CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 06, 2015, 09:17:59 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.
110486 Posts in 12763 Topics by 4892 Members
Latest Member: jvc7450
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 46
31  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: pad stamp? on: December 12, 2014, 10:47:23 PM
Steve,
Sorry, I was looking at the V0417MO pad when I said that!

The V0604MO pad is fine.

Kurt,

Thanks for clarifying - I started to question my eyesight.

Regards,
Steve
32  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: N40 with C60 on: December 12, 2014, 12:11:56 AM
Yep, I do, and yes, there is. I think I got the last NOS one from GM after it was discontinued (found on the locator) about 15 years ago. Takes a particular exhaust bolt for it, too, which I also have NOS (it may be available yet). I'll have to dig it out tomorrow and get you pics of them with the part numbers.

If you can't find one, I'll give you a sketch with dimensions if you want to fabricate one.

BTW, the car is my L48 Pace Car, power steering w/ A/C, TH350 -

Regards,
Steve
33  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: pad stamp? on: December 11, 2014, 11:49:27 PM
I'm a little surprised -

I helped buy this block for a friend nearly 20 years ago. It's not a match to my '68 Z, but very close in date. I built the long block myself, plus sourced every part going into it.

Block was standard bore when I bought it, deck had never been touched up or resurfaced in any way prior to going to the machine shop. Block was bored .030, fitted with 1st design factory TRW ('67 thin rings)pistons purchased from the same guy, who also included the manifold and original distributor. .010/.010 original 1178 crank, pink pressed rods. If you're concerned with the pad surface around the stamp, it looks like it was scraped - no milling feed lines on the rest of the surface. Surface is completely flat, no signs of tampering or filling. My thought has always been not to try and pass this off as my original; it's someone else's block, but it's an MO, rebuilt with GM original parts.

I asked if this car's VIN was in the database sometime back - the response was negative. If the car should show up, I would gladly entertain a transfer to the owner (otherwise it will power my '68 for the rest of my life/ownership).

http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?topic=12082.msg99143#msg99143

Regards -
34  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Craigslist camaro on: December 09, 2014, 11:54:36 PM
Didn't last very long -
35  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: pad stamp? on: December 09, 2014, 11:51:52 PM
Note VIN and engine code line mismatch -
36  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: pad stamp? on: December 09, 2014, 11:35:39 PM
it looks like the date code is made with gang stamp and vin was stamped individually because they're out of line.  is that right?


Correct. VIN and engine code are stamped separately. Note the positioning and fonts in the following pic -
37  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: pad stamp? on: December 08, 2014, 10:51:24 PM
i don't have a picture.  i'm trying to buy one and don't want to get burned.  is this some secret code or something?  seems there could be a few clues explained?

Post a pic. I've got a known original MO stamped block to compare it to, plus a good rule of thumb is to look at the block deck surface - milling feed lines from decking or surfacing that run at a tangent to the stamping are usually a dead giveaway that it's probably restamped. Too clean a surface is also an obvious. After that, font size and character shapes are clues that "sumting wong" -
38  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Issue with argent silver wheel paint on: December 07, 2014, 10:31:34 PM
My 12A L78 is equipped with a matched set of N66 YA rallys - unrestored, had Goodyear Polyglas matched tires on them until I sold the tires year before last. Definitely not bright silver, Argent with charcoal gray insets, putty or light gray backs.

I restored a set of AO's a couple of years ago for my '70 LS5 Chevelle - all original to the car, identical to the set of N66's on my L78. I found the Details SS inset color to be spot-on, that's why I included a pic of it. Charcoal, not black -

I used PPG Ditzler Argent for the '70's - pretty darn close if I do say so. I couldn't bear to put the trims on before it left - I was proud of the way the rims finished out (did not want to scratch them !).
39  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: 1969 Front Spoiler to Lower Valance Bolts on: December 07, 2014, 10:14:43 PM
Donny,

Page 354 AMK '69 Body - listed at $8.00, G-4320 28pc. kit.

Regards,
Steve
40  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Original front spoiler for a 69 on: December 07, 2014, 10:05:08 PM
HERE IS MINE. 

Donny - is there a part number heat stamped under the top right edge of the spoiler on yours ? Kind of difficult to see, I never knew there was one on mine until I looked at it today. Obviously, if there was more than one manufacturer, some might have had it and some not, but I think we can rule out the ink stamped versions as having one unless someone has another example. Early ones apparently didn't have one based on my first example.

Regards,
Steve
41  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Original front spoiler for a 69 on: December 07, 2014, 12:29:27 PM
Three versions for you to compare - 1) Old spoiler from the '70's, last vestige of the label remaining, 2) NOS spoiler pics 1&2 - label and stamped part number in upper right corner, heat stamping, 3) ink stamping only. The two NOS pieces were purchased at the same time, from the same dealer before they discontinued. The oldest was purchased and installed in the early '70's.

Regards,
Steve
42  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Mild Modifications / Re: 454 Street performance combination request on: December 02, 2014, 11:28:53 PM
Just a suggestion -

My LS5 '70 had an original LS5 motor in it, built in the early '80's -  I detuned it back to nearly stock specs, using the original low profile cast iron intake, 7040204 Rochester (which flows about 800 cfm), 10.25:1 pistons, Comp Cams hydraulic, stock lower end and LS5 heads, SS valves, headers. Car is a 400 Turbo, had 4.56:1 Eaton posi (originally 3.31). Factory air -

Even with the heavier Chevelle, it would do a complete doughnut if you allowed it to - not dynoed, but horsepower and torque unlike anything I've ever owned. Yet - idled great, instant response, but very harsh shift because of a doofus shift kit previously installed by the prior owner.

Don't discount Rochesters as a performance carb - they flow great, good economy if you can get used to the secondary moan when you put your foot in it. Watch your cam profile to allow for power brakes and the air, also. Select your compression for pump gas unless you want to spend a fortune on race gas or octane boosters for a cruise night -

Just my opinion - 
43  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Issue with argent silver wheel paint on: December 02, 2014, 11:02:45 PM
Hard to tell - looks OK, but pictures can't show hues like the old eyeball can. Paint code sounds correct - I'll try and dig mine out to compare.

Use the following gray for your inserts if you haven't found a match yet - perfect shade of charcoal gray. Did you use putty gray on the backsides ? Originals did.

The only other thing I recommend is to use a non-sanding primer when you start the process - I wore my fingers out sanding in the recesses. I hate the chore of painting, but I like the finished product -

Regards -
44  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Original front spoiler for a 69 on: December 02, 2014, 10:19:59 PM
Nothing molded as far as I can see. I have 4, 2 used, 2 NOS, three have stickers and at least one has the part number as an ink stamp. NOS ones are from the '80's, the used one was on the car from at least '73 or '74.

The one on the Pace Car appears GM, but I can't see any identification on it anywhere.

Anyone else have examples ?
45  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: This Pic got me thinking.. on: December 02, 2014, 10:05:02 PM
Mine is - side to side from the pinch welds on the cowl tulips, back to front right down to the edge of the blend line on the firewall. White as it can be.

The pic you posted shows the dumdum around the washer nozzles as black, the surrounding area is definitely white - my pics are pretty sorry (taken for a different post), but show the white areas fairly well.

Just my opinion -
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 46
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 0.078 seconds with 18 queries.