CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 18, 2014, 10:47:47 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.
104512 Posts in 12235 Topics by 4716 Members
Latest Member: Hgtech
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 274
31  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Distributor Questions.. on: August 27, 2014, 10:00:15 AM
<< And no matter what, using the center line off my intake: #1 wire goes driver side,#8 passenger way. (centerline up the cap) May take a little more effort but with timing set #1 terminal is inline with #1 piston. Probably just a pet peeve, but this is the way I was brought up doing it. LOL! >>

That misprint in the shop manuals (and Chilton and Haynes) has confused many a mechanic over the years. It was supposed to read "...rotor pointing to the #1 wire tower in the cap..", not "..rotor pointing to the #1 cylinder..".  The correct distributor housing/vacuum advance orientation and plug wire indexing in the cap is shown below, with the point adjusting window on centerline; that's the way the car was designed.
32  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: Timing out of wack on: August 26, 2014, 10:04:26 AM
On a '68, the timing index line on the balancer outer ring will be exactly in line with the keyway (that relationship didn't change until '69, with the new alternator-on-the-right accessory drive system). First thing I'd do is to verify true #1 TDC firing position - get a piston stop tool and mark the true TDC on the balancer outer ring.

The engine will NOT run at 75* advance - that's not what you have.
33  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Were different vendors used for wheel hubs on: August 26, 2014, 09:51:54 AM
'68 with front disc brakes. Were different vendors used for the hubs? Both have GM bolts attaching the rotors but the head markings are different and one hub is machined around the od on the seal side. I thought one might have been replaced but then the bolts for the rotors should been the same on both sides.

Original front hubs were made in-house by Chevrolet.
34  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Condensation wicks in tail light housing on: August 26, 2014, 09:40:15 AM
'63-'67 Corvettes also used the "wicks" in the bottom of the taillight lenses, with die-cast housings.
35  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Help determining 67 4P scenario on: August 26, 2014, 09:29:45 AM
A BB had a larger 3/8" fuel line ID and an offset for the transmission cross member mounting bolts.

Mike

All V-8's used the 3/8" fuel line.
36  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 69 coupe window outer weatherstrip/fuzzies on: August 24, 2014, 11:27:57 AM
Bailey was the original production supplier for door and 1/4-window fuzzies - in the plant they were called "Baileys". The other supplier was USM (United Shoe Machinery, Inc.).
37  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: vaccum hose connection on: August 21, 2014, 11:27:41 AM

No 1st-Gen Camaro had EGR, but the L-78 had a clip for the PCV hose that mounted under the right front carb nut.

John,
Did the PVC Hose bracket come on a 69 Z28 also.
[/quote]

Nope - it was only used on the L-78.
38  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 69 Z/28 X77 garage/barn find on: August 18, 2014, 09:44:16 AM
Ok, so the blade is correct but the clutch is a service replacement.  Reason why no ink stamp.  Last night I was able to take a flat head screw drive and push along the top surface of clutch..the orange  paint just flaked off and only revealing the EASTON embossed stamp. No ink stamp..I knew then it was a replacement.  Sad

It originally had an ink stamp (all Eaton clutches did), but they either removed it when they painted the clutch or it just wore off.
39  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 69 Z/28 X77 garage/barn find on: August 17, 2014, 09:33:18 AM
<< 7 Blade Fan #3947772  dated "A69"  (Jan '69)    Anyone have a clue to what the 914087 next to the A69 is ?  or what the  "L" is that's next to the A69.. BTW that "L" is only on one of the 7 blades. >>

The 914087 is the supplier's internal part number for the fan. That clutch is a later Service replacement, made in 1971 ("G" = 1966, "H" = 1967, "I" = 1968, etc.).
40  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: AC Compressor on: August 17, 2014, 09:10:55 AM
Does anyone know of a place that will rehab an ac compressor?

Classic Auto Air, Tampa, Florida.
41  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 67 DG rallys on: August 16, 2014, 09:02:59 AM
I have a set of 67 DG rally's. They have no date code that I can find. I heard these were good for that reason.
( No date code).
They are 14 x 6
Any info on them would be helpful.
Thanks.
TRC


Are you sure they're 14x6?  I've seen "DG" rallys that are 15" x 6", interchangeable with "DC" rallys.
42  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Original dealer info for 1st gens is available on: August 13, 2014, 06:10:41 PM

Does anyone have any idea how Norwood coordinated production of Camaros and Firebirds simultaneously?  ie..  intermixed..  or run firebirds for a day or more then Camaros?? 

They ran Camaro and Firebird intermixed, at a constant ratio. If you kept changing the ratio, every time you did that you'd have to re-balance labor operations and re-assign/re-train every worker in the plant. The ratio was developed based on volume and demand projections, and hardly ever changed.
43  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: vaccum hose connection on: August 12, 2014, 11:43:49 AM
So is the EGR hose holder clip only on big block?

No 1st-Gen Camaro had EGR, but the L-78 had a clip for the PCV hose that mounted under the right front carb nut.
44  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Original dealer info for 1st gens is available on: August 12, 2014, 11:09:40 AM
John, 

I've read where you said that before, and I'm not doubting you..  I'm just using the data (by month) that CRG provides us.

For the 912/day to be true... the month end totals would have to be off by *several weeks of production* if true.... and there would have had to be a LONG shut-down time that summer of '69 before they resumed production...??    I recall reading in some car mags back in 69, that salaried employees ran production for awhile.. during an 'hourly' hold out or ??  and if so, their production rate would have surely been less...    Can you shed any light on that?

A lot of those magazine articles were "fairy tales", written by folks who had no clue about how manufacturing plants operate; salaried employees didn't man the line and build cars. How many cars do you suppose 100 salaried guys could build, replacing 4,000 hourly assemblers spread across 16 miles of conveyors? None - it's a fairy tale.
45  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: technical articles by JohnZ on: August 11, 2014, 11:20:48 AM
I have some more technical articles to add - just need to buckle down and clean them up so Bryon can re-format them.  Smiley
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 274
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 0.359 seconds with 18 queries.