CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 22, 2014, 01:23:10 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.
107637 Posts in 12512 Topics by 4813 Members
Latest Member: fsc66
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 35
271  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Caveat Emptor on: February 18, 2014, 04:31:19 AM
The 05B car was made the same day as my car, and my car is 05A
How did you determine that?
272  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Sinkhole in the Corvette Museum on: February 13, 2014, 03:11:18 AM
or the Hugger Orange Museum.....Relax I'm only kidding
Course you are; can only think of one guy that'd pay to go visit that one Smiley

Very sad to see those unique cars damaged/lost like that.......
273  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Identifying Original Console Gauges on: February 08, 2014, 08:56:27 PM
Was once told by an old school restorer that using a small blob of toothpaste on the end of your finger works really well in cleaning up old lenses..... I have never put it to the test, and am not sure if this recommendation was for glass or plastic (or both?) lenses. Anyone else heard that?
Will have to look around for some old plastic gauge lens, and give it a try
At the very least, should end up cavity-free and minty fresh Smiley
274  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Identifying Original Console Gauges on: February 07, 2014, 05:03:39 AM
Mine are brushed face, and have somewhat uneven corners too:
275  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Stainless Chambered exhaust on: February 07, 2014, 04:43:56 AM
So if you 'lost' around 7hp with a chambered exhaust and stock exhaust manifolds, would you expect to regain those 7hp with chambered exhaust and long tube headers?
Also, would imagine that in reality, there could be at least a 7hp variance between 2 otherwise identical (drivetrain) cars off the factory assembly line.
276  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Headlight Switch on: February 07, 2014, 04:36:09 AM
Thanks Mark, that confirms it then.

Quiz tomorrow, not multiple choice.
Not sure what you mean by that Everett.
277  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Headlight Switch on: February 04, 2014, 05:15:55 AM
Another member has confirmed via email that 173 is correct for my application, so good to know. Thanks CRG.
278  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 69 Z28 Engine Bay Pic's on: January 31, 2014, 04:44:45 PM
Worth noting for the PTB discussion, that JohnZ's Assembly Process article describes the inspection marks as "ink stamps".
(My apologies if this has already been noted elsewhere in this thread, but I didn't spot it if it is).
279  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Rosewood Wheel on Ebay on: January 25, 2014, 06:22:52 PM
Yes, it was - to Howard Elliott Motors in Hamilton, Ontario.
Thanks John!
Gary - they were all Flint engines.
280  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Headlight Switch on: January 25, 2014, 06:27:02 AM
I have 2 headlight switches, one has 175 and the other has 173 on it. Can't say which one was originally on the car, which is a non-RS with factory console gauges. Research here indicates that 1995173 is correct for this application, but the AIM doesn't appear to call up this with RPO U17. The AIM does however specify different part numbers for console/non-console RS cars under RPO Z22. The earliest documentation I could find 1995173 in is the 1972 P&A catalog.
I'm going to use the 173 switch, based on research and advice here, but can anyone confirm if it is an assembly line correct part #?
281  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 69 Z/28 Barn Find?? on: January 25, 2014, 03:31:38 AM
Must have been hot in that barn, because the rear stripes shrunk! I call BS on this one
Well to be fair, the seller does say it had one repaint in 1981, which explains the incorrect rear stripe layout.
But I think I smell what you're calling on this one, at least on the story.
282  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Rosewood Wheel on Ebay on: January 24, 2014, 02:51:39 AM
Other than the shallower dish, was there any other difference between the early 1969 model year N34 walnut (pre-rosewood) wheel, and the 1967-8 version?
283  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 69' Z/28 on eBay... What a Car! on: January 23, 2014, 07:14:13 PM
So in your opinion do you think it is a $88k car?
Personally, yes. Fantastic looking car. That said, and meaning no disrespect to the current owner or restorer (James has done an incredible job), I find it perplexing that so much effort has been spent in meticulously replicating all the original factory finishes, including all the paint runs, coverage issues and variations observed on true survivors, and yet they used a BC/CC paint system.
Perhaps this is due to state environmental regulations preventing lacquer use?
284  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Rosewood Wheel on Ebay on: January 23, 2014, 07:02:53 PM
John, was your car originally Canadian-delivered?
285  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: photos of my 69 build, on: January 23, 2014, 06:53:05 PM
You wouldn't have known except for stripping it down
May not have realized the full extent of issues, but have another look at the front of the roof above the windshield trim in picture #1 of this thread for a hint of what lay beneath.....
Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 35
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 0.079 seconds with 18 queries.