Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
Originality / Re: 69 Z28 Leaf Springs.
« Last post by bertfam on February 15, 2019, 07:23:10 PM »
Well, either those springs have been modified/repaired, or they're not original. Every leaf should have the rectangular "pocket" at the end, and tapered (one of them appears to be just cut off). Also, the clamps (also known as straps) don't look original either. I agree, I think someone took an original set of 4 leaf springs and added another (incorrect) leaf!

And I'm assuming you mean a 3.73 gear, not 3.37, right?

Quote
With the factory multi-leafs.....was the main spring a dual taper (width and thickness) like the mono leaf, or was it a continuous width along its entire length

Mike, the only taper is at the end of each leaf. Approx the last 2 to 2.5" inches. The rest is all one thickness and width.

Ed


22
Originality / Re: 69 Z28 Leaf Springs.
« Last post by Mike S on February 15, 2019, 07:19:09 PM »
 That fact that the spacing between the upper perch and lower perch bracket is not fully closed make me believe a leaf was added. I don't think the factory would leave a spacing like that.

Mike
23
Originality / Re: 837 date for 2D Camaro
« Last post by hihorse on February 15, 2019, 07:14:18 PM »
Nice info thanks. Should have mentioned my car is 6042xx
24
Originality / Re: 69 Z28 Leaf Springs.
« Last post by onekidbill on February 15, 2019, 07:08:16 PM »
More pice
25
Originality / Re: 69 Z28 Leaf Springs.
« Last post by onekidbill on February 15, 2019, 07:06:31 PM »
Hi Ed'
When I restored the car back in 82, I installed a 12 bolt posi with an original set of 3:37 gears out 69 Z. But the springs were never changed.I'll get the numbers off the housing and let you know.
26
General Discussion / Re: 1967 Camaro built in 66 titled 1966
« Last post by Kelley W King on February 15, 2019, 05:24:54 PM »
I have a friend who says he has a Mustang titled 1964 model. He never has produced the title.
27
Originality / Re: 69 Z28 Leaf Springs.
« Last post by Mike S on February 15, 2019, 05:21:45 PM »
 With the factory multi-leafs.....was the main spring a dual taper (width and thickness) like the mono leaf, or was it a continuous width along its entire length (I assume the thickness was tapered). 
Just curious.

Mike
28
Originality / Re: 837 date for 2D Camaro
« Last post by william on February 15, 2019, 04:37:22 PM »
Much of what you need is also used by early COPOs. Tough to find.
Carb and alternator were added at the car assembly plants so dates differ.
02D at Norwood spanned about 14,000 cars so thereís early/late for the 837.
9A2 9A14 9A23Ö9B19. The latter is correct for many COPOs so donít expect to find one cheap.
02D at Van Nuys: 8L9  8L23
Only carb date I have is 913 at Norwood.
29
Decoding/Numbers / Re: Caveat Emptor...misleading statement
« Last post by bertfam on February 15, 2019, 02:31:23 PM »
I don't see anything wrong with his reply. I think he was being funny. Or at least TRYING to be funny. And at least he changed the listing. Most wouldn't.

Ed
30
Decoding/Numbers / Re: Caveat Emptor...misleading statement
« Last post by cook_dw on February 15, 2019, 02:26:07 PM »
Would it be fair to post your message to him so we have a better context as to why he responded that way?  Sometimes comments made over a computer screen are interrupted differently than they were meant.  I know I have said things that came across in a different way..
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10