Messages

181

Originality / Re: '69 distribution block color

« on: April 19, 2016, 05:27:36 PM »

So what is the correct color for the distribution block?   Some here have suggested 60% gloss black while I conclude others are suggesting natural cast finish.

My master cylinder was clearly black, but it was inconclusive to what colors the distribution block and prop value were.

182

Decoding/Numbers / Re: Voltage Regulator Date vs Car Build Date

« on: April 09, 2016, 04:49:05 PM »

Just checked the date on mine - 9C for a 04B Van Nuys builts Z.   Pretty sure it's original...

183

General Discussion / Re: CRG Shifter Report

« on: April 03, 2016, 12:28:46 AM »

Great job Martin and Kurt - another treasure trove of information!   Much appreciated. 

184

Originality / Re: Speedo Clip - Original?

« on: March 31, 2016, 04:36:38 PM »

X2 to what Dave just stated. Hans, the 2nd picture is for sure what was used on all cars I've noted but that does not rule out at the factory a gas line clip was used for some reason. I worked 40 years in manufacturing and in assembly a lot of things happen from time to time. The good news is what is normally seen you have 100% correct.....

Yep.   I'll go with what's correct.   Now gotta go find a couple of those correct clips.  The reproductions I purchased are not correct...ugh.

185

Originality / Re: Speedo Clip - Original?

« on: March 30, 2016, 05:03:24 PM »

I originally discounted the clip as an aftermarket add as well.  It is a metal clip.     The only thing that got me thinking is that the lower hole in the tunnel is smaller than the other two holes (on the firewall where the original clip is and the second hole near the top of the tunnel).   It also clearly used a screw to secure the clip as opposed to being "pressed in and expanded" as the other clips do...

Anway, no biggie.  Just found it interesting.   Surely not a normative practice if someone at the plant installed that clip instead of the normal production clip. 

186

General Discussion / Re: Fellow CRGer Needs Some Votes!!

« on: March 30, 2016, 04:57:32 PM »

BULLITT65's Z got my vote.  Tough competition, but your's really stood out.

187

Originality / Speedo Clip - Original?

« on: March 29, 2016, 10:32:40 PM »

The other day, I was preparing install a new speedometer cable and clips on the car.  I thought I was missing 2 clips as I only had the original style from the firewall.  However, when I retrieved the original speedometer cable, it had a very different clip still attached.   See attached photos.   Any chance this is original and the plant opted to use this style clip in lieu of the other style?   

The only evidence I have that it could be original is that the hole in the tunnel for this clip is quite different than the hole of for the AIM style clip.   It's smaller, and it's clear a sheet metal screw was used to attach it vs the other style which is pinched in.

For reference - '69 Van Nuys built Z, M22 trans, 04B prod date.

Speedometer Cable with clip still attached:



Close-up:



Tunnel Holes for clips:


Original clip attached to firewall:


Thoughts?

188

Restoration / Re: Correct Battery Cables for '69 Small Block w/Top Post Battery??

« on: March 24, 2016, 04:16:16 PM »

All those changeover dates for the cables were pulled from my battery research, btw.

Yep!  Awesome research Kurt.   Very, very much appreciated.    The CRG site is the best - I go here all the time to verify this or that for my Camaro and I'm hoping my restoration will be much better as a result. 

189

Restoration / Re: Correct Battery Cables for '69 Small Block w/Top Post Battery??

« on: March 23, 2016, 10:08:48 PM »

OK, last night I found a contact for the R&D Manager at American Auto Wire and sent him an email asking what he knew.

He responded with the following and good news is they offer reproduction cables with the correct PN and suffix.   I think Lectric Limited offers the same as well.    And these are the same PN's Kurt referenced above.   

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
eMail response from Don Bock on 3/23/2016

Good afternoon Hans,

     The info that you supplied was very helpful. The negative cable was actually a 6 gauge cable that was called out as being used on the most basic 69 Novas and Camaros (according to Packard's data list). I have actually seen this on one or two other Z cars during the years. We only make 4 gauge cables which is slightly heavier material. You can order part number 22305 and it will be stamped as "6296754 BF" which is the correct part number and suffix for that cable. The positive cable was actually used on several Z28's that we have seen over the years. The part number to order is 09925. It will be stamped "6289193 MF".

    The 6297647 cable you reference is the later side mounted cable and is stamped "6297647 AS", so that would not be correct for your particular car.

Hope this helps. Feel free to re-post this info as a "sticky" at the site if you believe others could benefit from it. Take care.

Donny
 
Don Bock
R&D Manager

150 Heller Place
Bellmawr, NJ 08031

190

Restoration / Re: Correct Battery Cables for '69 Small Block w/Top Post Battery??

« on: March 23, 2016, 03:06:36 PM »

I didn't confirm these, but these were off a Z:
Batt cables: + 6289193 MF, - 6295754 BF

Kurt - much appreciated.  To confirm, MF and BF is for a standard top post battery, not HD, correct?

191

Restoration / Re: Correct Battery Cables for '69 Small Block w/Top Post Battery??

« on: March 23, 2016, 03:02:22 PM »

Thanks for the feedback.  Indeed, I just checked Lectric Limited's online catalog and it appears they offer the following for the 302 w/top post battery:


- BATTERY CABLE, pos., V8, 302 C.I., with standard top post battery (positive terminal closer to passenger side)

- BATTERY CABLE, pos., V8, 302 C.I., with H.D. top post battery (positive terminal closer to driver side), mid-May to end of production: 6290591MF stamped on cable & "MF" code listed on build sheet

- BATTERY CABLE, pos., V8, 302 C.I., with H.D. top post battery (positive terminal closer to driver side), beginning of production to mid-May: 6290592BR stamped on cable & "BR" code listed on build sheet

- BATTERY CABLE, neg., V8, 302 C.I., with standard top post battery (positive terminal closer to passenger side)

- BATTERY CABLE, neg., V8, 302 C.I., with H.D. top post battery (positive terminal closer to driver side)



I'm guessing the "MF" & "BR" cables listed above are typo's in the production date period....probably should be the other way around, correct?

I'll call them this morn and ask what the PN's are for the standard 302 cables.

Thanks all!

192

Restoration / Correct Battery Cables for '69 Small Block w/Top Post Battery??

« on: March 22, 2016, 07:13:52 PM »

OK, per the chassis broadcast copy, my ’69 Z came with the top post battery (04B, Van Nuys built), MF and BF codes.    I’d like to get as correct as possible battery cables.   

Best I can tell per the AIM, UPC 12/A11, page 162, the correct PN is 6297647 for the Positive cable.  Don't know the neg cable PN#.

Unfortunately, it appears that for whatever odd reason, the correct battery cables for a 1969 Camaro small block with top post battery are not being reproduced while they make them for every other configuration, including inline 6 cylinders.  Go figure. 

So, what’s the best alternative reproduction battery cables to get?  Get the reproduction battery cables for the HD battery, or??

193

General Discussion / Re: Highly documented resto 69 Z/28

« on: March 07, 2016, 05:55:33 PM »

Another sport steering wheel. I must have the only Z/28 in existence with the standard wheel, lol 

That makes 2 of us. I'll be using the original standard wheel on my Z, albeit with the rosewood insert....!   I'm always amazed as well how seldom you see an original standard steering wheel.   

194

General Discussion / Re: 69 original rear bumper identification

« on: March 04, 2016, 04:31:49 PM »

Relief!  Thanks for verify Chick.   Let us know if you find a place to press in the rivets. 

195

General Discussion / Re: Chevrolet Symbol/ Moniker use dates

« on: March 03, 2016, 04:35:12 PM »

This help?  They have a time line when various logos where introduced and phased out. 

http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2011/Sep/0902_bowtie.html