CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 29, 2014, 04:55:29 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.
106672 Posts in 12435 Topics by 4791 Members
Latest Member: DEL
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  CRG Discussion Forum
|-+  Camaro Research Group Discussion
| |-+  Decoding/Numbers
| | |-+  67 Camaro Engine Identification
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [All] Print
Author Topic: 67 Camaro Engine Identification  (Read 3503 times)
67nuts
Newbie
*
Posts: 6


View Profile
« on: June 13, 2013, 12:04:29 PM »

Hey guys,  I am new to the group.  Great resource for all of us Camaro lovers!  Quick question:  I have 67 with a 327/275 engine that is missing the VIN number.  it has the manufacturing date code but no serial #.  I was told that many 67 Camaros came w/out this VIN #.  Is this true?  How can I tell the engine is a #s match?  Date and code seem to be correct; however, I don't know where else to look for the engine ID... Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks!
Logged
Ed Bertrand
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 2333


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: June 13, 2013, 12:19:33 PM »

Welcome to the site Ramon. With regards to your L30 (327/275), on the 1967 Camaro, generally only the Z28 and SS engines had the partial VIN's stamped. The only real way to validate it's the original engine to your car would be through paperword. Do you have the Protecto-Plate?

Ed
Logged
67nuts
Newbie
*
Posts: 6


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: June 15, 2013, 08:50:53 AM »

Thank you Ed.  I look forward to sharing/learning early Camaro facts among members of the group.  As for the Protecto-Plate, I don't have it... The number I read of the block where the engine stamp assembly number and the VIN numer should be is T1123MK. No other number present in that area. If I read this number correctly, it is for a Tonawanda factory assembly, 327ci/275HP "L30", with a 3-speed transmission, manufactured on the 23rd day of November 1966.  The car still has the Saginaw 3-speed tranny and the engine's date is a close match to the manufacturing date (11D ) located in the upper left section of the cowl tag.  FYi... The 4th week of November 1966 went from Sunday, November 20 thru Saturday November 26.

I tried to look underneath the seat and under the seats for additional paperwork on the car but there's nothing there...  I also spoke with the second owner (had it for almost 40 years) and he told me that was the original engine.

The car is a true survivor and is in very nice original shape.  It is a convertible with the mountain green color (HH).  An unmolested car which is a joy to drive!

Any help that can lead me to better understand the reason why the VON # is missing would be very appreciated.

Thank you!
Logged
Ed Bertrand
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 2333


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: June 15, 2013, 10:54:38 AM »

Ramon, the partial VIN on low and mid performance engines didn't get stamped in 1967. It's wasn't a requirement.

Ed
Logged
67nuts
Newbie
*
Posts: 6


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: June 15, 2013, 01:36:28 PM »

Thanks Ed.  Based on the information that I have, is it OK to call this car a matching #s? 
Logged
Ed Bertrand
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 2333


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: June 16, 2013, 11:37:29 AM »

I'd say "probably", but without documentation, you'll never know for sure.

Ed
Logged
69Z28-RS
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2488


owner since '76


View Profile Email
« Reply #6 on: June 16, 2013, 12:06:07 PM »

You could certainly that all indications are that it IS the original engine, and you have the statement from the 2nd owner (of 40 yrs) that it was the original engine.   Even though you cannot PROVE that it IS the original engine, it would be more difficult for anyone else to PROVE that it isn't..  Smiley

Based on the evidence you've stated, I'd feel good about it being the original engine.

Gary
Logged

Gary W.  /  69Z28-RS, 72 B 720 cowl console rosewood all tint
69 Corvette convertible, silver/black 350 hp,
60 Corvette white/red, 72 Corvette coupe (2), 
90 ZR1 red/red #246, 90 ZR1 white/gray #2466
72 El Camino, '55 Nomad, '57 Nomad, '57 B/A Sedan
67nuts
Newbie
*
Posts: 6


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: June 19, 2013, 09:39:25 AM »

Thank you Gary and Ed for your responses. 

This gets even more interesting...  I forgot to tell you that the engine has a security wire attached between the upper control arm shaft and the exhaust manifold on the passenger side of the engine.  From what I was able to research and please correct me if I am wrong, this 3/8" wire securing the engine to the upper control arm prevents the engine mount to break from the result of excessive torque (i.e. sudden acceleration, engine abuse, etc.).  Someone told me this was offered by GM via dealership a few months after the car was introduced to the market (perhaps some sort of recall from the manufacturer) at a cost of $100.  I have seen this hardness in only one other 67 Camaro V8. 

Is this true?  If so, would this be another clue to suggest that indeed, this is the original engine?  As always, I welcome your wisdom in this matter.

Thank you ,

Ramon.-
Logged
67nuts
Newbie
*
Posts: 6


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: June 19, 2013, 09:41:17 AM »

I would love to post a picture of the device... Not sure how to upload pics on this page...
Logged
Ed Bertrand
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 2333


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: June 19, 2013, 09:54:38 AM »

Yes, in 1971 GM issued a recall because the motor mount could separate, causing the engine to lift on a hard acceleration. This could cause the throttle linkage to stick, resulting in loss of control. The original NHTSA campain number was 71V235000, and the "fix" was to install the cable you have. However, since this was a recall, it didn't cost the owner anything.

Ed
Logged
67nuts
Newbie
*
Posts: 6


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: June 19, 2013, 01:15:37 PM »

Great finding Ed.  Do you or anyone else know if this was also an issue back in 1967?  I have seen at least one more 67 Camaro with this bracket/wire... 
Logged
JohnZ
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 4142


View Profile Email
« Reply #11 on: June 19, 2013, 01:39:56 PM »

Great finding Ed.  Do you or anyone else know if this was also an issue back in 1967?  I have seen at least one more 67 Camaro with this bracket/wire...  

That's because the 1971 recall affected V-8 cars back to the early 60's. MILLIONS of V-8 Chevrolets were affected by the recall.
« Last Edit: June 20, 2013, 10:54:22 AM by JohnZ » Logged

'69 Z/28
Fathom Green
CRG
Ed Bertrand
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 2333


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: June 19, 2013, 02:14:05 PM »

Here's the complete list of cars (and trucks) affected.

Ed

Logged
KurtS
CRG Coordinator
*****
Posts: 3294


View Profile Email
« Reply #13 on: June 19, 2013, 02:26:43 PM »

I think it was the biggest recall campaign ever at the time.....
People actually install them on their restored cars. It's ugly and it wasn't design intent - it was just the cheapest fix that GM came up with.
Use interlocking engine mounts instead.
Logged

Kurt S
CRG
Mike S
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1167



View Profile
« Reply #14 on: June 19, 2013, 02:40:53 PM »

The wheel makes a full revolution.....I installed the original looking BB mounts I bought from LI Corvettes. I figure the days of stomping the gas to the floor are gone for my 'baby' so I'm not going to worry about a mount separating.

Mike
 
Logged

67 LOS SS/RS L35 Hardtop - Original w/UOIT
67 NOR SS/RS L35 Convertible - Restored
Kelley W King
Member
***
Posts: 335


View Profile Email
« Reply #15 on: June 19, 2013, 03:02:04 PM »

I had a 65 impala SS back in 71 and got the recall. They would not install it because I had headers. My brothers unmolested 68 camaro still has it on it.
Logged

69 Z28 RS Scuncio Hi Performance
69 SS L78
67 SS Chevelle
64 Corvette
66 GTO Tiger Gold
77 Trans Am Special Edition
69Z28
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 889


69 X33D80 Z28


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: July 28, 2013, 12:49:12 PM »

Was just reading this and wanted to ask if it was unusual to have one on both driver and passenger side? I just picked up a 46000 mile 69 Impala and there is one on each side.
Logged

GaryC

'UNRESTORED' 1969 Cortez Silver X33D80 Z28
69Z28
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 889


69 X33D80 Z28


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: July 28, 2013, 01:01:49 PM »

Something else I was thinking about, even though the recall cables are there doesn't mean the motor mounts are bad or even separated are they? Looking at the mounts on the car I can't really tell. What's a good mount and a separated mount look like? Anybody have pics to share?
Logged

GaryC

'UNRESTORED' 1969 Cortez Silver X33D80 Z28
Ed Bertrand
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 2333


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: July 28, 2013, 01:07:31 PM »

Only one was required and installed on the drivers side at the dealership. Since the engine rotates clockwise (as seen from the front of the car (or counter-clockwise as seen from the drivers seat), the torque would make it "lift" on the driver side. The cable kept it from doing this by tightening up if the engine mount failed. One on the passenger side wouldn't do anything but slack the cable!

It's very difficult to visually tell a bad mount while it's installed on the car other than watching the engine when you "give'r the gas"! If it's bad, the engine will want to "lift" on the driver side. No, the recall doesn't mean you have a bad mount.

Ed
Logged
69Z28
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 889


69 X33D80 Z28


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: July 28, 2013, 05:29:16 PM »

So, Ed, why did many come with one on each side? My Impala isn't the only one i've seen this way. With the engine only lifting on the driver side it doesn't make any sense for there to be one on the passenger side, but yet, there it is. In my search for LM1 engines in the 69 Impala, I have see quite a few.
Logged

GaryC

'UNRESTORED' 1969 Cortez Silver X33D80 Z28
Ed Bertrand
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 2333


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: July 28, 2013, 05:53:10 PM »

No idea. The dealer was obligated to install one (and only one) on the driver side. HERE are the instructions for the kit (see reply number 9 from John). These instructions are for the Camaro and Nova, but the full size instructions are similar.

Ed
Logged
tmodel66
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1212


View Profile Email
« Reply #21 on: July 29, 2013, 10:34:57 AM »

Only one was required and installed on the drivers side at the dealership. Since the engine rotates clockwise (as seen from the front of the car (or counter-clockwise as seen from the drivers seat), the torque would make it "lift" on the driver side. The cable kept it from doing this by tightening up if the engine mount failed. One on the passenger side wouldn't do anything but slack the cable!


Ed


Ed isn't this backward? I'm not being a know-it-all nor a smarty pants, and I may be wrong but I think they rotate clockwise sitting in the drivers seat.
Logged

Daniel  
'69 SS 350/4 speed  Fathom Green--POP
69Z28-RS
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2488


owner since '76


View Profile Email
« Reply #22 on: July 29, 2013, 11:58:51 AM »

Yes, Ed got turned around in his drivers seat, as this part of his post is incorrect..   Smiley
"Since the engine rotates clockwise (as seen from the front of the car (or counter-clockwise as seen from the drivers seat), "..   
but the remainder of his post, and the gist of his response, was correct..  Smiley
Logged

Gary W.  /  69Z28-RS, 72 B 720 cowl console rosewood all tint
69 Corvette convertible, silver/black 350 hp,
60 Corvette white/red, 72 Corvette coupe (2), 
90 ZR1 red/red #246, 90 ZR1 white/gray #2466
72 El Camino, '55 Nomad, '57 Nomad, '57 B/A Sedan
Ed Bertrand
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 2333


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: July 29, 2013, 12:37:51 PM »

Quote
...I think they rotate clockwise sitting in the drivers seat.

What I meant is that on the Chevrolet V8 engine, the crankshaft, pulleys and fan all rotate clockwise if you're looking at the engine standing in front of the car (counter-clockwise if you're sitting in the car looking forward).

This rotation is what makes the engine want to "lift" on the drivers side.

Ed

Example HERE
« Last Edit: July 29, 2013, 01:05:52 PM by Ed Bertrand » Logged
JohnZ
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 4142


View Profile Email
« Reply #24 on: July 30, 2013, 11:15:11 AM »

Yes, Ed got turned around in his drivers seat, as this part of his post is incorrect..   Smiley
"Since the engine rotates clockwise (as seen from the front of the car (or counter-clockwise as seen from the drivers seat), "..   
but the remainder of his post, and the gist of his response, was correct..  Smiley


Ed's post (reply #18) is 100% correct. :-)
Logged

'69 Z/28
Fathom Green
CRG
69Z28-RS
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2488


owner since '76


View Profile Email
« Reply #25 on: July 30, 2013, 12:06:03 PM »

Yes, John, kinda sorta..  *L*...

'The 'rotating assembly' rotates in one direction, but the TORQUE on the engine itself is actually applied in the opposite direction when there is a load; that's why the engine TRIES to rotate in the clockwise direction (as viewed from the drivers seat)...    it's all in the terminology.. Smiley

and Ed's further explanation clarified that.

Gary
Logged

Gary W.  /  69Z28-RS, 72 B 720 cowl console rosewood all tint
69 Corvette convertible, silver/black 350 hp,
60 Corvette white/red, 72 Corvette coupe (2), 
90 ZR1 red/red #246, 90 ZR1 white/gray #2466
72 El Camino, '55 Nomad, '57 Nomad, '57 B/A Sedan
Pages: 1 2 [All] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

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 0.097 seconds with 17 queries.