluster mounting holes next to the ash tray opening.

William, THANKS for the clarification.  However, I still am confused about 8716458 which is supposed to be the correct panel.  I have seen 3 cases where 8716458 panels in the original box do not match what is originally on the car.

Is the over the counter panel just not 100% visually correct but functionally A-OK?  Was the over the counter panel supposed to be modified?

130  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Dash Panel Mystery on: January 21, 2012, 08:35:24 PM
I could not find anything on the net on 8716458 being used on Novas and Camaros.  Is there any documentation on this?

I found a posting on where a guy had the exact same problem about 8 years ago.  Weird.

131  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Dash Panel Mystery on: January 21, 2012, 03:05:55 PM

Thanks COPO.

So both the 69 Camaro and the 70's Nova used the identical part number.  That is confusing!

Whoever ends up buying the EBay Nova one is going to be upset. 
132  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Dash Panel Mystery on: January 21, 2012, 01:04:53 PM
A few weeks ago I bought a sheet metal "PANEL, INSTRUMENT" part number: 8716458, group: 10.230

When it came in, it looked like a section was removed.  It did not match the original dash panel that was in the car.

It looked like this:

I became upset and returned the dash panel to the seller.

Now, I see another different NOS dash panel on EBay that looks identical to the one I returned

EBay Dash Panel

EBay auction:

My original dash panel looks like this:

Did the over the counter dash panels have that section removed for some reason???

133  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1111488 distributor on: January 18, 2012, 10:39:48 PM
Looks legit to me.

Jerry M restored my original 1111480 recently and here is a pic before restoration.

The 8 on the part number and the 8 on the date also don't match.

134  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: GM Heritage Center Documentation on: January 10, 2012, 12:45:18 PM
Great pictures Steve! 

It would be great if what the pictures show could be matched against the GM instructions.  Is it possible that the gray primer in step 4 went on over black primer in step 2?

135  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: GM Heritage Center Documentation on: January 09, 2012, 01:26:37 PM
I wonder if color pictures exist showing the underside on either the NOR or LOS assembly lines.

In John's terrific write-up, he has these two pictures:



#3    GM has this picture which is similar to picture #1 - Van Nyes (LOS) assembly line for 67 Camaros

has anyone ever seen a color picture that is similar to picture #2 ?
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10
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 0.091 seconds with 18 queries.