CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 16, 2014, 10:55:07 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.
97116 Posts in 11684 Topics by 4578 Members
Latest Member: ronhill
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 64
46  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Can 67 SB Engine Frame mounts be accidently switched? on: March 10, 2014, 10:02:19 AM
  Isn't there a lip that is turned down on one side of the mount and overhangs the frame cross member? I would think that would prevent the reverse mounting. I know my BB mounts have that turned down lip.
   My 67 BB fan sits about 1/2 the blade top curve into the with the end of the shroud. I though the SB was similar though the BB and SB used different P/N spacers and there is only a 1/4" difference in depth between the two with the SB having slightly more depth reach.

Mike
47  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Help identifying heater box part on: March 08, 2014, 11:53:51 AM
 Looking at the extended end-to-end length of the rubber inside the cold air passage side it looks to make contact with one folded edge closest to the heater box, hence a seal. I think the rubber is there to act as a top and bottom air dam to keep pressurized cool air away from the hot air door top and bottom edges for various heat settings to force air around the door flap back. The internal stamping of the box is very rigid so the rubber may be acting as a secondary benefit of support but that may be debatable.

Mike
48  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: eBay picture on: March 02, 2014, 09:19:27 PM
I see the comments " bent wheel use on rear". For the drive shaft I think the reflection of the exhaust pipe on the shaft gives a perception that it is at more of an angle than factory, but upon closer inspection it looked ok i think.
  I think you are right about the reflection. I know from experience that it's damn near impossible to skew a rear on the springs providing the axle brackets are of the correct width.

Mike
49  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: eBay picture on: March 02, 2014, 08:39:34 PM
Looks like the rear is definitely skewed. Are the axle tube mounts sitting on the spring tits for centering?
 I am only use to seeing mono springs with metal tits so I assume multi's have them too.

Mike
50  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Half a 69 camaro.... on: March 02, 2014, 07:48:43 PM
 Is that a numbers matching desk?  Grin
51  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: under hood finish on: March 02, 2014, 02:44:38 PM
 I would think that whatever the gloss % is of GM's reconditioning black paint it, that would be close enough.
That is what I am using. I have yet to see anyone use a gloss meter to determine the gloss % finish at a car show.
Without one then it's simply individual interpretation. I doubt GM cared much what the gloss % was for underhood mass production parts.

Mike
52  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 68 396 Camaro TH400 oil pump cover on: March 01, 2014, 07:38:01 PM
 If you are talking about the round cover in the front that the torque converter shaft comes through, it is unpainted.

Mike
53  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Fredd Gibb ZL 1 on eBay.. Rebodied? on: March 01, 2014, 02:23:56 PM
 I was 'mated' with my wife in 1977...I am still the same original person!  Cheesy

Mike
54  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Van Nuys Tag on 69 camaro on: March 01, 2014, 10:20:43 AM
Hmm, without the original motor, its going to be hard to validate a LOS car is a Z/28.
  Or hard to disprove it.
IMO, I wouldn't get too concerned or too hung up documentation unless you have intentions to resell the car (most here keep their prized possessions) so just enjoy owning and driving it.

Mike
55  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: PACE CAR TROUBLES on: February 25, 2014, 07:36:55 PM
What's the story behind this? Was the car coming from or to a show?
That's the kind of accident whereby you wake up the following morning and hope it was just a bad dream.

Mike
56  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: Question on exhaust manifold tube support on: February 25, 2014, 07:05:42 PM
  It may be tight possibly from being slightly out-of round. If it looks like it is just a tight friction fit and not an obvious over sized OD, then try putting a thin layer of grease on the flange and using a wooden block across the OD, tap it in.

Again, this is only if it looks like it wants to go in but is just snug. I use grease at times for stubborn exhaust fittings and it works great.


Good luck!
Mike
57  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: PACE CAR TROUBLES on: February 25, 2014, 06:55:14 PM
 If the rear frame rails are straight then the rest of the body is likely square. Looks like the outer panels plus inner wheel tubs need replacement, for starters. If it were mine I'd rebuild it if I had a sentimental attachment to it.
Trunk floor boards can be replaced as well as the inner braces.

Mike
58  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 67 traction bar busings? on: February 24, 2014, 09:18:18 PM
Hi Mike,

  I was looking to see if an OEM type of bushing was made where rubber was used.
If these ES bushings are what is available, I'll go with them.

Thank you,
Mike
59  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / 67 traction bar busings? on: February 23, 2014, 11:31:52 AM
 Any '67 owners whose car has the rear traction bar replaced the rubber bushings?
Mine are dry rotted and need replacement. I have seen these on eBay but they look to be the solid type: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Rear-Traction-Bar-Bushing-Set-Passenger-Side-Energy-Suspension-3-7115-3-7115BL/360855488013?_trksid=p2045573.c100033.m2042&_trkparms=aid%3D111000%26algo%3DREC.RVI%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20131017132637%26meid%3D5041252489324300350%26pid%3D100033%26prg%3D20131017132637%26rk%3D3%26rkt%3D4%26sd%3D221175379129

Thank you,
Mike
60  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Were 'Pacesetter' VIN's period different? on: February 22, 2014, 11:29:14 AM
This car has been discussed before.

http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?topic=11345.0


HA!  and I even replied to that one too :-) I should have done a search before starting this thread!

Mike
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 64
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 0.093 seconds with 18 queries.