Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10
51
General Discussion / Re: Re: 68 ss ID #2
« Last post by jmalara on January 16, 2017, 11:04:05 PM »
OK, so I went to see the car.  Disappointing to say the least.  Here are a few pics. His brother showed the car and had no answers.

1.  There was no VIN tag on the dash.  Just not there.  Brother did not have any details.
2.  The engine codes were sanded off.  Claimed when the engine was rebuilt mechanic did it but it was the original block.'
3.  Car was cosmetically in worse shape then I expected. 
4. Motor was cosmetically in worse shape also.

On the bright side I do believe it was a real SS/RS.  Muncie cable was right and verything else checks out although there were only 26 hood springs,

52
Originality / Re: Original Born with Battery Trays LOS NOR
« Last post by 68camaroz28 on January 16, 2017, 10:22:19 PM »
This old Gen II battery tray has a small tab also it seems.
53
Originality / Original Born with Battery Trays LOS NOR
« Last post by 68camaroz28 on January 16, 2017, 10:12:27 PM »
Subject- Original born with Battery Trays found on 67-69 Camaro’s from LOS & NOR.
Realize many CRG members spend time on other Camaro websites but not everybody and thought this was a worthwhile subject to make sure it is documented and hopefully placed in the “Pictures and information of original details” section. Information on how this subject matter came up from MCACN show can be found in my build thread:
http://www.camaros.net/forums/133-build-projects/182584-time-another-68-z-28-restored-85.html
Special thank you to Steve who was able to show me examples of what is normally observed while inspecting original survivor type Camaro’s in Vintage Certification. Examining what is unique to original born with compared to GM service replacements include some things that can be seen and some not when installed.
Most noticeable is a tab where the battery hold down clamp bolts on. Please note I have not seen this tab on any service replacement battery tray to date and have observed some old ones on ebay for sale. A few examples including one Steve posted-


Darrell’s 03D 68 NOR L78


Danny’s 05E 68 NOR Z/28


Jerry’s 07C 68 NOR Z/28


Skip’s 07D 68 NOR Z/28


Steve showed this 01C 69 LOS


06A 69 by Yenko’s SSL78


Skip’s 09D 69 NOR Z/28


Now compare that tab area to this NOS service replacement. Different design!


The service replacements have the nuts used to bolt the tray in place from the bottom oriented straight. On every original born with tray so far each of the two nuts are oriented the same but each one is oriented differently from the other (see 01C 69 for good view).  Look at the tab of the examples and note how each one’s tab tapers from one end to the other.
Can anyone add to this? Here is a simple chart of examples which includes Jon's 67 low mileage take off which has correct oriented nuts.
67               Jon’s 1100 mile take off-No Tab- Has angled nuts
67 11A LOS Has tab but not as pronounced as many. Robert
68 03D NOR Has tab Darrell
68 05E LOS Has tab Danny
68 06A NOR Has tab DaveV
68 07C NOR Has tab JerryG
68 07D NOR Has tab Skip
69        LOS  Has tab Mike1971
69        NOR Has tab Mike1971
69 11A NOR No tab Has angled nuts & orig. battery hold down clamp. Noyenko
69               Has tab but not as pronounced as many. Noyenko
69 01C NOR Has tab Jude
69 02D NOR Has tab SteveS
69 03B NOR Has tab SteveS
69 09A NOR Has tab (late built) Robert
69 09D NOR Has tab (late built) Skip
54
Trans-Am Camaros / Re: Smokey Yunick
« Last post by camaroboy68ss on January 16, 2017, 08:11:58 PM »
That is a great picture showing the grille and headlight doors being pushed forward to get rid of the recessed area.
55
Decoding/Numbers / 1969 Z28 Trim Tag - Real?
« Last post by Speedracer8 on January 16, 2017, 07:25:45 PM »
Can anyone help me identify this as a real or reproduction trim tag?  VIN range is N575XXX on this car and best I can tell that range matches this body build.  Partial VIN is stamped on the rough casting near the oil filter, which I think also makes sense for this build.  V1219DZ stamped on the pad.  No further information at this time.

Thanks for the help!
56
General Discussion / Re: 1969 M22 breakdown of Quantities
« Last post by william on January 16, 2017, 06:47:15 PM »
Possibly.

A few of the ZL1s the list shows as having an M22 do not have paperwork and were restored starting with nothing more than a body. There are 7 for sure.
57
General Discussion / Re: 1969 M22 breakdown of Quantities
« Last post by VINCE Z28 on January 16, 2017, 05:12:44 PM »
11 of the 69 ZL1's  came with the M22 Trans. Super car Registry.
58
General Discussion / Re: 1969 M22 breakdown of Quantities
« Last post by william on January 16, 2017, 03:17:09 PM »
Good question.

Like most options, ECLs differ based on other equipment. There are no RPO ECLs specific to COPO 9560 & 9561. When they did the query looking for M22 ECLs specific to BB it picked up all of them including COPOs. When the report was summarized it was assumed all 867 were for L78s.

But when they queried for L78 ECLs could it have picked up COPOs? As I stated L78 is always listed on Canadian COPO docs. There is one out there at this time:

http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/688190/re-yellow-rs-copo#Post688190

As usual L78 is listed along with all the other equipment. But there are no ECLs shown. Maybe 20 years ago when you requested build info on a Canadian delivered car they just copied the page your VIN was on along with 18-20 others. I have a few of these and looked up the COPOs. All of the COPOs I can read also list L78AA5 along with 9560 or 9561.

If they did the ECL query using the same info from the shipping reports I have to say there is a possibility the 4,889 L78 build total included COPOs.
59
General Discussion / Re: 1969 M22 breakdown of Quantities
« Last post by hihorse on January 16, 2017, 01:23:59 PM »
So 4889 units for RPO L78 includes COPO?
60
Decoding/Numbers / Re: Water Pump Bypass fitting..
« Last post by dutch on January 16, 2017, 11:09:17 AM »
Thanks for the replies - the car is stored for the Winter - but this is on my 'to do' list when and if it ever stops snowing and we get to see some grass (maybe early to mid May the way it looks now) but I will attempt the removal and go from there - and yes it is still and will be one the car when I do attempt it..
Anyone have an idea of who sells the best reproduction bypass fitting for an early 1968 model 302 engine.. I think there were two styles - one for 1967 models more of a hexagon shape body if I recall, and one for 1968's more squared off - but like many other bits on my car there was probably a carryover deal and maybe mine again falls into the situation where some things deemed '67 model year ended up on some of the earlier '68 model cars..
Block was assembly stamped in late Dec '67 and cast in early Dec so would it be possible that one or the other could or should have been found on it?
Thanks again - Randy 
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10