Messages

3721

Originality / Re: Original fan belt

« on: December 30, 2013, 06:01:41 AM »

When judging do you compile any original pictures of certain parts to compare against future cars if there is questionability with a particular part or area of a particular car? I just thought you must see the best of the best, so a picture reference book of originality may be a tool possibly.

3722

Originality / Re: Original fan belt

« on: December 29, 2013, 05:32:18 AM »

Chick, I knew you guys would have some old relic of a judging book from back in the day. "What a great group of guys" that can go back in time and find resources like that...

3723

Originality / Re: Original fan belt

« on: December 28, 2013, 06:22:17 PM »

Hey Chick I recently saw that auction for that replacement belt as well, ( I also saved the pics), thanks for posting the pics. Hans and JKZ have had the raised original belts, which made me think the raised was assembly line correct. Is it any different for 67 or 68, did they use exclusively one style from the factory?

3724

Originality / Re: Exhaust Manifold #s

« on: December 27, 2013, 06:54:40 PM »

Charley, awesome gesture.

I agree. 

X2

3725

Originality / Original fan belt

« on: December 27, 2013, 06:37:30 PM »

Hey guys, I am trying to figure out what the original part number for the 1969 Z/28 fan/alternator/smog belt is. I see in the AIM it says for a sbc with a manual it is GM3883248, but then see the repop guys list a part number GM3932457, although I didn't find this in the AIM.
In addition to the part number I am also trying to figure out what is assembly line correct. I have seen 2 versions of GM belts, ones that have the GM number stamped/pressed in , and have also seen the part number raised off of the belt in a crisp font. See pic (Thank you Hans for digging those out)
Hans pic of his belts came off a 69 Los Angeles car, not sure if the Norwood parts bin would be the same, or if there was an earlier and later version of the belt(s).

3726

Originality / Re: air cleaner

« on: December 27, 2013, 06:29:18 PM »

can you give us some more info? It sounds like you are working on a 69 with a cowl hood?

3727

General Discussion / Re: 67 convertible 6 cyl 3 speed rare??

« on: December 26, 2013, 05:38:24 PM »

"Here is my 1956 chevy pickup I did a frame off, bare metal restoration/resto mod. Shaved firewall, one piece windows, shaved all emblems and custom interior. Me and my father ( I did most of the work and the patina paint job ) restored this truck in 7 months. I also took a couple months off working on it when I moved. I sold it for 16k (stock suspension). It can be done"

Thanks, for posting your truck story. While it is a nice resto, guys are doing this all the time, AND making money doing it. Of coarse you have to buy a initial solid vehicle, and know how much you can turn it for when your done. The basis for the TV shows that do this in an hour and portray a couple days work (not really reality IMO) is guys that are able to do this in a few months time.
I agree and it continues to happen.
The candidates are out there waiting to be "cleaned up".

3728

General Discussion / Re: MERRY CHRISTMAS !!!!

« on: December 26, 2013, 01:57:18 AM »

Merry Christmas and God bless our troops

3729

General Discussion / Re: Rick & His Yenko at Americarna LIVE Car Show

« on: December 26, 2013, 01:49:25 AM »

what does a car like that go for (roughly)?

3730

General Discussion / Re: 67 convertible 6 cyl 3 speed rare??

« on: December 25, 2013, 10:54:25 PM »

I think if you got it running under its own power for little cash out of pocket you could do alright.

Additionally I just purchased a nice 65 mustang convertible a few months ago. I got it operable, installed new interior, top, and cleaned it up cosmetically and did make money in the short run ( 6 months) . Call it a mini resto. People have been doing that for years, wether original or not, and foreign and domestic.

3731

General Discussion / Re: 69 Z/28 survivor on Ebay

« on: December 25, 2013, 09:10:27 PM »

My car has undercoating, but I have the receipt showing it was done on the 2nd day of ownership, along with undercoating it. If not for the undercoating my car probably would have rotted away in the first couple of Michigan winters. SO, yes on a car now it would nice not to have them, but undercoating while used to cover up possible rot, back in the day saved a few cars, and was useful.

3732

Trans-Am Camaros / Re: factory race parts

« on: December 25, 2013, 11:53:25 AM »

well I wasn't sure if anyone had ever posted about it, and thought it would be cool to see what the system looked like back then and how they mounted it. Would the rear end get that hot around the track? or was it just for the 24 hour races?

3733

General Discussion / Re: 69 Z/28 survivor on Ebay

« on: December 25, 2013, 04:34:15 AM »

It was a win win for Lawrence, either way he would have ended up with a nice Z, and he did.

Merry Christmas fellas

God bless our troops

3734

General Discussion / Re: 69 Z/28 survivor on Ebay

« on: December 25, 2013, 04:32:00 AM »

thanks for putting that out there Lawrence.

3735

General Discussion / Re: my 1969 z28

« on: December 25, 2013, 04:05:44 AM »

Very good info. Its funny my car has 46k on it which is considered low milage but still another 8k more than your low milage beauty , but its funny with the "low" milage that each car has how many oops things happened still from the original owners. My front spoiler definitely has some wear to it, I acquired a nice original back up if one day it decides to part with the car. And of coarse my car also has some paint touch ups on the side panels from the bad Michigan winters eating up the paint I believe.
The side pipes are a great bit of nostalgia, I don't see them now in your pics, what style exhaust did you replace them with?