CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 25, 2015, 03:48:45 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.
112263 Posts in 12899 Topics by 4935 Members
Latest Member: rspallina
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 47
16  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Antenna Mast on: March 24, 2015, 09:45:20 PM
The splined portion looks like a '9, but the nut looks different. What does the tag ahead of the nut say ?

Pic - 3-69's, 1-'68

17  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 69 Z Harmonic Balancer or not ? on: March 22, 2015, 08:19:58 PM
I know there is probably a disparity between NOS and production line parts (if nothing else, a time difference), but you can compare these two, a 7173 '68 and a 7708 '69. Both are 20-25 years old, and both are stamped in about the same location. I'd have to dig my original '69 out of the archives, but I don't remember a stamping on the face of the balancer.

Casting marks on the back are similar to the previous descriptions. Only the offset and the stamping (if they are) really set these apart.

I second the previous motion - buy it (especially if he's discarding). You can always have it rebuilt -

18  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Garage Find '69 HO Z on: March 17, 2015, 09:10:33 PM
Never mind - posted 2/17. Should have checked before -

Still a great article.
19  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Garage Find '69 HO Z on: March 17, 2015, 09:06:16 PM
If I can get this link to work, check out the "garage find" from an article in Hot Rod (as linked by MSN)

If it's been posted before, remind me -
20  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 69 camaro keys on: March 14, 2015, 10:38:41 AM
Hi Chick.  Thanks for the offer, but I was only curious if Chevrolet parts departments still did keys (as they used to). 


I had my local dealer (Jim Reed) make them from the codes several years ago for a '79 Camaro that I had - we made the keys from the key codes listed on the dealer invoice. Sport handled that when he was still at Reed -

Latest was for the '68 Z - my local locksmith handled it - we used the codes from the dealer invoice and from the codes listed on the lock cylinders, plus a couple of NOS blanks from eBay. Worked like a charm.

I'll ask Sport (if he doesn't read the thread this weekend) if they still do it. Anti-theft and privacy deals are the biggest concerns last I saw -

21  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Help me find out if my 1969 Z 28 is real on: March 07, 2015, 11:22:05 AM
"This car was built the first week of January and the motor was built the 3rd week."

That raises a flag / question. It should be the other way around. The engine cast and assembly date should be before the car build date, not after.

Got any pictures of that engine pad stamp?

When you read the eBay ad, it states "Oriiginal DZ302 block". Fine point, but it doesn't say "The" original engine block. May not be a matching numbers car, but obviously can still be an origianl Z. Need to take a peek at documentation -

Regards -
22  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Help me find out if my 1969 Z 28 is real on: March 06, 2015, 12:04:44 AM
Don't be afraid of posting here - the extreme and vast majority of people that watch and comment on this site are here to help, and not to disparage your car. I've visited other sites over the years where that's not always the case. You'll get what you look and ask about a very high percentage of the time, with fair and honest opinions from just about everyone. I've owned a Z for a long time, and I still learn something about it constantly from the topics and postings here. That's what this forum is known for, in my opinion (for what it's worth).

You've got enough '69 Z owners, experts and aficionados represented here to dissect any feature on the car, start to finish. That being said, when you post your documentation please remember that you'll get a pretty firm opinion of validity, so be prepared for it.

Welcome to the CRG - post away !

P.S. Good looking car - really like the color combo -   
23  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: Brakes Trouble Shooting on: March 03, 2015, 09:59:56 PM

I suspect the booster check valve may be involved. Try this link out for some easy checks:

All kinds of things to consider, but be methodical and you'll find it. Let us know -

Regards -
24  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 1969 convertible one-piece trunk replacement on: March 03, 2015, 09:41:39 PM
Google it. You'll find an amazing collection of articles and videos, including the following link to a Super Chevy article in 2005 which handled the entire floor replacement (in a coupe), including assembling the rear half of the car. I remember reading this (and probably still have the magazine article buried in the storage building archives). "Not for the faint of heart", to be sure, but eminently do able -

Good luck in your project - don't be afraid to share pics and progress -

25  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Craigs list ad in TN for NOS 69 grill std... on: March 03, 2015, 09:27:39 PM
Jimmy's Bowtie Supply in Shelbyville (Jimmy Shreve, I think).

Contact info is listed on the CL ad -

Regards -
26  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Fat & Furious - King of Camaros Episode on: February 18, 2015, 03:13:10 PM
I thought it looked pretty good beforethe burnished brown. Made such a big deal about the rosewood that it was really a let down to see such a shiny wheel finish.

For all that trouble to be "exact", the headers and funky detailing were amusing. Guy sure paid a lot for a clone -

27  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: BV Water Pump Pulley on: February 14, 2015, 01:43:03 PM
I owned a '53 Henry J for over 25 yrs!!

Gary - are you sure it wasn't an Allstate ? I've heard how cost conscious you are -

28  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: BV Water Pump Pulley on: February 14, 2015, 01:32:33 PM
Sorry for the late entry, but I've been out of town for a couple of weeks and could not add my 2 cents -

The 2456DV pictured is off my X77, definite original, and the inner support is not swaged in place, but is spot welded as shown. This is the original finish on the pulley as well - appears to be dark grey phospate on the front side, or maybe dulled semi-flat black.

The 824BV shown is a repop. The two pulleys are different in diameter by quite a bit - no wonder the belts needed to be swapped according to My68SS -

29  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1969 Camaro SS396 - Trim Tag Date vs. VIN Production Date on: February 13, 2015, 06:47:53 PM
Smart move. I'm late in ressponding due to being out of town all week this and last, but my 12A L78 is 3800 cars past this one with no X code.

Wish it did - it's in the missing paperwork gap for the build date and dealer. No real way to tell if it's an X66 or X22, either.

30  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Part Number Stamp or Sticker on Wiper Motor Assy on: January 24, 2015, 03:52:12 PM
I'm only trying to add JohnZ's data, but having mucho trouble with the table formatting..  Could someone who knows how to do this in the cRG s/w please correct it?  :)

build   NOR      RS?          sticker          Stamped      Sticker            (Notes)
date    LOS      Not?           PN?              PN?           codes
-----   -----        ----           ---------         -----------      ----------      -------------------------------
10D    LOS         RS       5045608                                                 RS solenoid dtd 10-28-68
11D    NOR       RS                            5045605          
12B    LOS       RS                             5045605                            stamped - 4918976 2
??      NOR   non RS                          5045572 034 9 B E      
02D    NOR   non RS                        5045572  036 9 B F             Rochester   
03B    NOR   non RS      5045572                         053 9 6 A      
03D    NOR       RS       5045605                         079 9 B F              Part # in yellow paint
06A    NOR   non RS                          5045572     100 9 5 B      
06A    NOR   non RS                         5045572     134 9 6 B      
07A    NOR   non RS                         5045572      170 9 6 B      
09C    NOR       RS       5045605                          227 9 6 A             Dayton   
???     NOR   non RS      5045572                          282 9 6 B      

I tried - again
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 47
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 0.087 seconds with 18 queries.