CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 16, 2014, 05:20:15 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.
97077 Posts in 11682 Topics by 4578 Members
Latest Member: ronhill
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
1  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / '68 L35 1100794 Alternator on: April 12, 2014, 09:24:11 AM
I've disassembled the fan and pulley from my 1100794 alternator to send them out to get plated and have a couple of questions which hopefully someone can help me with:

1.) Both the fan and pulley have a slot in them which one would assume would be used with a woodruff key yet the shaft on the alternator does not has a slot for a key. I'm fairly certain that both are original to the alternator and car since the pulley does have the "7" stamped on it and the build date of the alternator (A25) is in line with the build date of my car (01D). Why would they have a slot in them if the alternator shaft does not have a key way?
2.) Are the pulley and the fan attached with a nut and lockwasher or a nut and a flat washer?

Thanks,

Bob
2  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Research Topics & Reports / Re: 1968 SS hood ornaments on: March 28, 2014, 07:45:34 PM
The outside of the stacks are painted matte silver right up to the top of the stacks. The insides are chrome plated. The base around the stacks are also chrome plated. It's difficult to capture in a photo but there is just a very small amount of overspray where the matte silver meets the chrome plating at the base of the stacks.

Hope this answers your questions.

Bob
3  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Research Topics & Reports / Re: 1968 SS hood ornaments on: March 27, 2014, 08:25:16 PM
Here is what I have. Top photo = Original, Bottom photo = NOS (still in box).

Bob
4  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Galvanizing a Fuel Tank on: March 25, 2014, 06:56:22 AM
Darrell,

Very nice! What did you do to get that type of finish?

Bob
5  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: OT- Rare Shelby Mustang GT500 unearthed after 40 years on: March 14, 2014, 07:06:55 PM
I live about 5 miles from this car and it's the talk of the town.  Many locals have known about this car for years but he refused to sell it. It really does reside in a barn and unfortunately was not well protected. During our harsh central PA winters the barn doors would be left wide open. The scuttlebutt is that it will sell for over $200K. This was a hoarder beyond belief.

I'll be attending the auction but strictly as a form of entertainment. Another car in my garage and I'll be headed to divorce court.    Grin

Bob
6  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: shock mount bolt on: February 28, 2014, 07:51:56 AM
I don't mean to hijack this thread but I have almost the exact same question on the restoration of my '68 L35 SS car. The repro rear shocks I have (p/n 3192832) have the washer staked on. The AIM (page 288, L35 A13) clearly shows the shock installation with the lock washer and nut. So my question is, when are the bolts shown in reply 1 used? My car also had them installed but possibility due to a previous owner who installed air shocks. The Camaro vendors are advertising this bolt for use on multi-leaf springs cars but if the original shocks used a staked on washer then when are these bolts used?

Thanks,

Bob
7  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Wiper transmission reburbish and paint prep ??? on: February 27, 2014, 12:48:03 PM
Yes...perhaps an overkill but brass will get that natural patina over time.

Didn't have any lose linkage with mine so I'm afraid I can't offer any advise on how to correct your problem. Hopefully others will chime in.

Bob
8  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Wiper transmission reburbish and paint prep ??? on: February 27, 2014, 06:58:03 AM
Dave,

I recently completed my wiper transmission not too long ago. It looked exactly like yours when I took it off the car. I soaked the entire assembly in Evaporust for a couple of days. After the Evaporust bath I disassembled what could be removed, zinc plated the bolts and wired wheeled the brass parts. I then masked off the rivets and those parts that should remain natural, and sprayed the linkage 60% gloss black (which is what it appeared to be after the Evaporust bath).

I'm pleased with the final result.

Bob
9  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Galvanizing a Fuel Tank on: February 24, 2014, 01:12:12 PM
James,

Yea, you're right.  Not the answer I was hoping for. Thanks for the tip I'll look into it.

My tank is in superb shape and after removing the 45 year old undercoating I was pleasantly surprised to see how well the underlying metal was preserved. The undercoating did exactly what it was suppose to do. The top and sides of the tank where naturally, the undercoating did not get to, has surface rust which, as you have suggested, I'm cleaning up with steel wool. It's just a long laborious painful process. I was hoping for an easier way to get it back to the factory look.

Bob
10  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Galvanizing a Fuel Tank on: February 24, 2014, 12:44:33 PM
Just a quick follow-up from my original post.

I just heard back from the company mentioned in reply 2. They told me that they will not re-galvanize anything that they did not original galvanize. Not sure why but it's back to the drawing board.  Sad

Bob

11  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Galvanizing a Fuel Tank on: February 22, 2014, 09:35:10 PM
Thanks for your comments Tim. I have sent an e-mail to a local company that specializes in galvanizing (http://www.kornsgalvanizing.com/). I'll let you know what they say.
12  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Galvanizing a Fuel Tank on: February 22, 2014, 08:16:53 PM
Has anyone ever had their fuel tank galvanized 50% Tin/50% Zinc)? I have an extremely clean original date coded tank that I'd like to bring back to a factory looking appearance and do not want to paint it. I realize the original tanks were Tern (20% Tin/80% Lead) coated and this formulation has long since been stopped due to the hazards of lead.

Thanks,

Bob
13  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Rear Brake Standard Diameter on: February 12, 2014, 08:19:04 PM
Many thanks to all who have contributed to this thread. I never thought it would have turned out the way it did. I was just looking for an answer that I thought would be easy to provide................if you have a manual that lists it!,  Grin Grin Grin

Thanks again!

Bob
14  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Rear Brake Standard Diameter on: February 11, 2014, 02:40:55 PM
Well how about that! I thought I was the only one that was missing that section.  Grin

Thanks for the '69 section 5. I'll keep it with my '68 Service Manual and until someone else comes up with section 5 for the '68 version.

Thanks again!
15  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Rear Brake Standard Diameter on: February 11, 2014, 01:21:18 PM
Many thanks Pete and Gary. Mystery solved!

For what it's worth, attached are 3 consecutive pages of the '68 manual which shows the omission of section 5.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
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 0.084 seconds with 18 queries.