CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 22, 2014, 07:11:25 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.
105658 Posts in 12338 Topics by 4753 Members
Latest Member: stpatrick
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 243 244 [245] 246 247 ... 275
3661  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: need a transverse muffler for 69 Z , on: July 29, 2006, 10:05:42 AM
Aaron,

A chambered system is too restrictive?  That doesn't seem to make sense.  They were developed to be much less restrictive.  Hence the noise issue.

Restriction and noise level attenuation are two different issues; the chambered exhaust system is both louder and more restrictive than the standard dual system, just as it was on the Corvettes of the era. Chambered exhaust on the Camaro and Chevelle and sidepipes on the Corvette used the same 1-7/8" I.D. pipes manufactured by Walker, and the option was driven by Marketing, not by Engineering.
3662  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Floor Boards on: July 29, 2006, 09:58:42 AM
There weren't any weld-nuts in the tunnel for the console attachment; the front bracket has two threaded studs on it that go through holes drilled in the floor with loose nuts on the bottom, and the center and rear attachments use Riv-nuts clinched into holes drilled in the floor. Non-console cars had no holes in the floor - the four console attaching holes were drilled at assembly for D55.
3663  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Engine upgrade on a 1980 Berlinetta on: July 29, 2006, 09:40:22 AM
You might want to post the question over on the forum at www.nastyz28.com - that site is pretty much dedicated to 2nd-Gen Camaros (this one is primarily focused on 1st-Gen cars).  Smiley
3664  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Floor Boards on: July 28, 2006, 09:23:26 AM
Yes.
3665  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Do You Really "Feel" the Road Better With Manual? on: July 28, 2006, 09:19:40 AM
Any '70 Corvette that weighs 4000# is carrying 700# of lead ballast - they weighed 3300# with a full tank of fuel - about the same as a '69 Camaro. Now that I think about it.(geez its been 30 yrs) It could have been another car. Embarrassed I'm fairly sure my camaro was #4000 lbs

Well, if your Camaro weighed 4000#, it was carrying ballast too. A '69 Camaro V-8 coupe weighed 3135#, and a V-8 convertible weighed 3385# (add 249# for a BB).
3666  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Do You Really "Feel" the Road Better With Manual? on: July 27, 2006, 09:44:33 AM
I have power steering on my '69Z, and it works fine; it's over-boosted like all GM systems were in the 60's-70's, but that's the way it was back then. Mine was manual when I got it, but I tired of the low-speed steering effort and converted it to power using all factory parts.
3667  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 67 speed warning help needed on: July 26, 2006, 07:31:13 PM
The original speedwarning buzzer was discontinued decades ago, but you can get a functional replacement from Long Island Corvette Supply (www.licorvette.com) for about $20 - their #39-29D.
3668  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Do You Really "Feel" the Road Better With Manual? on: July 26, 2006, 07:22:44 PM
Was the manual steering on a 70 vette the same system as a 1st gen Camaro? Huh

Nope - '63-'82 Corvettes used the "linkage-boosted" system with a power cylinder - same system the early Chevy II used.

Any '70 Corvette that weighs 4000# is carrying 700# of lead ballast - they weighed 3300# with a full tank of fuel - about the same as a '69 Camaro.
3669  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Mild Modifications / Re: Power BRAKE Booster - not Power Steering on: July 24, 2006, 03:52:38 PM
Drill a 9/16" hole at a convenient location on the top plate (out of the way of the linkage and plumbing) and tap it 3/8" NPT for a standard manifold vacuum fitting and re-connect your booster.
3670  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: what dealership??? on: July 24, 2006, 03:38:18 PM
There were over 4,000 Chevy dealers - do you have any paperwork or a Protect-O-Plate for the car?
3671  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Power Steering Power Booster 'Feed'??? on: July 24, 2006, 03:35:30 PM
I think you mean power brake booster, not power steering, right?
3672  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: multileaf rear suspension on 67? on: July 20, 2006, 10:35:26 AM
Was a sway bar part of either package.

Thanks !!!!!!!

dab67

If you're asking about a rear sway bar, no rear sway bar was ever factory-installed on any 1st-generation Camaro.
3673  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: cruise master-air filter on: July 19, 2006, 09:41:28 AM
That's an error in the manual - the vacuum-operated cruise control was never a factory option on the Camaro, but was available on many other Chevrolet car lines; that's why the reference was removed from later editions of the manual.
3674  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Dipstick Location on: July 19, 2006, 09:36:12 AM
Most 350 blocks cast after 1978 have the dipstick on the passenger side; shouldn't affect "value" at all, as we're not talking about the original engine anyway.
3675  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: VIN vs. build date...do these add up? on: July 18, 2006, 01:58:19 PM
There are numerous anomalies in the assignment of build week codes on the Fisher Body trim tag; you can't always make arbitrary connections between build week codes and VIN numbers. Their build capacity was the same as the adjacent Chevrolet final assembly plant - 912 per day.
Pages: 1 ... 243 244 [245] 246 247 ... 275
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 0.088 seconds with 18 queries.