CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 01, 2015, 07:19:09 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.
111533 Posts in 12837 Topics by 4914 Members
Latest Member: C5Phil
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 253 254 [255] 256 257 ... 282
3811  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: exhaust manifold torque on: July 05, 2006, 10:30:53 AM
Also, the gasket must be taken into consideration as well.  Using a high strength bolt and torquing to a higher value could impact gasket integrity.  Obviously the original specs are for original gasket, bolts, etc and might be different for performance upgrade components.


Quite true for most applications, but no gaskets were ever used on any Chevy V-8 exhaust manifold-to-head attachment.
3812  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Camaro booster numbers on: July 04, 2006, 10:18:35 AM
I don't have the detail booster part numbers - maybe William or Ed have them. They're shown as different numbers in the A.I.M. between J50 (power drum) and J52 (power disc/drum), but that's because those numbers are for the complete assembly (booster and master cylinder), probably as a result of the drum master cylinder and the disc/drum master cylinder being different.

The A.I.M. also doesn't show the correct releasing of the parts - the booster and master cylinder were received separately at the plant (not as an assembly as shown in the A.I.M.); the booster was installed on the body on the Trim Line, and the master cylinder was installed on the Chassis Line where the brakes were bled. The master cylinder was pushed forward out of the way, and was attached to the front of the booster (or to the pedal support studs with manual brakes) with two nuts after Body Drop.
3813  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 67 SSRS 350 shocks? on: July 02, 2006, 03:45:18 PM
I don't know - have no idea what level of internal jounce and rebound valving they have (how they're calibrated); you might call D&R and ask them - I think they're the licensee that's having them made.
3814  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 1st Gen Driveshaft Design - Did GM Make a Mistake? on: July 02, 2006, 03:38:02 PM
I have no idea why they were offset. I seriously doubt if it was a "mistake" - Chevrolet didn't create, release, manufacture, and inventory unique configurations unless they needed them; most likely some development engineer found a driveline harmonic condition he didn't like and found that offsetting the joints with that combination took care of it. The driveshaft U-joints on my original '69Z are also offset 15*-20*.
3815  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 67 Optikleen vs Kleerview washer bottles on: July 01, 2006, 06:38:36 PM
None. It wasn't a factory option - it was a dealer add-on accessory item.
3816  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 67 SSRS 350 shocks? on: July 01, 2006, 06:35:43 PM
It came originally with spiral Delco shocks - the repro spiral shocks are allegedly a pretty close match to the originals, but have no stamped-in part numbers or dates like the originals did.
3817  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: starter soleniod wire protector ???? on: June 28, 2006, 10:28:29 AM
What year? The '69 assembly manual doesn't show anything like that. To post a picture, click on "Additional Options" just below the window where you compose your post, browse your hard drive to find the image, highlight it and click "open", then click on "upload", then close that window, and when you click on "post", the photo will show up below the text in your post.
3818  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 140 cam, manifolds, and cross ram???? on: June 27, 2006, 11:12:50 AM
JohnZ: What would be the GM part number for the LT-1 cam? is it 3896962? or the 24502476?
db67

The LT-1 cam is available from GM as P/N 12364054 (cam and lifter kit, manufactured by Crane), or from Federal-Mogul/Speed-Pro as their #KC-1145R (cam and lifter kit) or as #CS-1145R (cam only), or the cam only from Crane as their #969551.
3819  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: '70 Camaro question for JohnZ on: June 27, 2006, 11:08:47 AM
seems genuine to me. Nastyz28.com states Dealer Introduction: 2/26/70

That dealer introduction date is the same as the 02D production week, and they were in production for at least six weeks, probably eight, prior to the dealer introduction date.
3820  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Brake lines for a 68 on: June 26, 2006, 10:05:31 AM
Do you have the Assembly Manual?
3821  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 67ss frame off restoration on: June 25, 2006, 10:44:32 AM
Nope - may be difficult to find a shop to only paint it from the bone-line down; most shops don't want to paint only "half a car", especially when it means matching a light color that's faded over the years and then get complaints about the color match.
3822  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 69 Z Engine overspray on: June 25, 2006, 10:32:06 AM
Vacuum-formed plastic masks were used on the aluminum valve covers and intake when the engine was painted, with varying levels of overspray around the edges. The bellhousing was also in place, and generally shows varying levels of paint coverage/overspray on about the front 2"-4", and occasionally some on the clutch fork (the rubber boot was installed later at the car assembly plant). The exhaust manifolds were installed after painting at Flint Engine beginning in 1965 or 1966; big-blocks at Tonawanda had the exhaust manifolds in place when they were painted.
3823  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Anyone know if this is a 327? I have #'s off the block................... on: June 25, 2006, 10:20:49 AM
And would they have put this engine in a Camaro in 1967?

Nope - the block was cast in 1961.
3824  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Will Chevrolet release documentation??? on: June 25, 2006, 10:17:40 AM
There are no records to release; don't hold your breath.  Smiley
3825  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Correct oil pan drain plug for '68 BB on: June 24, 2006, 12:55:08 PM
Thanks John,   My 69 Camaro has the later style drain plug. I will be looking for the correct one now.

Don't hold me to that (large-head plug on 69's) - I know Corvettes used the 7/8" drain plug at least through '68, but I'm not positive when it changed after that. My original 02D '69 Z/28 has the 9/16" hex plug with the flanged head.
Pages: 1 ... 253 254 [255] 256 257 ... 282
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.269 seconds with 18 queries.