CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 01, 2015, 08:32:00 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.
111536 Posts in 12837 Topics by 4914 Members
Latest Member: C5Phil
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 267 268 [269] 270 271 ... 282
4021  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1968 327 275hp. non smog air cleaner housing on: March 12, 2006, 12:20:02 PM
It should have a left side manifold heat stove with elbow pipe to the air cleaner.

Left side? Left = driver's side, Right = passenger side.
4022  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Rebuild or Replace Engine and Transmission on: March 11, 2006, 12:10:40 PM
You can buy a GM crate motor for less than the cost of a full rebuild, but what you have may not need a full rebuild at all, and I'd want the original engine in it if it was mine; get it running first and check it out (compression test, leakdown test, tune-up, etc.) and see what you've got.
4023  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 z/28 x-77 trunk mat on: March 11, 2006, 12:06:02 PM
John Z.

My 1969 z/28 camaro, build date of 1OD, with a flat hood. Had hood insulation as well as
a trunk mat. I know that for a fact because when I bought the vehicle over 20 years ago.
I removed the insulation for the hood because it was tearing and I threw out the trunk
mat because it was also torn. Does that mean my 69 was ordered with the z87 deluxe
interior. I also have the front endura front bumper.


The only way a '69 flat-hood car would have come from the factory with a hood pad and a trunk mat is if it originally had the Z87 deluxe interior.
4024  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: original wheel and tire combo on: March 11, 2006, 12:01:21 PM
You'll need "YH" 15x7 rally wheels.
4025  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1969 SS on: March 11, 2006, 11:57:18 AM
The trans was built on January 19, 1965, and is out of a '65 Chevelle built at Fremont, California; no way to tell by looking at it whether it's an M20 or M21.
4026  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Correct Oil fill cap for 68 327 on: March 10, 2006, 01:37:34 PM
Not sure about the '68 Camaro, but '66-'68 SB Corvettes used the same block/intake configuration, and they had a sealed twist-on cap and a PCV valve threaded into a bung on the fill tube with a hose to the carb base as one side of the PCV system, and the other (intake) side was an adapter in the hole in the back of the block next to the distributor with a large rubber hose that connected to an elbow in the air cleaner base.
4027  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 z/28 x-77 trunk mat on: March 08, 2006, 12:05:32 PM
The only way an X77 with a standard interior would have hood insulation would be if it had the ZL2 hood, which included the hood pad regardless of its application. Otherwise, only Z87 deluxe interior cars had a hood pad.
4028  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1967 RS/SS on: March 07, 2006, 10:57:14 AM
Can you post a photo of the cowl tag? RPO numbers (L35, Z22, etc.) were never stamped on the cowl tag.
4029  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: LT1 Question and For Sale on: March 07, 2006, 10:52:58 AM
You are quite correct the 350/255hp was a 4 barrel,(I made an err)the 350/250hp was the 2 barrel .Although there was a 350/350 hp available in the Corvette in 1969 I'm not sure if GM was calling it the Lt1,but it did use most of the same componets as the 70's Lt1,it's odd that it used a rochester instead of a holley though.

The '69 Corvette L-46 350/350 was a Q-Jet-carbed hydraulic-cam engine, just like the '68 L-79 327/350 that preceded it.

Block casting numbers have virtually nothing to do with the configuration of a finished engine, which is why folks get confused when they look up a casting number on Mortec and think they have a 302 (or other low-volume engine). The 3970010 block is a good example of that - over seven MILLION of those blocks were cast from 1969-1979, and they were used for every 350 application imaginable, in both cars and trucks, and only one-third of 1% of them were assembled as 302's. Blocks are blocks, and none of them were cast for a specific finished application; the only thing that made them different was the components installed in them and the pad stamp that identified their internals and vehicle application.
4030  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Correct finish(es) on 69 12-bolt Camaro rear on: March 04, 2006, 10:47:56 AM
As I posted above, the axle SHAFT wasn't painted at all; put the drums on, mask the studs, and paint the entire assembly. The pinion flange was installed at the axle plant, generally didn't get paint on it, and wasn't touched at the car assembly plant except to attach the prop shaft rear U-joint.
4031  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: john z on: March 03, 2006, 10:23:15 AM
I'm not familiar with that detail on Firebirds - don't know if they used the same/similar A/C components as the Camaro used; you might look at the Camaro assembly manual and the A/C system schematic and see if it looks like the pieces in your car.
4032  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Question of build date vs. rear assembly date on: March 03, 2006, 10:19:54 AM
The "selection" process was simple - the operator looked at the Chassis Broadcast, took his hoist to the rack with those axles, grabbed the next axle in the rack, and loaded it on the chassis carrier; nobody paid any attention to dates. The axle racks came out of the rail car, were stacked in off-line storage, and were taken to the line one rack at a time. Axle racks held four axles each.

Thanks for chimming-in on this John. I was hoping you were on-line.

John, that makes perfect sense. However, how does a rear just "sit around" in a rack
for 4 months before it gets selected. If a rack only held 4 rears, it would stand to reason
that the racks were turned-over on a daily or regular basis. This is the cause for my confusion.

Kurt, by the way, I am referring to a 1970 model.


Who knows - lots of weird things happened occasionally in the production system in those days; that's why the NCRS allows full credit for dated components up to six months prior to the car's final assembly date in Corvette Flight Judging, although 2-6 weeks is "typical".
4033  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Question of build date vs. rear assembly date on: March 03, 2006, 10:14:08 AM
JohnZ, I notice your Z/28 was built 02D at Norwood as was my L78. My vin is xx5415. Where is your car from mine. About 15 years ago I came across a Z/28 close to where I live that was built 5 cars away from mine.


Mine is 606402, built a little more than two shifts after yours.
4034  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Correct finish(es) on 69 12-bolt Camaro rear on: March 03, 2006, 10:07:30 AM
The axle SHAFT itself wasn't painted; the complete axle ASSEMBLY was painted after the drums were installed, as the last operation before the axle was placed in the shipping rack. I don't recall ever seeing any protetctive sleeves on the lug studs, but they avoided painting the pinion flange where the U-joint attached.
4035  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: Muncie 4 spd. oil? on: March 01, 2006, 11:29:11 AM
They work just fine with the lube they were originally designed, developed, and durability-tested with; ordinary 75W90 or 80W90 gear lube. Don't use a lube that contains a Posi friction-modifier additive - it will slow down the synchronizer action.
Pages: 1 ... 267 268 [269] 270 271 ... 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 0.39 seconds with 18 queries.