CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 31, 2014, 06:11:21 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.
105865 Posts in 12354 Topics by 4762 Members
Latest Member: HarryQ
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 75
1  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Radio Delete Block-off Plug on: October 27, 2014, 11:11:25 PM
Hi Bob,

     That number should be 4805843. Mine (67 05B conv) only has 43 visible due to previous paint jobs before I bought the car and using thinners to remove the paint removed some of the raised numbers. There are reproductions for this but lack the numbering.
This is good to see another plug confirming the number  Smiley
 I find the sealer on the '68 hinge interesting. Looks like in 68 it was brought down the side? My '67's only have sealer on the top hinge and only on the top side. The texture on yours is interesting. I wonder what was used to cause that pattern.

Thank you for sharing this picture as I am sure future searches will find it helpful.

Mike
2  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Radio Delete Block-off Plug on: October 22, 2014, 10:18:47 AM
 That plug was used for a rear mounted antenna too. Is there a part number on the plug?
Thanks for posting as an FYI because it's always welcomed to have the into at hand when doing a search.

Mike
3  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Looks like another Fake X77 TT on: October 22, 2014, 10:15:44 AM
The seller has posted that the car is a clone. Someone pointed out that the trim tag is a fake.

That was me - I asked him yesterday why the car had a fake/repro cowl tag when it wasn't a Z/28.  :-)

John,
   What was the sellers reply? Just curious.
Mike
4  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Galvanized finish on 67-68 tail light housings, hot dipped or electroplated? on: October 18, 2014, 08:01:13 PM
Thanks Darrell !

Year  Tag date   Plant  Head type
67      11B          LOS   Hex
67      11E          NOR   Phillip (L&R)
67      04B          LOS   Hex (L) & Phillip (R)
67      05B          NOR   Phillip (L&R)
67      05E          NOR   Hex   (L&R)
67       ?                ?    Phillip (L&R) - posted by 69z28-rs
68      03D          NOR   Hex   (L&R)
5  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Galvanized finish on 67-68 tail light housings, hot dipped or electroplated? on: October 18, 2014, 11:57:37 AM
Hi John,

  Thanks for chiming on. By head type I was referring to hex or Phillip. So, somewhere along the lamp units revision history the fastener type was changed. Looking at the small sample below there doesn't seem to be any hint of when the type transitioned. Oh well, still an interesting topic  Smiley
So far we have:

Year  Tag date   Plant  Head type
67      11B          LOS   Hex
67      04B          LOS   Hex (L) & Phillip (R)
67      05B          NOR   Phillip (L&R)
67      05E          NOR   Hex   (L&R)
67       ?                ?    Phillip (L&R) - posted by 69z28-rs

Mike
6  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Galvanized finish on 67-68 tail light housings, hot dipped or electroplated? on: October 17, 2014, 08:22:50 PM
 Looks like there is no pattern for usage between the two different types of fasteners.

John Z. - were the tail lamp housings already assembled from the supplier? If a vendor provides them, who actually would specify the type of fastener head to use?

Thank You,
Mike
7  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Galvanized finish on 67-68 tail light housings, hot dipped or electroplated? on: October 16, 2014, 08:12:54 PM
I'd guess, based on volume economics, that they were stamped from hot-dip galvanized rolled sheet stock, which then required no further processing or handling.  Smiley
 I agree with that about stamping from stock. I looked at the lamp opening edges and see they are exposed steel with no galvanizing, obviously from the hole stamping process

Mike
8  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Galvanized finish on 67-68 tail light housings, hot dipped or electroplated? on: October 16, 2014, 08:06:10 PM
 Interesting observation and topic! I checked my housings and found the 05B NOR used Phillip heads on L&R side and the 04B LOS used Phillips on one side and hex heads on the other.
I don't know if it was a NOR vs. LOS thing or a transition from one head type to the other starting around 04B (good idea for a poll?). I doubt it would be one of those 'as long as it fits' usage being the assembler would have to switch out the tool to screw them on.
  I attached images of the NOR and LOS fasteners and a closeup of the hex fastener marking  used on the LOS tail housing.

Mike
9  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Galvanized finish on 67-68 tail light housings, hot dipped or electroplated? on: October 16, 2014, 06:11:47 PM
 I checked my '67 04B LOS and '67 05B NOR original tail housings and they have a very clear and definite spangle texture.
I would say they were hot dipped.

Mike
10  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Black Paint on Chrome Parts on: October 14, 2014, 05:32:32 PM
 The GM paint I used then was pre-thinned so it went on straight from the can. It is more of an egg shell gloss, as I would describe it. Looks darn close to Rust-Oleum 7777. Being it was from GM I figured it was the same gloss used for the firewall, tail panel (BB) and radiator and inner fender support so I used it as such. It was a lacquer and dried quickly. I don't know what the GM reconditioning black mixture is today.

Mike
11  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 1967 Camaro stolen on: October 13, 2014, 12:17:56 PM
 In the past when I drove my car to work a few times in the '90's and left it in the parking lot under the security camera, nobody screwed with it.
But, there is always someone who is up to the challenge. At that time I used a steering wheel lock (I know they can be broken quickly) but I also would open the hood and switch plug wires 8,1 & 2,7 on the distributor cap and also substituted a hollow coil wire before I walked away from it. It takes less than a minute to set the wires and close the hood. If anything it would buy time and hopefully enough of it where I can get to the car. Fortunately nobody ever tampered with the car.
  Now, I would invest in the steering wheel locks that have a built in motion sensor that triggers a self contained alarm and also will page you. Similar to the 'Bully' brand alarm I have for my Harley.

Mike
12  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Black Paint on Chrome Parts on: October 13, 2014, 07:15:45 AM
Bob,

  Are you referring to the blackout on the tail lamps within the "bumpy" areas? I did mine back in the 80's using a few light coats of GM reconditioning black (no primer) and to this day they still look good with no lifting.

Mike
13  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Vin for data base on: October 13, 2014, 07:05:14 AM
Vin124378N378371

From what I can tell its a orig rsss396 4 spd M21 car. Manual steering, Power 4 piston front calipers, deluxe interior, no spoiler no console or gauges.
Green exterior black interior
How did you come by this information?

Mike
14  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 67 poa valve on: October 08, 2014, 05:47:48 PM
056 looks to be the Julian date and that puts it around Feb 25, 1967. I'd say it is correct for your April 67 car.

Mike
15  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: New guy, New project ' 67 on: October 06, 2014, 05:26:36 PM
Ill get better pics of that for you today
I see what looked like blackout paint is actually dirt. Looks like the wiper motor hole covered explanation looks to be valid so far.
What is that silver tag on the motor head?

Mike
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 75
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.086 seconds with 18 queries.