CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 24, 2014, 11:12:50 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.
105722 Posts in 12341 Topics by 4754 Members
Latest Member: Jake
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 31
286  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 69 CAMARO'S LEFT ON THE ROAD on: September 26, 2013, 07:09:18 AM
The noted damage is interesting, wonder if the broken motor mount had anything to do with putting the car in the water.
Mike
Didn't the broken engine mount issue sometimes cause the throttle to stick open, hence the recall to fit interlocking mounts?
287  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Original 1969 standard grille on: September 24, 2013, 04:02:15 AM
Interesting detail, if that's correct. The non-RS grills have the emblem centered on the gap between vertical dividers.
288  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Don't miss out on this one on: September 23, 2013, 04:29:18 PM
Tags looks good....
To some degree, I can understand why sellers are wary of supplying photos to "tag chasers", especially if the requester of the photos has no interest at all in buying the car, and the seller later finds it the subject of discussion on an Internet forum.
I understand the motivation for assisting those who track VINs and TTs, and find the dark side of the hobby - fooling people with fake cars - disgusting, but I can also see why some sellers are reluctant to provide VIN and tag details to strangers via email.
289  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Sheetmetal Date Code on: September 22, 2013, 04:20:01 PM
Found a couple more stamps over the weekend. Fenders are stamped exactly where Mike's are, in the above photo, and both seat back braces are stamped in the center, about half way between the rectangular hole (near the bottom) and where the 'Y' fork occurs.
290  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Don't miss out on this one on: September 21, 2013, 06:35:03 PM
Pity there's no picture of the trim tag.
291  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: "837" alternator deep grove pulley on: September 21, 2013, 06:33:16 PM
I believe the '67 Z28 and L78 alt pulley had the notch you're describing.
292  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Sheetmetal Date Code on: September 19, 2013, 10:23:13 PM
Concerning the sheet metal: are all panels/pieces stamped ? Front clip etc...? It's all OE and wonderful shape so somewhere I want it noted. I know doors ,hood---can't find it on fenders ,valiance, etc.
As far as I know, all original sheetmetal parts have a date stamp, although I haven't checked my entire car yet. So far, I have found the following:
Quarters are stamped in the weatherstrip gutter area, near the rear window filler panel joint;
Trunk lid stamped on the underside stiffener brace near the centerline;
Doors - as shown in pictures above;
Header panel - stamped on underside, just to one side of the centerline;
Valance - I recall it is stamped on one end, where it bolts to fender extn, but will have to check;
Roof skin side support structure - driver's side, towards rear of door glass.
Fenders and fender extensions - haven't had a close look for these yet.
293  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Sheetmetal Date Code on: September 19, 2013, 04:14:38 PM
Thanks for the reply, and yes if you get a chance, it would be nice to know if your other cars have the same issue.
294  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Sheetmetal Date Code on: September 19, 2013, 02:23:49 AM
Just checked passenger side door, came from the same donor car, and it has 2 different date codes too.
Nobody else come across this?
295  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Need paintcode for 67 CC ermine white... on: September 18, 2013, 06:37:26 AM
Try this:
296  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 Z/28 Power Brake Hose Bracket - Original? on: September 18, 2013, 02:22:19 AM
The bracket in the photos Danny posted seems too short.
297  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 1969 RS and Cowl induction hole on: September 17, 2013, 04:02:18 PM
The '69 AIM calls up hole for Z22 Rally Sport as 1.00" diameter (UPC 0, sheet A9), and cowl induction wiring hole as 0.75" diameter (UPC ZL2, sheet A5).
298  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Sheetmetal Date Code on: September 15, 2013, 03:56:09 AM
I was stripping down a used driver's side door from a '69 today, when I noticed that the inner panel of the door shell had 2 different date codes stamped on it. I've added some photos, showing the location of the 2 stamps (circled in red) and each of the two date stamps. How come there is a gap of several weeks (from week '39' to '43') between the stamps? The 'H39 1' stamp is upright and the 'H43' is upside-down.
299  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Paint stripping rear spoiler? on: September 12, 2013, 10:21:39 PM
Dave, I posted a reply to your other thread over at TC, but I was under the impression that the factory spoilers were ABS, rather than fiberglass.
300  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Timing Cover date codes on: September 12, 2013, 08:34:11 PM
Here's a 1969 dated BB timing cover, currently listed on ebay: http://www.ebay.com/itm/290976608998
Seems to follow the same date code format as the SB covers I have, if the stamp is '31 69'. If the '3' was upside-down, instead of the '1', then the date code would be '69 13' which is possible, but has anyone ever seen the year stamped first? (Date code images below)
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 31
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 0.094 seconds with 18 queries.