CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 31, 2015, 10:38:54 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.
111440 Posts in 12830 Topics by 4913 Members
Latest Member: devodave
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 76
136  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, 11:44:04 AM
Wide tires were used back then.  They just had to jack the rear of the car up to clear the quarter well.  Another check mark for 7 & 8s for not needing as much jacking..










137  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, 07:34:57 AM
Give me a 68 RS/SS L89 4.10 or 4.56 m20.

Not an RS or L89 but its a 4.56 & a 69 CEL78 with a bench seat!  If I had the income I would snatch this one up.

Click Link



138  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, 07:38:27 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.
139  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: pad stamp? on: December 09, 2014, 12:29:07 PM
Can you post the VIN please?
140  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: pretty cool on: December 08, 2014, 10:10:43 PM
Great pics.  Do I see hood pins?
141  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: pad stamp? on: December 08, 2014, 09:50:08 PM
My $0.02

Main reason is because the fakers or restampers of the world are getting better and better by the day.  This is the main reason for the "secrecy".  Unfortunately or fortunately it takes time and experience researching to get to the point that several here have achieved.  This is a passion and a hobby.   Wink


I just wanted to add that you do not want to rush into a purchase.  You will need to research every car you look at to make sure you are getting what you want.  It will be somewhat of a long process especially for the novice.
142  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: IS THIS ANOTHER MILLION DOLLAR 6 BANGER ? on: December 08, 2014, 09:28:46 PM
$ 400-500 to find original valve stem caps?? People have  lost their minds over these cars, Huh

You apparently didnt see the set over on yenko.net for sale.  $400 for a set of 5..

Go here!
143  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: New to CRG from N Texas on: December 08, 2014, 08:19:28 PM
Welcome to the site!

Its been a secret for years.  68's are the best followed by 7's and then 9's.. 


144  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Craiglist ad 18 1st gen Camaros on: December 08, 2014, 08:06:05 PM
Link?
145  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 67-9 Fuel lines on: December 07, 2014, 05:50:08 PM
67L78 thanks for the reply.

I want to make sure I get my info correct so bare with me.

Bat car and your car was essentially the same except for the fact the frame mount bolts were positioned to where your car was going from the ground side towards the engine but the bat car was going from the engine side towards the ground?

Thanks, Darrell
146  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 67-9 Fuel lines on: December 07, 2014, 02:21:24 PM
Changed my post.  Thanks.  I have been updating spreadsheets all morning and had 67&8 on the brain.  Besides the fact they are the better years.   Cool
147  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 67-9 Fuel lines on: December 07, 2014, 01:20:44 PM
Thanks to everyone that has supplied pics thus far.  We still need more pics and info on this subject.  Anyone else have original fuel lines on their cars?  You can email me the pics at

cook_dw@hotmail.com
148  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: New guy - Hello! Need opinions - is it a real SS? on: December 06, 2014, 04:35:36 PM
Based on what I'm seeing, it seems that a 68 L78 car (which is what the subject car of this thread claims to be), should have the fuel line mounted to the cross member on the passenger's side by a metal strap held in place by one of the motor mount bolts.  Am I correct?

Chris

Yes and No.



You can not hang your hat on just that clip.  To help answer a little further.

I feel the clip on the frame mount was used on all 67 & 68 big block cars.  One thing that concerns me is the fact the fuel line was cut in that area as well as I do not see a clip or bolt or even a hole for said items on the top of the frame that secures the line.  So yes this could be a big block car.  Unfortunately, that is not enough evidence to sufficiently say that it is 100% without a doubt a big block car.  What you need with any of these cars anymore is documented ownership history, original drivetrain and/or original paperwork.  Of course the best is all three but sometimes 1 or 2 out of the 3 is enough when all other items check out and nothing seems shady or fishy.  Hope that helps.

149  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: "Cement" used at rear shock mounts?? on: December 06, 2014, 12:41:40 PM
I posted this before.  I actually bought some this week & it's a dark gray.

Click Me for Thread
150  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: New guy, New project ' 67 on: December 05, 2014, 09:51:40 AM
At this point the only data I have collected show early LOS cars.  Still need more early NOR cars to add to my list to make a determination.  At least on the data I have been collecting.
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 76
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 0.281 seconds with 18 queries.