CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 04, 2015, 07:53:43 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.
110434 Posts in 12758 Topics by 4891 Members
Latest Member: Sixgun17
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 34 35 [36] 37 38 ... 46
526  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: ZL/2 breather wing nut question. on: April 14, 2013, 08:05:33 PM
Gary,

   Took a couple of comparison pics between my Z11 and open element Z wings, but the file size is way big to attach. Definite difference between the two - if I can figure out some way to shrink 'em, I'll send them to you.

Regards,
Steve
527  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: SS 350 tags on: April 12, 2013, 11:32:28 PM
Nor rear end, trans or other pertinent info. Looks brand spanking new to me. Strange indeed.

Steve
528  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Verify if NOS Door Mirror is real on: April 12, 2013, 11:29:37 PM
If you'd like, I'll dig my R&L NOS mirrors out of storage tomorrow and post pics of them. I bought both of them from GM in the early 80's (I wanna say $17.00 apiece), and they are still where I put them 30 years ago or so. If I remember correctly, they are DMI's, not DMA's.

Regards,
Steve
529  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 1111499 on eBay on: April 12, 2013, 11:21:28 PM
  Getting pretty tough to tell on a lot of these things - you need a scorecard to "grade" them. All the correct parts, but the side of the case is awfully shiny, with an apparent lack of turning operation feed lines, plus the "step" where the distributor cap fits down onto the top appears almost nonexistent (which could indicate the case had been turned down, and restamped). In the long run, I think you should assume the worst in almost all cases - there are just too many people trying to cash in on rare parts and high prices.
  I have a bonifide original, unrestored 499 that my best bud scarfed for me in a local meet a couple of years back for next to nothing - that's a great indicator that it indeed was an original - a counterfeit artist or a Camaro/Chevelle enthusiast would have known what it was, and the price would have been out of this world either way. My thought has been to trade it straight for an earlier date to fit my Dec. 68 L78, but the longer it goes, the more hesitant I am to ask someone to trade it for fear I'll get the king-size salami in the trade. I truly believe the only way I can ever accomplish it will be to send it to Jerry to restore, authenticate, and then act as a middle man to broker the deal (so he could verify both). Not having ever approached him about it, I won't assume that he would do it, but at least he could restore a couple more to add to his wallet.

Regards,
Steve
BTW, I tried to trade the 499 to one of the eBay sellers we have been talking about, thinking he had an original, but when he saw the pictures of mine he actually declared mine to be a fake. I got a good laugh about it, plus resolved not to take this guy in any casual consideration as legit. Shame there aren't more honest people than there are -
530  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1969 Z/28 YH Wheels on: April 06, 2013, 10:54:51 AM
There is a slight offset difference between the YH and FW 15" rims, but it is very subtle (about 1/2"), and does not affect tire clearance or brake clearance IMO. I have a set of FW's on my Z11 (YJ's are stored, reserved for show duty w/Goodyears if I ever get to that point), and work/sit right with the 205/50/15's Goodrich T/A's I put on it to drive. Like most RS cars, you have to watch tire size in width and diameter to keep from rubbing the actuator covers, but they work fine and look better to me than the 14" YJ rims in filling up the wheel wells.

When you install the derbys and rings, you'd be hard pressed to see a visual difference between the two. Off the car like these are, look at the center sections position compared to the rim on a known set of YH's and you can probably see the difference. As with everything nowdays, some people will try anything to make a buck, including restamping rims.

Regards,
Steve
531  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Decoding/Numbers / Re: Stamping Tool for VIN on Block & Trans on: April 03, 2013, 08:33:40 PM
Pic is likely over 400 kb, the system won't accept it. Bob is 100% correct - you couldn't have posted a better picture to verify the crank. The Z shaft is the only one produced with that kind of identifying notch. Nice flywheel, though - I wish mine was that pristine.

Regards,
Steve
532  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: Lubing after sitting for a year? on: April 01, 2013, 08:55:31 PM
I agree with Mike S; you should go a little further before you spin it. I sold my '70 LS5 year before last - it had sat without being turned over for 16 years (while I was busy raising kids) with the intake removed (I was de-tuning it back to stock, replaced an aftermarket intake and L78 heads with stockers). I used a Moroso priming tool that I bought years ago, pumped oil pressure up before even attempting to turn the engine over. I squirted Marvel Mystery Oil cut 50-50 with Castrol GTX into each cylinder, left the plugs out, and then hand-turned the crank 90 degrees and primed again until oil showed up through the pushrods. Buttoned up the block, timed it, and started the engine. The only problems I had were several flat lifters, which finally pumped back up, but no cylinder problems, ring problems, or bearing difficulties. Ran like you expect Chevrolet's finest to do - barked the tires trying to pull it out of the garage.
This engine/car was stored in an unheated garage for a total of 19 years, 16 of those partially torn down, respected but not taken care of as much as it deserved, but it still fired up and ran good enough to trailer to a new owner (so the '68 Z could take it's place). I don't think you'll have much trouble with it - looks great to me.

Regards,
Steve
533  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: What are these marks on the harmonic balancer? on: March 28, 2013, 04:56:32 PM
You'll still need to verify whether the mark is on the #1 or #6 rotation - both valves on the #1 cylinder will be closed if you are at TDC for the #1 piston (you probably knew that, just a reminder). I've started engines before without realizing it; you usually find out quickly enough -

Regards,
Steve 
534  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Subframe Crisis on: March 21, 2013, 09:25:05 PM
Not to add to your task, but you need to consider the inside of the sub as well. If you don't have a stripper (read as alkaline immersion company) near you, I suggest using a converter, or a system like Eastwood's internal spray coating, to treat the inside of the frame while you're treating the outside to a restoration. Imagine how much is inside, out of sight, that could rear up and show from the inside/out one day -

Just my opinion -

Regards,
Steve 
535  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Keys from keycode? on: March 21, 2013, 09:03:31 PM
My '68 Z had the ignition lock changed at some point in it's career - when I got it home, I pulled the door locks out (they are coded on the lock with the key numbers) and the trunk lock (same deal) , and had my local locksmith cut new keys from the codes - worked perfectly. I found an NOS ignition lock cylinder, had him recode the lock, and did the same to the trunk/glove keys to match the codes up. Probably cost all of $30.00 to get everything right. The only problem he had was with the '68 coded key blanks - they are different from '69's, longer slot, so he had to extend the slot to get the key to fit correctly. Solved that problem by buying a couple of sets of NOS blanks on eBay - about $12.00/set. Works wonders -

Regards,
Steve
536  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Property Tax Rate Schedule on: March 17, 2013, 12:37:28 AM
Tennessee does not judge a property tax on vehicles (some counties might add a wheel tax; the counties I've lived in don't add it to antiques) - sales tax accrues only on the sale/transfer of the vehicle; vehicles older than 25 years qualify for antique tags, a one-time-only registration that's good for as long as you own the vehicle. Vehicles prior to '75 do not have to be emissions inspected. Insurance required, applies to all vehicles.

Tennessee guys - left anything out ?

Regards,
Steve
537  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 67-Distributor Fake or Real.... learn & stop this crap on: March 14, 2013, 11:57:08 PM
I don't think that is what he means. If WILMA is selling a restamp he will state that, but if it is real he will state that as well.

Gary - I tend to agree with you. I have noticed wilma99's auctions for years - when he restamps one, he usually states it to be a restamp. There are two of these 170's on eBay right now, and they appear the same in font and markings. You can never be sure (I'm no expert, either; I can usually spot the obvious restamps), but Jerry can probably give the skinny on this if he sees it -

Just my opinion -
Steve
538  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: 3 Speed Auto Steering Column to 4 Speed on the floor Question on: March 14, 2013, 11:34:45 PM
In my opinion, I would pull the original column out and keep it intact, put a donor column in, or upgrade (which is really the best case) to a tilt column. You can pick up a non-tilt one for a floor shift fairly inexpensively, just takes patience and looking. I know a tilt column is pricey, but in my case, this old body just doesn't seem to slide so easily behind the wheel of the old Huggers any more.

Depends also on how original you want the look to be - your linkage is going to change, depending on if you use a factory style Hurst reverse lock out. Bellcrank may work, but you'll have to look up the parts to decide the differences. Shouldn't be terribly difficult -

Regards,
Steve

P.S. Check out eBay auction #321088117709 - Canadian, but looks pretty decent, good price so far, no bids. Good luck -
( I should qualify the Canadian statement before I catch heck - I only meant North of the Border for shipping considerations !)
539  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: 302 valve setting with roller rockers on: March 09, 2013, 08:27:28 PM
Hard thing to reason - either you can't learn everything, or can't remember everything. Must be the latter, 'cause I forgot which is more important.

I went back and looked up the ratio and the rocker part numbers - I agree completely. My parts book says the 302 "0" rockers and the 350 rockers were one in the same, I always thought they were different. I had been thinking about using rollers anyway instead of the stamped 1.6 rockers I bought for the '68; I think this has made my mind up.

Regards,
Steve
540  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Maintenance / Re: 302 valve setting with roller rockers on: March 08, 2013, 10:36:36 PM
Randy/John,

I thought the original rocker arm ratio for the '69 302 was 1.6:1 ? Low Perf at 1.5:1 ? Am I having another senior moment ? I realize that has nothing to do with the lash specs, but I used to think the ratio was changed somewhere along the early years to the 1.6 -
please correct me if I'm wrong.

Regards,
Steve
Pages: 1 ... 34 35 [36] 37 38 ... 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 0.094 seconds with 18 queries.