CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 28, 2015, 12:24:52 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.
112376 Posts in 12911 Topics by 4944 Members
Latest Member: 68RS/SS
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 122
286  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, 11:28:04 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 agree all the manufacturers used skinny tires because most everybody else used them, and they were main stream, and their " Win on Sunday, sell on Monday" marketing was working without using large wheel tubs, but this may have given any 1 of the big 3 a leg up.

I could see it affecting the trunk space a little, but on the A body cars and full frame vehicles, you could fit like 6 people in the trunk! I think they could sacrificed a some trunk space on those cars at least. A redesign of the rear seat would have made it work without sacrificing hip room. Nix a couple of extra ashtrays in the rear and its paid for... Smiley

I think it was do-able back then. I think the design of the cars was great across all the manufactures really. When you see some of the prototypes they were looking at and the other possible names of the cars, things could have turned out a lot worse. I think a possible name for the Camaro was the "Chetah" ... Cheesy
287  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: if you could go back and redesign the 67/8 .. or that other one, on: December 09, 2014, 09:37:10 PM
1967 - wouldn't change a thing.
1968 - why mess with perfection.
1969 - redesign to look more like a 7 or 8.

Seriously though why change them.  Their differences are what make them great.

 I agree for the most part with Cook.
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. The 65 mustang only came with 14" wheels and a 225 tire is pushing it on those. 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.
I also think this would have saved a lot of corvettes camaros and the like from the big flared fender rage of the 70's. Just my 2 cents from seeing a lot of hack jobs and fab work over the years.
288  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: New to CRG from N Texas on: December 08, 2014, 09:25:29 PM
Darrell (Mr. 68)  I knew I could count on you to chime in here....

BTW it is still a well kept secret, nobody will claim they like 68's.... Cheesy

(but we know they do)    Wink
289  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: A Very Rusty Proposition on: December 07, 2014, 09:49:46 PM
Well never say "never". Enough guys locate an original motor to give the rest of the hobby with orphan cars hope. Think positive, hell check out the orphan section on here somebody may have already located it..
290  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: New to CRG from N Texas on: December 07, 2014, 09:47:30 PM
Well you are gonna make a few friends on here right away, there is a contingent that like 68 the best. I like 67 and 69 , it would have to be a RS or a Z for me to bite on a 68. Just saying....
There are guys like Chick and Daryl that are big on the 67 and 8 and will come to your aid if you have any questions.

Hope you enjoy the site and all it offers at a great price.... Grin
291  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: New to CRG from N Texas on: December 06, 2014, 09:21:52 PM
Welcome to the site. So what is your current first gen ?
292  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: A Very Rusty Proposition on: December 06, 2014, 09:07:40 PM
Did you get the block or trans with it?
293  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: A Very Rusty Proposition on: December 05, 2014, 12:31:38 PM
If done right what would price would this car bring if you had to sell it?
294  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: car that lost its barn! on: December 05, 2014, 12:18:41 PM
How about a link to Google images for us to look at?
295  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: A Very Rusty Proposition on: December 05, 2014, 12:01:29 PM
Those are all bolt-ons. What matters is underneath.

That's what I'm talking about. If the shell isn't too bad, seems like it is worth the time.
296  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: A Very Rusty Proposition on: December 05, 2014, 10:00:46 AM
Kurt,

If you gave me the $$ to do it, I wouldn't touch that car...  Smiley

Gary when I grew up in the 90's this was the typical project car. In fact I purchased a 66 Chevelle SS that looked identical to this car except with a couple of gallons of orange house paint on it for $900. I slapped an extra 396 and muncie in it I had laying around and drove it for 4 years as a daily driver, and had guys making me offers back then if you can believe it. So I have seen worse. I really wanted that car back then, and I couldn't afford a 8k driver so a project car fit my budget. I think I had around $1500 into it, and had fun drag racing it against my friends 10k muscle cars.
297  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: A Very Rusty Proposition on: December 05, 2014, 09:55:30 AM
That Z/10 looks like it was taken down to metal and then parked outside?

The condition of this car kinda reminds me of another members car on here, that looked like a 20 footer maybe even a ten footer when he bought only to uncover a bunch of rust and shot patch panels underneath. The work looks about the same roughly.  If this car was media blasted or dipped, you would probably double the value right there. Then you could see what you have to work with. It doesn't look ir-repairable to me, but you would have to be passionate about it to get it done the right way. If you have a good title, and good VIN and trim tag along with a garage space to blow it all apart, that would be all the encouragement I would need.

This is assuming you got a good deal on the body, which may or may not be the deal killer here.
It would be cool to see it resurrected from the dead, Good luck with it

298  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: A sad goodbye on: December 04, 2014, 03:13:34 PM
Final pic of the car?


You made the right choice, and they 20,302 of them, so not impossible to find another one.
299  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: This Pic got me thinking.. on: December 02, 2014, 01:09:16 PM
Well one of the things I notice, is while agree the flash point is above the heater box, you will notice as you get farther away from the flash point along the upper cowl it gets less and less white, and by the time you reach the wiper motor it turns into a light overspray. Vs the passenger side where it is very bright white (very close to the flash), and even the rubber seal looks grey with a white (flash) stripe running along it.
This appears to be a 68 Z from the pic, is there no such examples of 68's with the cowl having any white overspray?
300  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Nice Z28 For Sale on: December 02, 2014, 11:21:56 AM
I think it would be interesting to know the percentage of all first gen Camaros with their original drivetrain. With big blocks getting swapped out, and the numerous changes guys made, including blowing up transmissions, and rear end swaps. Maybe another  poll is in order ??
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 122
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 0.097 seconds with 18 queries.