Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Hans L

Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 26
256
Originality / Re: Front license plate bracket question.
« on: April 24, 2014, 02:50:13 PM »
Interesting thread.   Had no idea so dug out my old license plate bracket.   Had it not been for some the posts, I would not have found the "AAC" stamp.   Lightly glass beaded the area is supposed to be and sure enough, there it is.  Small, thin font style, so pretty sure it's orginal.   I'll post pic's later.   '69  04C Van Nuys Build.   

257
Originality / Original or GM Replacement Power Steering Belt - Z28
« on: December 26, 2013, 05:38:05 PM »
The following Power Steering belt was on my car when I purchased it (the top one in the picture below).  Per the AIM, it's the correct PN, 3848263 and appears to be Z28 specific, but I'm not sure if it's factory original or a dealer/GM replacement belt.

In the pic below, the top belt is the original; the lower belt is a Quanta reproduction belt.  As you can see, the reproduction is quite different than the original GM belt.   But that is not to say the Quanta belt is incorrect - it might be a correct factory style belt, maybe there were multiple suppliers/styles, or?

Thoughts/comments on these belts?


258
Originality / Re: Top post vs side post batteries.
« on: December 18, 2013, 03:45:52 AM »
Kurt - I know.  Just find it weird prior owners switched it out.   Happens of course. 

259
Originality / Re: Top post vs side post batteries.
« on: December 17, 2013, 10:52:38 PM »
My 04B has side posts as well.  (LA build).  Car was sold first week of June.  I've been told it should have top posts...but I have always wondered.   I will inspect the cables to determine if I can decipher any part numbers.    Car still had the original heater hoses and belts when I aquired the car, so I would have been surprised the battery cables were replaced.  Obviously possible, but.

Last VIN # are L529307.

260
Originality / Re: Fill & Drain Plugs 1969 Muncie M22
« on: December 17, 2013, 10:48:45 PM »
Looks good Lloyd.  Those are correct per my discussion with Jerry as well.   Here's the plugs that are on my Z's original M22.   After Jerry rebuilt it, he requested follow-up pics for his files and research.   Confirmed original for the car/trans.  Built date of the car is 04B.   Note that the trans came with two magnetic plugs - both the same.






261
Here's my SWAG based on production numbers and assuming even distribution across solid lifter engines suggests around 8.5% of the Z's could have had an M22.

Here's the logic - In 1969 M22's could only be ordered with solid lifter engines.

So, '69 Production Count of Solid Lifter Engines:
Z28's:             20,302
L78's:               4,889
L89's:                 311
COPO 9560:          69
COPO 9561:     ~ 800

Assume 30% of the L78/89's & COPO's came with automatics or about 1820; balance of 4,248 had manuals.  NOTE:  THIS IS A SWAG....I do not have data to quantify this guess.  If its less, just fewer Z's had M22.  

Net total number of solid lifter engines that had manuals that qualified for M22:   24,503.   Again assumes 30% of the big block solid lifter cars had automatics.

Total M22 production:   2117

% of total solid lifter cars that had M22's:   (2,117 M22's)/(24,550 solid lifter engines) = 8.6%

Again, assuming M22's were evenly dispersed across solid lifter engine Camaros in 1969, would indicate a little over 8.5% of the Z's had an M22.

Lots of assumptions here and nothing absolute, but might be indicative....of course, if the bulk of the M22's went behind L78/L89's and COPO's, then the Z % with M22's could be quite a bit less.

By the way, my Z came with the M22.    Dealer car sold off of the lot per the original owner when I asked him.  No idea why the dealer opted for the M22.

Hans

262
Restoration / Re: 69 upper ball joint rivets
« on: November 25, 2013, 12:58:15 AM »
Hmmm.   I really don't remember.   Maybe call Rare Parts?  They might remember.   I just know the repro's were not used - possible due to size issues.

263
Restoration / Re: 69 upper ball joint rivets
« on: November 24, 2013, 11:38:06 PM »
Doug,

I bought the Classic Suspension ball joints and the corresponding rivets.  The ball joint is close, but not exact to the originals.  

I sent the control arm, ball joints, and rivets to Rare Parts for installation.   The guy there didin't like the repro rivets I provided and used his own.   Total cost to install the rivets was around $100.


Here's the contact info in case you're interested in the service:

http://rareparts.com/contact/

GLEN KNOWLES, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
621 Wilshire Ave. Stockton, CA 95203
800.621.2005


Results:  



264
Originality / Re: 1100837 Alternator Stamping - Original?
« on: November 03, 2013, 08:34:25 PM »
Lloyd,

Here's a clearer pic of my alternator.   Hope this helps.  Unfortunately, I don't have enough expertise to comment the one you are considering, so can't add value there.

Not sure why Photobucket rotated the picture.   I re-rotated on the site, but reverts back to this mode when I add the link.   If you click through the pick, it should display normally.




265
Originality / Re: 1100837 Alternator Stamping - Original?
« on: November 01, 2013, 05:04:28 PM »
It's not - here's the best other pic I have.  I'll take a better pic this weekend and post.  Jerry M confirmed it's real and rebuilt/restored it.


266
Originality / Re: 1100837 Alternator Stamping - Original?
« on: November 01, 2013, 04:36:20 PM »
Lloyd - just a word of caution on "837" alternators - I had to source one for my Z last year.  I really struggled to sort out real from the fakes.   It takes a real pro to know is what I found out.   Fortunately, Jerry MacNiesh was rebuilding my engine at the time and I was able to get his confirmation the one I was considering was real.   I think he rejected 90% of the ones I sent him for consideration (at least 15 - 20 samples).   I was quite shocked how many re-stamps are out there.   

Heres the one I bought, confirmed by Jerry as a real "837".   It's a little early for my build (March), but within the acceptable range.   Also, I'll take a better pic if needed.


267
Originality / Re: 69Z Brake Booster Oddity
« on: November 01, 2013, 03:15:22 AM »
For reference, 04B Van Nuys built Z, 9204 with a "80" build date. 

268
Originality / Re: Correct engine paint suggestions please!
« on: November 01, 2013, 02:13:36 AM »
Jerry M rebuilt and restored the 302 for my Z.   He used Seymour paint.


269
Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1100837 9 F 17
« on: October 23, 2013, 07:34:49 PM »
Just read your post on Yenkos.  Be very careful when searching for an 837 alternator.   From my experience last year hunting for one, 80%+ were re-stamps.   I had an expert (Jerry M) inspect each one I was considering and i was shocked how many were declared restamps.    And real ones are not cheap.   I did find a real one on eBay, but took months of looking.

Good luck with the hunt!

270
Restoration / Re: Heater core - rebuild or buy new ???
« on: October 22, 2013, 06:06:20 PM »
I took my original heater core to a local radiator shop in San Diego this summer.   They pressure tested it and noted a potential leak area around the inlet/outlets.  They added some solder to those areas and re-tested confirming no leaks.  Not the prettiest looking, but completely hidden within the heater box so not too concerned.  Cost was like $75.   

Interestingly, the heater core date code is like 6-7 months before the build date of the car (68J vs 04B build date for car).   I thought I might have mixed it up with my Chevelle's core, but the heater cores are different, so virtually certain it is original to the car.

 


Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 26