CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 01, 2015, 06:00:42 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.
110366 Posts in 12748 Topics by 4887 Members
Latest Member: Calz11
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 281
61  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: IS THIS ANOTHER MILLION DOLLAR 6 BANGER ? on: December 17, 2014, 12:40:41 PM
I got this "302" plate for my '69 Z 15 years ago - couldn't believe it was still available without the Mustang guys grabbing it.  Smiley
62  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 67 Camaro Pilot Line Assembly Process and Procedures on: December 17, 2014, 12:31:24 PM
The booklet shows Fisher #DD01D with Fisher Pilot Plant #21 - Detroit as the starting location.

Would that be a complete body delivered to Chev with front fenders and rolling chassis, or just the firewall back as they would be delivered during actual production?

Nope. Fisher Body was only involved with the body shell from the firewall back - they had absolutely NOTHING to do with any Car Division front sheet metal, chassis, powertrain, or instrument panel parts. Every part you see in the Assembly Manual with a part number on it is a part designed, developed, released and manufactured or purchased by Chevrolet and installed by Chevrolet employees in the Chevrolet side of the assembly plant after receiving the painted and trimmed firewall-back body shell from the Fisher Body side of the plant. Although both Chevrolet and Fisher Body were divisions of GM, Fisher Body was a different world, and Fisher worked very hard to keep it that way.
63  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: pad stamp? on: December 15, 2014, 11:38:26 AM
The Flint and Tonawanda block broaches were about the size of a locomotive, and machined 5,500 blocks per day in two linear passes - first pass did the pan rail and upper half of the main bearing bores, and the second pass did the block deck and front and rear "wall" surfaces. See photo below showing both sets of broach blades.
64  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 1969 Burnished brown Z/28's on: December 15, 2014, 11:31:21 AM
cross ram in the trunk (never installed and sold with the car);

No Z/28 EVER came with a cross-ram setup in the trunk - if you wanted to buy one, it came in a box over the counter in the dealer's Parts Department.
65  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 67 Camaro Pilot Line Assembly Process and Procedures on: December 14, 2014, 11:02:53 AM
John,
Can you clarify one thing?
Final assembly on the Chevrolet side was off-line? That I didn't realize. I assumed it was on the main line.

I almost didn't post, knowing that John would be the authoritative reply on this. Smiley

I wasn't there, but the "Echoes of Norwood" book only makes one tiny reference to assembly of the Pilot cars, and refers to "Pilots were hand-built at first out in the rear area of the plant under extreme secrecy...". It also refers to "..later Pilots used to test the assembly line configuration and line setup...", but doesn't say how many or when. This, of course, refers only to Chevrolet, as nobody at Chevrolet-Norwood had any knowledge at all of what was going on at Fisher-Norwood (or at Plant #21). Fisher Body was a separate division of GM, and Chevrolet wasn't allowed to peek, even though there was only a wall between them. If it weren't for Frank Beaulieu's Pilot Schedule booklet (which was backed up by huge dedicated binders containing the complete Chevrolet Engineering Bill of Material required to build each car), we wouldn't know ANYTHING about the Fisher Body portion of the Camaro Pilot program. Fisher Body-Norwood knew all about it, but they never talked to anyone at Chevrolet, so there's nothing in the Norwood book about it.

Remember that the Chevrolet side of the Norwood plant underwent a major conversion and expansion as soon as the last '66 production cars and trucks came off the line, as the Truck Line was then torn out (and sent to Atlanta) and that space was used to expand and rearrange the passenger car conveyor system to increase hourly production capacity to match that of the adjacent Fisher Body plant.
66  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 67 Camaro Pilot Line Assembly Process and Procedures on: December 14, 2014, 10:27:42 AM
The booklet shows Fisher #DD01D with Fisher Pilot Plant #21 - Detroit as the starting location.

Would that be a complete body delivered to Chev with front fenders and rolling chassis, or just the firewall back as they would be delivered during actual production?



Just the body from the firewall back, same as production - Fisher Body had nothing to do with front sheet metal, chassis, engine, or Car Division options - all of that came from Chevrolet after receiving the body from Fisher.
67  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 67 Camaro Pilot Line Assembly Process and Procedures on: December 13, 2014, 02:13:32 PM
I spent about half of my 21-year GM career in the pre-productiion and pilot end of the business, including almost four years as the Senior Passenger Car Process Engineer at the Chevrolet Pilot Line in Flint, which was the location for Chevrolet Final Assembly of major new model Pilot vehicles (carryover and minor change Pilot programs were handled in the Assembly Plants).

First, let's get the terminology correct - the Fisher Body assembly plants that built Chevrolet bodies delivered them to their adjacent Chevrolet assembly plant, not to "GM" (Fisher Body and Chevrolet were both Divisions of GM, although you'd never know it by watching them try to communicate). Fisher delivered to Chevrolet.

Fisher Body new major model Pilot programs were run in downtown Detroit, at Fisher Body Plant #21; this 8-story plant (the rotting ruins of which are shown in a video on YouTube) is where all of the Pilot bodies were welded, painted, and trimmed, to be delivered to their Chevrolet customers (and to Fisher Body Engineering). All of the new welding and body-in-white assembly tooling was set up at Plant #21, and later shipped to the primary assembly plant (Fisher-Norwood in this case) for installation and final tuning. The Chevrolet pre-production paperwork (handled by Frank Beaulieu's Pilot Specs Group at the Pilot Line) indicates Fisher Body Plant #21 as the source for all of the Camaro Pilot bodies. During the off-season, Plant #21 was also Fisher's production plant for Cadillac Fleetwood custom limousine bodies, supplied to the Cadillac Clark Street assembly plant.

Fisher-Norwood had no BODY Pilot facility to weld and build new bodies - they took the bodies from Plant #21, did whatever they needed to do with them, and sent them "through the wall" to Chevrolet-Norwood (based on Chevrolet's schedule) for final assembly and shipping to the ultimate Chevrolet customer (Engineering, Sales, Manufacturing, etc.).

The Chevrolet-Flint Pilot Line wasn't directly involved with Final Assembly of the Camaro Pilot cars - they were final-assembled at Chevrolet-Norwood in a secure off-line area dedicated to the Pilot program. Normally, in a large multi-plant Pilot program (like the "B"-body Impala/Caprice, which was built in eleven plants at 6,000 per day), nearly all of the Pilot cars were final-assembled at the Chevrolet Pilot Line (from bodies supplied by Fisher Body Plant #21) and shipped to their customers - see photo below of finished '68 "B"-bodies leaving the Pilot Line.

Without getting into a lot of gory detail, that's how the Fisher Body-Chevrolet Pilot programs worked in the 60's.

68  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: exhaust manifold torque small block on: December 12, 2014, 10:57:58 AM
And if you expect to be able to remove the exhaust manifold bolts at some later date, use a film of hi-temp anti-sieze on them when you install them.  Smiley
69  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: if you could go back and redesign the 67/8 .. or that other one, on: December 11, 2014, 11:40:07 AM
Hmm, I was thinking they had drag slicks even in the mid 60's. Wasn't big daddy's swamp rat around in the late 50's?

I was referring to PRODUCTION tires (the kind they designed the car around).  ;-0
70  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Mild Modifications / Re: What carburator for my 454 LS 5 M22 3.07/1 possi 67 conv. on: December 10, 2014, 11:22:16 AM
Yes that was what I planned, but is there no problem with a vakuum on a 4 speed?. Thoth it maybe wod give a bumpy ride on accselaretion? This is my first built with a 4 speed, wood like too get it right the first time. :-) Thanks Jack.

Vacuum has nothing to do with the transmission - it has to do with the engine, and specifically with the camshaft.
71  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: if you could go back and redesign the 67/8 .. or that other one, on: December 10, 2014, 10:26:48 AM

One major thing if I could go back in time to all the manufacturers would be to increase the wheel well size specifically in the rear, but considering trans am, how about on all 4 corners. Even my 66 chevelle or the early novas , the engineers could have probably had the same cost of assembly and made the inner tubs bigger.

Remember that:

1. "Big tires" didn't exist in the early-to-mid-60's - they were all skinny, for ride comfort.

2. Making the inner rear wheelhouse tubs wider would have compromised the rear seat hip room dimension and reduced the cubic capacity number for the trunk, and those were important in the 60's.
72  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Service Engines (CE coded) on: December 06, 2014, 12:19:18 PM
I have been researching CE blocks (mainly small blocks) for some time now, and have a couple of questions that hopefully Kurt and/or the other CRG researchers can help with:
1. Does CRG have any examples of warranty documentation for a service replacement engine being installed in a 67-69 Camaro, and if so, are there any known examples of the block casting date preceding the build date of the car? (and if so, curious as to how much earlier?)
2. Did the dealer always issue paperwork for the replacement engine recording the new pad stamp number?
3. What was the process for supply and demand of service engines? i.e. were CE blocks produced by the engine assembly plants on demand from the dealership (assuming the zone rep authorised it), or were they machined, assembled (long, short or bare) and stamped 'CE' alongside regular production engines and set aside until required?

From the serial numbers allocated to Flint and Tonawanda for service engines, seems that would've been an excessive number of blocks/fitted engines etc to store and maintain somewhere, but then it would've taken time for the dealer to order the replacement, for the engine plant to machine, assemble and ship the part across the country, then for the dealer to fit it, all while the loyal customer was without their car.....

1. I had a copy of the service order when my Z engine was replaced with a "CE" short block (plus one new 186 cylinder head) in June, 1970, but it's filed away.

2. I doubt if any dealers made any effort to stamp anything on the pad - they made their money by getting the job done below flat rate and getting the car out the door; stamping "numbers" in those days would have seemed pointless.

3. "CE" short blocks were built based on demand, normally on weekend overtime; without intake and exhaust manifolds and cylinder heads, they had to be manhandled off the end of the engine plant assembly line with hoists and forklifts and placed on wooden pallets which later became shipping crates.

"CE" engines weren't "stocked" at regional parts depots - dealer order for an engine went to GMSPO (GM Service Parts Operations), who sent it to Flint V-8 (or Tonawanda, depending on the engine), and the engine plant shipped the engine direct to the dealership. "CE" engines were only supplied as short blocks or "fitted blocks" - not as "long blocks".
73  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: New guy new project 69 Camaro on: November 30, 2014, 01:54:57 PM
DEL, my book shows HK as ;1965 Corvette 327 cid 365 H.P. 4sp. Holley 4-BBL. or 1969 passenger car 350cid 300 H.P. powerglide High Perf.

Is the first character "F" or "V"?
74  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Windshield Washer Nozzle Cement on: November 25, 2014, 11:13:41 AM
3M "Strip-Calk" is the same material as the "dum-dum" originally used in the plant for that application (and others).
75  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Ron Pratte collection on: November 16, 2014, 11:43:42 AM
Anybody watch the velocity/Barrett Jackson / ron pratte collection TV show? Very interesting.

It's on Velocity Sunday afternoon from 2:00PM - 3:00PM.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 281
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 0.092 seconds with 18 queries.