CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 19, 2014, 12:35:55 PM

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.
97200 Posts in 11690 Topics by 4578 Members
Latest Member: ronhill
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 264
1  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Windshield Installation on: April 17, 2014, 09:58:17 AM

Nice to see that done correctly with no butyl or short-cuts. :-)
2  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: need the experts help with stamp pad on: April 17, 2014, 09:35:06 AM
I don't see an oil galley plug with a hex head in that first posted picture on the first page.??

Hard to tell from the photo if the external oil gallery plug (which has a square head, BTW) is just not installed, or if there's no hole for it. Photo of the casting date will tell that story.
3  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: has anyone run Sealed Power/Fed. Mogul/Speed Pro camshafts? on: April 16, 2014, 10:19:15 AM
The Federal-Mogul/Speed-Pro/Sealed Power cams are EXACT blueprint duplicates of the GM originals, without any "improvements" that close the intake valve earlier; I've used several of their blueprint "097" Duntov and "30-30" cams with no issues.
4  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Questions about "O" Rockers 3974290 for 69 Z/28 on: April 16, 2014, 10:11:53 AM
My question is..  Are the 3974290 "O" rockers arms good enough to be compatible with and intended to be used with the "140" cam?

If a person were to build a set of 3974290 rocker arms from the current sources of NOS parts, ebay, camaro shops, etc.  Would he still get the same "O" rocker out of the current 3974290 box?  Are they still made the same, heat treat, hardness, etc.  Do the new ones still have the "O" on them?

Does anyone know if the new replacement part number of 10089648 gets you an "O" rocker?  My dealer says that the 10089648 is a direct replacement for the 3974290, but I kinda doubt it!

What aftermarket brand such as Crane or Manley, with the part number, would replace the "O" rocker?

Please advise and suggest.

Thanks,
Bryan

GM hasn't manufactured the "o" rocker arm for decades - the only stamped rocker arm available from GM these days is the "guided" rocker with the "ribs" to keep it centered on the valve stem, and you can't use that rocker with solid lifters.
5  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Original seat tag on: April 11, 2014, 09:20:15 AM
I'm not really sure where to post this but I ran across this tag today while stripping my Passenger side front bucket seat apart to get ready for new buns & covers.

Van Dresser supplied the pre-assembled burlap and stiffening wire unit to the "Cushion Rooms" (where the seats were built) in the Fisher Body assembly plants. I think they were later absorbed or acquired by Lear or Johnson Controls when GM quit making seats in-house.
6  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Heater cover wiring clips. on: April 04, 2014, 01:15:14 PM
Hey guys, how many clips are there in the engine compartment side heater cover for the wiring? Any idea where they go? I don't know why, but I'm thinking there should be two??

There are two - see your Assembly Manual, UPC 12, sheet A6 (reference from sheet A7); one clip on the top for the orange blower motor wire, and one at the inboard lower stud for the starter harness.
7  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Block crayon marks on: March 31, 2014, 11:28:57 AM
Interesting! I was cleaning up a Flint CE block recently and noticed yellow grease pencil marks on one side (which I have left undisturbed); Would the same process as JohnZ described have applied equally to a CE assembly as a production engine?

Yes - the only difference was that a "CE" engine was a short-block, so it didn't get heads, an intake, a water pump, distributor, or an oil pan. This made them difficult to handle (had to be done manually with hi-lo's and wooden pallets when they got to the end of the line), so they were usually run on weekends.
8  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Block crayon marks on: March 31, 2014, 11:22:01 AM
Hi John,

  I thought the engine prefix stamp was applied before the heads were mounted which explained why some of the stampings were close to the head to deck edge or under the water plug protrusion as with BB's. Or was it different between BB and SB in regards to when the pad was stamped in relation to the head mountings?

Mike

On small-blocks, the machine code stamp was done after the heads went on; on big-blocks, the machine code stamp was done BEFORE the heads went on so the stamp could be done on the outboard end of the pad without having the big threaded plug in the head in the way of the gang-holder. Big-blocks had to be done that way so the car assembly plants could stamp the VIN derivative on the INBOARD end of the pad, where there was no plug in the way of the stamp.
9  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: GM silver for Rally wheels. on: March 31, 2014, 10:33:13 AM

Does the standard procedure apply to YA SS wheels as well, were they masked/painted at the assembly plants, reason I ask is I have never see an original paint YA with anything other than gray on the reverse.

I think you're seeing Service wheels, which were painted grey so they wouldn't rust in depot storage. Wheels were jammed by the thousands herringbone-style in rail cars, and if they were final-painted at Kelsey-Hayes, they'd have been badly nicked, chipped, and scratched before they ever got to the tire mount/balance equipment. You had to be there to understand what a rail car full of wheels looked like when they opened it.
 
 

10  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Another Tire Question on: March 31, 2014, 10:14:48 AM
215/65-15 is exactly the same size as the original E70-15.
John aren't you running 22560R15's?

Nope - I have 215/65-15's all the way around. It came to me with the usual 235/60-15's, but they rubbed at 12 o'clock on the fronts (original springs).
11  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Block crayon marks on: March 29, 2014, 10:17:46 AM
All engines had what would ultimately become the stamp pad suffix scrawled on the side of the block in grease pencil; that was done in the first operation on the engine assembly line, where the block was upside-down and the bores were air-gaged. That marking told everyone on the line what innards and external parts to install in the block (cam, crank, rods, pistons, oil pump and pickup, pan, balancer, lifters, heads, intake, water pump, valve covers, distributor, etc.). The pad didn't get stamped until the engine was turned right-side-up and the heads went on.
12  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 69 z28 distributor hold down bolt on: March 28, 2014, 09:42:08 AM
Mine is a phosphated Grade 5 (3 lines) bolt with traces of orange overspray (02D '69 Z/28).
13  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Another Tire Question on: March 28, 2014, 09:30:48 AM
215/65-15 is exactly the same size as the original E70-15.
14  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Hmmm, "complete bumber to bumber" restored 69 Z on: March 27, 2014, 09:36:36 AM
Wheels are incorrectly painted, and wonder why they put the washer bottle in the RS location?
15  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: info on yenko/copo's on: March 21, 2014, 11:36:50 AM
It's a lot easier to just upload images directly from your computer - use the "Choose File" button below the window you type in, and use "more attachments" if you need to upload more than one image (you can upload a max of four per post), and each must be below 150KB.   Smiley
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 264
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 0.097 seconds with 18 queries.