CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 23, 2014, 07:25:23 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.
97448 Posts in 11712 Topics by 4581 Members
Latest Member: Cooper48
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 31
286  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 68 camaro grill NOS on: May 13, 2013, 10:00:28 PM
Could be - unfortunately, I don't have an RS grille to compare it to. One observation: From dealing with GM parts over the years, I have rarely seen a GM part (especially of any size) that didn't have a part number either stamped or molded into it, even some of the smallest and most obtuse parts (like my original dimmer switch carpet grommet I ran across the other night - has part # and manufacturer, and "Made in USA" molded into the reverse side).

Regards,
Steve
287  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 68 camaro grill NOS on: May 13, 2013, 09:30:46 PM
Ahhh - just when you think you've seen 'em all, consider this NOS grille -

Regards,
Steve

P.S. - backside inner lip recess -
288  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 68 repro doors - Problems with? Who makes? on: May 07, 2013, 11:35:36 PM
I have a friend that just went through 3 complete sets of repops to get doors that didn't have waves, dips and washboard panels - he finally gave in to the last set and did a lot of filler work and buildup on the edges to get the things smooth. To top it off, his car is a '67 - he is going through the vent window fitment as well, which is a pain.
There apparently are at least 2 manufacturers of complete doors, maybe more. General construction is not bad, shipping/handling and packaging seems to be a bigger issue. Metal gauge thickness and weight is different from originals as far as I can tell, but I'm not a professional bodyman - just my opinion.

Regards,
Steve
289  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 69' Camaro Z28 purchase help PLEASE on: May 07, 2013, 11:19:31 PM
Since it's in the database, is there any documentation available for the car ? P-O-P, dealer invoice, title histories ? If not, depending on the state, the DOT might be able to give you paperwork on the car for a fee - I got full docs on two of mine verifying the Z options and all options ordered with the car, plus the MSO's from Chevrolet to the assigned dealers for a few bucks (lucky because both cars were sold new here in my state, the DOT photocopied and microfiched all of the paperwork). Worth a shot, although nowadays they will blackout the names of the prior owners due to the Federal Privacy Act, which would be no bad deal if you can document the rest of the car - that ends a lot of speculation about what the car started life as, then the only thing you have to worry with are restamped "original" drivetrain components.

All in all, a pretty car - a few details need correcting, but it looks like a very good and nearly finished Z. I wouldn't kick it out of the garage for leaking fluids. Good luck on your deal.

Just my opinion -
Steve
290  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Non dripper valve cover questions. on: May 05, 2013, 07:07:37 PM
Did all the 418 covers have a dull finish?

I forgot to chime in on the first part of the question - my originals and all of the unrestored cars I have ever seen had "mill" finish cosmetics - they are smooth, but not polished. IMO bead blasting ruins the finish - about the only way I have ever seen as an effective way to clean them is dip them in carb cleaner, but you have to be carefull with that as well (some cleaners are so aggressive they can open up or pit the surface). True, they get worse with age and oxidation, but polishing them is not correct, nor is bead blasting. I will have Jerry restore mine when I get to the point where I need them done.
I sold a set of mid-80's NOS dripper covers a while back - they were polished covers, and you could really see the heat cracks were showing up in the casting dies. Shortly after I bought them, GM superceded the part number again, making that the third part number away from the original 418's that I know of. BTW, as you know, both original L&R covers did have the same casting number, as any number of posts will mention. Took me years to get word on that - I thought somebody had replaced one of mine with a duplicate side for a long time.

Regards,
Steve
291  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Non dripper valve cover questions. on: May 05, 2013, 06:40:23 PM
There was some kind of tub that vibrated that had these light gray stone looking things in it at one place I worked at years ago, but I don't think they have it anymore. I remember seeing it back in the 80's. I wonder if that is what reskins these things.

Gary,

Good description of an accelerated tumbling process, which uses ceramic media and a chemical accelerant to deflash/deburr and clean the castings. Other media types are available to lessen the debrading action, or make it more aggressive, depending on the need. The "steel ball" process may actually be a Wheelabrator, which i have seen used more on steel and cast iron parts because it does "peen" the surface, smoothing it out in the process. Most of the commercial rebuilders I have seen (or been in their shops), use the ceramic accelerated process - I suppose you could use either. Not sure of Jerry's process, but I have seen his end result (and signature) on several restored '69's, and he did my '68 intake with great results. Whatever he does it with, it's absolutely the best one to use IMO.

Regards,
Steve
292  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 0 rocker arms BIG or small 0 ? differences? on: May 04, 2013, 12:44:07 PM
Gary,

    They should be kept together, for the same reason as when you pull a cam/lifters/pushrods - I remember reading this in the overhaul manual (many) years ago, that stated the wear-in or hone pattern that develops between the contact surfaces are unique to those parts, and that the parts have to go through the same process if they are mismatched on reassembly, which could cause accelerated wear/premature part failure. I believe that to be on the high side of extremely remote - if you use assembly lube, and lubricate everything like it should be, they'll probably be fine. I still keep mine together, marked or cataloged.

     I don't consider myself as a professional engine builder, but I built my first one ('57 PowerPac 283, 30-30 solid GM cam, 327-300 heads, 11:1 TRW pistons, original stamped rockers, 43 years ago; multiple small blocks and big blocks (even a couple of FoMoCo's) since. I have never had a reused stock rocker fail, but I have checked them all for problems before reinstalling them. Last I heard, the original 283 was still at it. It's just a matter of personal preference - I know roller tips are better for geometry and reduced internal friction, but I still will use my "O's" until they give up the ghost, or I do.

Just my opinion -
Steve
293  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: '67 accelerator return spring: was there a bracket? on: May 04, 2013, 11:52:15 AM
Hey 1967RS/SS - do it look like this ? It's free if you'll pay the freight - if you still need one. My old eyes and worse memory didn't fail me for once (found this yesterday).

Regards,
Steve
294  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Willow Run plant about to see the wrecking ball...? on: May 02, 2013, 11:31:48 PM


[/quote]
 I started my GM career at Chevrolet-Willow Run in 1964, building the Corvair and Chevy II.
[/quote]

Gee, John, you probably built the car I got my license in - my Dad's '65 Corvair Corsa. Loved that car, leaking pushrod tubes and all - a lot of really good memories from it. Wish I had it sitting beside the 'Maros today.

Regards,
Steve
295  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 0 rocker arms BIG or small 0 ? differences? on: May 02, 2013, 11:23:28 PM
If rebuilding an engine I'd not use used rockers. Why take a chance?

My original "O's" are still together after all these years, and I won't hesitate to use them again. I don't want to spend $600.00 on some NOS set from a speculator if I can keep from it. I rebuilt the engine in '75, and among the parts I changed in upper valvetrain were the springs, lash caps, keepers and retainers, but not the rockers. Kept all the original parts and ratholed them. I had a Sig Erson Hi Flow IIH stick, hydraulics and titanium retainers, double wound Erson springs. I'm going back all original from cam to upper train - I really missed soaking the splash aprons with oil and listening to solids sounding like a frantic Singer sewing machine. 20W50 Union 76 racing oil was pretty cheap in those days; I loved the purple color on the driveway after adjusting valves. Stock oil pump in the engine would push 80 psi on my Stewart Warner mechanical gauge at about 2500 rpm, and until I bought a set of Erson lash caps to fit over the oiling holes, would just about empty the pan of a quart or two from one side to the other. Had to work quick -

Regards,
Steve
296  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Mild Modifications / Re: Hidden Radio on: May 01, 2013, 06:22:31 PM
Ed,

    How do you keep the local gendarmes from hanging you or your son ? My 16 year old got one of our local $180.00 + court costs reminder that turning your stereo to on is not a good idea. He got treated like a terrorist -

    Ditto on the Custom Autosound mistake - never again. I have original AM and AM/FM's for all of the cars - also making a pull-out hard case container that I can remove from the car when I don't want it on board, but I have to admit that the new repops look pretty close. I'm tempted to change the lens on one and use it on the '68 -

Regards,
Steve
297  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Convertible Speakers on: May 01, 2013, 06:02:48 PM
Hey Mark,

Thanks for the pic. I have a set of originals that I've fretted with for years trying to decide whether or not to install them on my Z11, but I have always resisted it because they are such a poor (cosmetic) design - at least they are almost invisible once installed.

I'm still debating -

Regards,
Steve
298  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Grill questions on: April 23, 2013, 10:43:31 PM
Mark,

    The Argent Silver standard open headlight original grilles I have seen (and had on my X77) were actually molded in an off-white color, and painted argent silver if I'm not mistaken, which I sometimes am. The later replacement (counter) grilles were all black, you have to paint to match, which up until the repros got updated was the only way to spot an original from over- the-counter grilles and repops. Broke my original in '76 and replaced it with a new one from GM - all black, left the center grill black and painted the surround LeMans as it should be. I used to think it looked better then Argent, but I will paint to original when the restoration ever gets there. NORS is still better than a repop, IMO.

    Someone please correct me if I'm wrong. I have a pretty thick old hide; it stands up to criticism quite well. I can learn even at my advanced old age -

Regards,
Steve
299  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: License plate light Q's on: April 22, 2013, 09:10:55 PM
'69's have a connector stubbed out on the outside of the harness wrap inside the trunk - the pigtail plugs into the harness. There is a rubber grommet that seals the wire where it goes through the panel into the trunk interior - if I remember correctly, it should be part of the pigtail on the light.

Going from memory - I'll have to look at the NOS one (wherever I've hidden it).

Regards,
Steve
300  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: Loose Wrist Pin In Rod on: April 22, 2013, 08:55:33 PM
I'm thinking the overheating had something to do with it. I'm wondering if the machine shop should have detected a little bit less force required to remove the damaged piston. I'm sure if the overheating did in fact cause the loose pin, it should have been noticed then.

Likely not, considering the method shops use to change pistons - heat the pin end of the rod (with torch, or induction heating coils) until the pin gets loose enough to push out. Rods that worn obviously cannot be recovered, unless you bush them. If they are standard rods (not "pink" rods), that's probably not cost effective. "Pinks" came both as press fit pins and floaters: the biggest differences involved shot peening - pinks were peened, standards were not.

When I rebuilt my 302 in '75, I had the original rods bronze bushed. The shop that rebuilt them in Nashville cussed me when I picked them up - they noted that they expended many a drill bit attempting to drill the pin oiling holes - shot peening really works -

Regards,
Steve
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 0.093 seconds with 18 queries.