CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 21, 2014, 09:17:13 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.
104650 Posts in 12243 Topics by 4719 Members
Latest Member: Baconcks
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 73
16  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Ebay Trim tag counterfeiter on: September 06, 2014, 06:40:41 PM
   I'm sure counterfeiters by now know what to look for in the computer age. Keeping tight lip maybe 10 years ago would slow down the reproductions but today there is so much that people freely post that makes it a treasure trove for counterfeiters. CRG posts here are one example with the freely posting of trim and VIN tags which eventually become metadata for a web browser to pick up for anyone looking for these images. Also, you can freely download real trim tag examples and look at them for comparison from a few web site already. A Google search is all one needs to do.
  Educating the consumer is a double edge blade. In one hand you can teach them and they will be able to spot a fake and avoid falling prey and yet the counterfeiters can also learn.
I have been down this route in the gun collecting industry where fakes show up too but there are people who do teach what to look for. But, no matter how hard a counterfeiters tries, there are always little nuances that will spring up to raise a flag. I'm sure one day the perfect stamp will appear and then the only identifiable 'DNA' will be the machine marks for comparison on similar period tags like with Vette's. Camaro's will be harder of course because they are painted. Using the Corvette crowd as an example, once the publication was available that showed how to identify real (hence fakes too) 'Vette tags, then that reduced the numbers of fakes showing up, that is how I understand it anyway.

Mike
17  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: REAR END DATE on: September 06, 2014, 06:22:37 PM
Still depends a lot on the year and the model.  Less common vehicles for that year or even time of year have been known to have larger spreads.  But you can't say that for all cars.
 I agree with this statement. I would think the standard gear and rear date stamp (if no optional were ordered) would be close in dates being the inventory was used at a faster rate.
  The two L35 Camaros I have with original rears are one 'BJ' rear (3:07) stamp dated 0404 for a LOS 4B (April 13th per UOIT) dated trim tag and that is the standard gear ratio rear with this model so I can see how the rear date stamp is close to the body born date on the trim tag by almost 2 weeks. The other 67 rear is a 'QK' (3:31) stamp dated 0331 for a NOR 5B dated trim tag and that is the optional performance gear ratio rear. So, I can see how that can sit in inventory longer before getting pulled and in this case it was close to 6 weeks. Also, per John Z., there was no mandatory rule for using items by their date codes unlike in the food industry.

Mike

*fixed quote*
18  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Ebay Trim tag counterfeiter on: September 06, 2014, 06:06:14 PM
 I doubt it is Bill. As I understand it, Bill uses a real Fisher addressograph for his tags. This guy in Canada has these ads a lot on eBay and for 67 & 68 tags the numbers are not quite right and the horizontal column alignments are not period correct.

Mike
19  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 68 Convertible Windshield Header Moldings on: September 05, 2014, 08:56:21 PM
 I read within CRG a while back that in '68 there were new DOT safety laws passed that made it necessary for the satin moldings. I think the wiper arms were included in that too but I am not 100% sure. '67 was bright trim.
Maybe John Z. can verify that.


Mike
20  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 67 AIM on: September 02, 2014, 07:01:16 PM
WOW...Bob, I had my 67 AM since the early 80's and that too doesn't have those pages.  Huh
I never realized it until reading your post.
What color do you think it is? I have a few I found in my shed I know I took from parts cars in the 80's.

Mike
21  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Another potential rebody on: August 31, 2014, 09:31:34 AM
OK....I see what you mean now. A potential for moving the tags to another body. For some reason, after seeing the red color on both cars and assuming for a moment they were the same, I was thinking now there is something you don't see often...a Firebird with a Camaro tag. That would be interesting to explain the difference in quarters.  Cheesy

Mike
22  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Another potential rebody on: August 30, 2014, 10:56:33 PM
 I take that add to be for 2 separate cars, not a rebody. The pics show a Camaro and FB rear tail panel.

Mike
23  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Took the Day Off.... on: August 29, 2014, 10:55:51 PM
 I know the topic of the tail paint has been discussed here before and I believe the consensus was the black paint used for the tail was the same for the lower rockers (where used) and the firewall. It makes sense because I doubt GM would have a special gloss just for the tail blackout. If you were to take a guess (unless you know for sure) at what gloss level would you say yours is?

Mike
24  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Took the Day Off.... on: August 29, 2014, 10:43:03 PM
 I figured that but I'm not sure what he is stating. Does he mean the tail blackout is gloss black?

Mike
25  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Took the Day Off.... on: August 29, 2014, 10:27:56 PM
"I have to retract my first belief of them being semi or satin black. "
  What do you mean by that statement?

Mike
26  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Help determining 67 4P scenario on: August 26, 2014, 10:28:43 AM
Hmm...I thought SB used a 5/16" line from tank to pump and the BB was 3/8". Maybe I am getting confused with the BB fuel line routing and the way it is secured by a retainer on the front frame then. I knew something is different with the BB fuel line.

Mike
27  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Extent of firewall coverage with body paint on: August 26, 2014, 10:10:04 AM
 I'm at the point of spraying the door jambs, underside of trunk lid and lip and firewall prior to body spray. How low did the robotics spray paint on the firewall prior to blackout?
Were the bottom of the "saddle bags" and the angular looking lower fender support covered in body color too prior to blackout? This is for a 67 NOR car.

Thank You,
Mike
28  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Condensation wicks in tail light housing on: August 25, 2014, 10:35:25 PM
Both my 67's have them. On the one I restored I replaced a missing one using a cigarette filter (I think from a Marlboro). It worked and looks excellent.

Mike
29  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Help determining 67 4P scenario on: August 25, 2014, 10:32:24 PM
A BB had a larger 3/8" fuel line ID and an offset for the transmission cross member mounting bolts.

Mike
30  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Correct bolts for seat rails to seats on: August 22, 2014, 07:54:15 PM
There are a lot of bolts pictured here from a well participated discussion:
http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?topic=9074.15
Look at reply #28 for seat bolts. Keep in mind that the head markings can vary depending on the mfg, but for seats I have always seen the washers with the barbs in the edges.

Mike
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 73
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 0.101 seconds with 18 queries.