Author Topic: My Z arrived today! (Read 31599 times)

rspallina · « **on:** May 09, 2015, 02:33:05 AM »

Hey guys - I have been real quiet over here after posting the links to those two pieces of yellow art that you all had vetted here for some time. Well after countless late night hours....much to my wife's dismay

, this arrived at our home today after a two day journey from Plano TX. Want to share and start a discussion. Many thanks to Darell for all his help during this time...could not have pulled the trigger without him. The prior owner posts in camaros.net and I found a thread of his that started even prior to him finding the car. MacNeish certified the car as a survivor about 9 months after his purchase in 2007. Virtually everything on the car including the paint is original. Other than the smog, exhaust manifold, spiral shocks, rear leaf springs, two rear wheels (that are not date code correct but correct ones were sent with car in trunk) and the carb which is also not date code correct, the car is virtually untouched. Being new to this I'm curious to find out what you guys think about the necessity of correcting the above items. Prior owner was a an originalist but told me that he didn't correct most of these items that Jerry identified because the car would drive and run all wrong. Let me know what you think...here are some pics:

rspallina · « **Reply #1 on:** May 09, 2015, 02:53:32 AM »

Here are some additional pics:

bcmiller · « **Reply #2 on:** May 09, 2015, 02:53:51 AM »

I would leave it as is.

69 Zee · « **Reply #3 on:** May 09, 2015, 03:03:47 AM »

Quote from: bcmiller on May 09, 2015, 02:53:51 AM

I would leave it as is.

2x, search for the few date correct parts and put to the side. Congrats, and a very nice find. You have a nice collection of doc's as well, post when you have a chance as well as the history.

6667ss138 · « **Reply #4 on:** May 09, 2015, 03:10:28 AM »

Congrats! She's a beauty.
With it being a "survivor", I would keep my eyes open and slowly collect the correct dated components, if you can find them reasonably priced... You wouldn't have to install them. The parts you mention are getting tougher and tougher to find and are usually pretty pricey though.
That's just my opinion.
Other than that just show and go and enjoy!

rspallina · « **Reply #5 on:** May 09, 2015, 03:30:58 AM »

Thanks guys! Drove 18 miles today and firmly felt like I was back in high school! Back then the smog, manifolds, wheels and a bunch of other original items would have been tossed for upgrades. I will start a search for the missing items and put them away for another day. The way she drives today is all I'm looking for. Thanks for the advice. Will post more pics in the days to come.

6667ss138 · « **Reply #6 on:** May 09, 2015, 03:44:36 AM »

Rob and Darrell, I was just down in your neck of the woods this past weekend. My wife and I had to make a quick trip to the Ft Lauderdale area. We then went back to Tampa. My 67 Chevelle is down there now. We put the top down and went for a drive one evening. Man, the weather was great so I can relate to your drive!
Back in the land of Oz though now.

Talking possible tornado's here tomorrow.

rspallina · « **Reply #7 on:** May 09, 2015, 03:54:56 AM »

We had one of those days today Len. Next time you're in town give us a shout. Be safe out there. A friend posted pics on FB and all you could see we're the tops of mailboxes. Hunker down!

janobyte · « **Reply #8 on:** May 09, 2015, 01:59:38 PM »

Quote from: bcmiller on May 09, 2015, 02:53:51 AM

I would leave it as is.

Agreed. Looks great ,gathering mechanically sound. Dedicate a shelf to gather dated parts as $$ permits, if you decide to go that direction with the car in the future. Hairs split some , I respect everyone's opinion on this site on what they see as "enjoying" their car. All good.

mickeystoys69RSSS · « **Reply #9 on:** May 09, 2015, 03:47:06 PM »

Nice score and one of my favorite colors too.

BULLITT65 · « **Reply #10 on:** May 09, 2015, 04:42:48 PM »

Hey congrats on purchasing a solid car and doing your homework to find the right one. The car looks great. I like the fact that nobody added console gauges, but just the pod above it with the mechanical gauges. The original owner of mine did the same.
Have fun with it!

dannystarr · « **Reply #11 on:** May 09, 2015, 06:15:19 PM »

I have been watching this car for a while. What a score! Good for you.. I was emailing with the owner and getting info and pictures. Then I realized what the heck am I doing, I can't get a loan for this car. So I emailed him back told him I would have to pass. I got stars in my eyes and got a little weak there... LOL! I would want the RS, and the Special Ducted Hood. That's just me... D

69Z28-RS · « **Reply #12 on:** May 09, 2015, 06:33:12 PM »

It appears you bought an extremely nice car!~ I love it! and I notice it's an 09C ... same week as mine (my body number almost 500 after yours!). My production date was 18 Sept 1969.

rspallina · « **Reply #13 on:** May 09, 2015, 09:40:21 PM »

All great feedback guys! I am very new to all of this and have learned a little from Darell but have so much to learn. To put it in perspective, I got the car yesterday, washed and detailed it (btw it was spotless lol), drove it and then stared at it quite a bit, before wiping it down and taking my kids for rides. Darell came over today and starting checking every number on the car and just kept telling me great job it's a beautiful car and he can't believe it. Gary my car was built 9/16 and was delivered to Suburban Chevrolet in Minnesota. The guy that bought it actually bought two of them...one for racing and this one for pleasure. He like a lot of guys sold after having a baby. He sold it to his cousin in 1971 who owned it until 2005 when it was consigned to a museum and purchased by a fflipper who sold it to Anthony Cleveland, our seller. Anthony babied the car for 9 years. The driver who brought the car to me said he was crying when they were loading up the car. I feel extremely lucky to have found it and I am happy to hear all the positive feedback. Austin I received your email and checked the valve covers and could not feel and drippers. I would also like to compare notes. It is amazing that after all this time that the car is so intact. I graduated high school in 1983 and cars weren't this intact back then. I like the idea of getting what it needs to be totally correct. Having said that when jerry comes down to certify Darells car I will ask him if it is just okay to have them on the shelf. The car drives amazing and I wouldn't want to spoil a good thing. Darell was like a kid in a candy store today behind the wheel. If this doesn't motivate him to start the restoration on his car I don't know what will lol. Anyway, I am happy to post any pics that you may want to see to check against your own cars. Let me know and I would be happy to help. Thanks again, Rob

BULLITT65 · « **Reply #14 on:** May 09, 2015, 09:49:26 PM »

Awesome. I think you and Darrell's cars are the same color right? (his is vinyl top car though)

rspallina · « **Reply #15 on:** May 09, 2015, 10:06:28 PM »

Darells is dusk blue. Btw my car has 79k miles. 200 from turning 80. That could be this weekend lol!

bcmiller · « **Reply #16 on:** May 10, 2015, 03:05:37 AM »

Do you have a pic of the axle code stamp?

rspallina · « **Reply #17 on:** May 10, 2015, 10:39:24 AM »

Here it is

bcmiller · « **Reply #18 on:** May 10, 2015, 02:37:58 PM »

Yes, that is it. I removed the extra image and the blank attachment. Does it look like there is a C before the BU ? Can you very carefully wipe that area off with some lacquer thinner.

Do you know the casting date on the center section? I will look something like this attached image.

And we have a thread going at this link on casting date, casting number and stamped information on axle housings. If you want you can post your axle data there.
http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?topic=10375.0;all

bcmiller · « **Reply #19 on:** May 10, 2015, 02:52:51 PM »

Oh, and the more I look at that car, the more I like it. I think Lemans Blue is my favorite color.

And as far as finding correctly dated parts for what has been changed. Sure, go ahead and do that if you want. But the car is awesome the way it is, and putting the original stuff back won't make it run any faster. ENJOY!

68camaroz28 · « **Reply #20 on:** May 10, 2015, 03:08:03 PM »

Yep, that lemans blue is one of my favorites and nice addition to the family.
What a Mother's Day Gift....... Just kidding!
congratulations.......

BULLITT65 · « **Reply #21 on:** May 10, 2015, 04:34:11 PM »

How about a motor pic for us?

rspallina · « **Reply #22 on:** May 11, 2015, 04:03:53 PM »

Hope everyone had a great Mother's Day! Here is a motor pic and the stamp:

rspallina · « **Reply #23 on:** May 11, 2015, 04:13:27 PM »

Thanks guys....Lemans Blue was not my first color choice but it is growing on me.

BTW, here is a pic of the casting date on the axle:

rspallina · « **Reply #24 on:** May 11, 2015, 04:35:26 PM »

Here is the VIN information on dash and door and stamps on engine and trans:

BULLITT65 · « **Reply #25 on:** May 11, 2015, 04:40:17 PM »

great pics Rob. Just curious, what was your first choice of color? (don't say hugger orange)

rspallina · « **Reply #26 on:** May 11, 2015, 04:51:47 PM »

Going back to the axle comment regarding the C before the BU... I would assume that some were stamped with the C and others not for whatever reason. Has to be some deviation for human element? Jerry never mentioned it in his report on the car. Here is a better pic with what appears to be a C:

rspallina · « **Reply #27 on:** May 11, 2015, 04:56:12 PM »

Quote from: BULLITT65 on May 11, 2015, 04:40:17 PM

great pics Rob. Just curious, what was your first choice of color? (don't say hugger orange)

Daytona Yellow...something about that look with a black top. That's why i wanted your opinions on the authenticity of the two cars I was originally looking at that I posted in the decoding section.

69Z28-RS · « **Reply #28 on:** May 11, 2015, 05:11:30 PM »

Not many with the original blue VIN sticker on the door!! Yours makes the second I've seen (in addition to my own). It's also interesting that your car was built 2 days before mine (your VIN is about 1400 ahead of mine), yet your engine/trans/rear are dated after my own; just shows to go ya... that there are wide ranges on the parts dates ...

rspallina · « **Reply #29 on:** May 11, 2015, 05:35:58 PM »

Yes Gary....Darell said it was a nice thing to have. Also attaching Protecto Plate and noticing that there is no C next to the rear end information. Have you seen late production Protecto Plates with the C designation?

BULLITT65 · « **Reply #30 on:** May 11, 2015, 05:36:21 PM »

Quote from: rspallina on May 11, 2015, 04:51:47 PM

Here is Jerry's report on the car from 2007. Some of the items have been fixed. Going back to the axle comment regarding the C before the BU....why did he not mention in the report? I would assume that some were stamped with the C and others not for whatever reason. Has to be some deviation for human element?

Well not according to the "human element" putting together the thread on rear axels.....

69Z28-RS · « **Reply #31 on:** May 11, 2015, 06:54:06 PM »

No, I don't think any of us have seen (yet) any protecto plates with the 3 letter prefix on the rear app stamp. The three letter (with the C in front) began with the '70 model year (apparently), yet some of the late '69 Camaros have a 'C' stamped out front. It would be interesting first of all to find a '70 protecto plate with the C on the rear and on the protecto plate! I think Charley (clil) has a very original '70 Z28 and perhaps he would be kind enough to check/verify that fact?

Given that some of the late '69 diffs have the C stamped out front, Can we find one that also has an original protecto plate with the 'C'.

Note: Since you are fairly new to CRG, you should check the thread re the rear ends, as sometime in August, the rear carrier casting number changed, and nearly simultaneously with that, the 'C' began to appear. Bryon is collecting data from late '69 cars in attempt to document those changes.

rspallina · « **Reply #32 on:** May 11, 2015, 07:07:02 PM »

Thanks Gary. I would be curious to see the designation on a late 69 protecto plate or on the 70's. I did read the thread but there seemed to be some question about whether or not the C was on every car produced late august and later. I understand there are not a whole lot of data points but it does appear that the C did start showing up on some cars when they went to the 341 rear end.

BULLITT65 · « **Reply #33 on:** May 11, 2015, 10:12:32 PM »

Well I have tried zooming in on the image, and all i can make out is bumpiness or surface rust of age. It would have to be a very very light C stamp to be hidden in there IMO.

rspallina · « **Reply #34 on:** May 11, 2015, 11:20:12 PM »

When you are under the car you can see it at certain angles...very difficult to get a pic...let me know what you think about this shot that my 11 year old daughter got after scrubbing a bit with a sponge:

bcmiller · « **Reply #35 on:** May 11, 2015, 11:48:00 PM »

That is a C BU stamping, as I would expect. But very light. No problem that it was not mentioned in Jerry's report.

I doubt you will find a POP with CBU stamped on it. I have some data on early 70 model year cars with the 3 letter axle code.

Everything on your car agrees with the data points in the axle thread.

bcmiller · « **Reply #36 on:** May 11, 2015, 11:50:06 PM »

Quote from: rspallina on May 11, 2015, 04:13:27 PM

BTW, here is a pic of the casting date on the axle that I took this morning...Jerry wrote in his report "1": Is it possible to expose more of the stamp than what is there?

Unusual axle casting date, did you show the casting number or list it somewhere? I assume it is a 341 casting.

rspallina · « **Reply #37 on:** May 12, 2015, 12:16:11 AM »

Bryon - Jerry lists it as a 341. I have looked at the drawings of where it is supposed to be but not sure I am looking in right place. I need to see a proper pic of where I can find the casting number.

bcmiller · « **Reply #38 on:** May 12, 2015, 12:35:30 AM »

OK, 341 casting, that lines up just as expected. Since you had to clean the area where the C is (and it is still very light) it's not unusual that Jerry did not mention it. Note that the C is spaced over from the BU.

Casting date is unusual but not a problem.

I posted my reply in your message above by mistake, then removed my reply and posted it here. That is why it shows your post above as modified. Sorry.

rspallina · « **Reply #39 on:** May 12, 2015, 12:43:36 AM »

Here is the cast date that Jerry listed looking at the 10:00 position and not the 2:00 position which is where you need to look for a 341 rear end according to his book ( he may have been rushing). Before I read the note in his book I was looking at 10:00

bcmiller · « **Reply #40 on:** May 12, 2015, 01:19:09 AM »

Rob,

I tried looking at the casting date several different ways. What is there could be I 7 - with the 9 missing. That would be cast September 7, and with the assembly date stamp of 0910 (September 10) it would make sense. But there is no doubt in my mind that the axle is 100 percent original to the car.

rspallina · « **Reply #41 on:** May 12, 2015, 01:44:52 AM »

Thank you Bryon. I posted the axle info on the appropriate thread so you can add to other data.

69Z28-RS · « **Reply #42 on:** May 12, 2015, 03:20:57 AM »

Rob, your 'C' was difficult to spot, just as mine was, but after your cleaning and new photos, it seems to be there! I think that 'C' wasn't intended to be placed on 1969 model year cars, but happened to the late production cars as a change due to the 1970 model change to the rear application notation. It's just one additional thing that is different (or special?) about our 'late '69 cars'...

69Z28-RS · « **Reply #43 on:** May 12, 2015, 11:54:17 AM »

Rob's 'C' seems to have taken some 'licks', just as mine had. It makes me wonder how those extraneous rocks that hit those 'C's .. always hit the C rather than the B, U, etc…?... OR maybe the diff factory put those 'C's on the rears – of the late 69's, and then decided to 'remove' them, and banged them up at the factory intentionally? (I think no one knows the real story or reasons for that – management made an unprecedented decision to continue production of '69 Camaros and Corvettes for an additional 5 months… so obviously things were in flux and decisions about '69 vs '70 issues made quickly ...)..

Rob's 'C' has the same relative spacing before the BU as mine does… almost all the 69 rears with the C.. the C is displayed a couple of character spaces to the left of the 'BUxxxxGy' code.. it's almost like they didn't want it to be considered part of the app code? Is the 'C' used on 1970 3 letter diff codes displaced the same way? Or are they closely spaced as if stamped at one time?

PS. Why don't we consider the 'E' as part of the app code as well? ...

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Another case of me being in a hurry and trying to quote your post, but ended up editing it. Sorry about that Gary, post your pic with the C circled again if you want. I am between being at work and another function. I should know better than trying to rush a reply. My apologies...

bcmiller · « **Reply #44 on:** May 12, 2015, 12:37:44 PM »

Gary, I will address those questions later today hopefully (very busy day ahead).

Axle plant was changing over to 3 letter codes, Camaro production ran over is the short answer.

69Z28-RS · « **Reply #45 on:** May 12, 2015, 12:48:58 PM »

It's fun speculating about all the 'unknowns', even if we never get factual answers to our questions~

Bryon, you should retire.... then you could be as busy as you wanted to be...

I'm meeting a car friend for a german lunch, chasing down some materials for the new det. garage I'm building, changing the oil in the Nomad for a trip to the mountains this weekend, and maybe a few other odds n ends ...

PS: The Smokey Mountain Classic Chevy Roundup occurs in Pigeon Forge, TN this weekend (The Inn at Christmas Place)..

There's also the Good Guys meet at Titans stadium in Nashville, AND the ZR1 Gathering at the NCM in Bowling Green, KY... I haven't yet figured out how to be at all three!!

rspallina · « **Reply #46 on:** May 12, 2015, 12:59:28 PM »

Guys - has anyone ever noticed a D that is lower than the C?? I will take a pic and post it later today

Daytona Yellow 69 Z/28 · « **Reply #47 on:** May 12, 2015, 02:08:04 PM »

Beautiful Z, Congrats

bcmiller · « **Reply #48 on:** May 12, 2015, 08:37:43 PM »

Quote from: 69Z28-RS on May 12, 2015, 11:54:17 AM

Rob's 'C' seems to have taken some 'licks', just as mine had. It makes me wonder how those extraneous rocks that hit those 'C's .. always hit the C rather than the B, U, etc…?... OR maybe the diff factory put those 'C's on the rears – of the late 69's, and then decided to 'remove' them, and banged them up at the factory intentionally? (I think no one knows the real story or reasons for that – management made an unprecedented decision to continue production of '69 Camaros and Corvettes for an additional 5 months… so obviously things were in flux and decisions about '69 vs '70 issues made quickly ...)..

Rob's 'C' has the same relative spacing before the BU as mine does… almost all the 69 rears with the C.. the C is displayed a couple of character spaces to the left of the 'BUxxxxGy' code.. it's almost like they didn't want it to be considered part of the app code? Is the 'C' used on 1970 3 letter diff codes displaced the same way? Or are they closely spaced as if stamped at one time?

PS. Why don't we consider the 'E' as part of the app code as well? ...

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The "hits" are more than likely just coincidence, based on the location on the axle tube. They are not an attempt to remove them, at least not by the axle plant or assembly plant. And those are not the only ones I have seen banged up.

The 1970 codes are similar, with the C being spaced over. There is at least one example of that in the axle thread, and I have others.

E is part of the code, but is only there to designate which limited slip carrier is installed inside, E being for Eaton.

I will see what I can find in the Chevrolet Service News documents I have, but the three letter axle codes were planned, not just done on a whim.

Added - I will look again tomorrow for the September/October 1969 CSN that may have notes on the 3 letter axle codes.

rspallina · « **Reply #49 on:** May 12, 2015, 08:38:58 PM »

Thanks Daytona! Gentlemen - i present you with a D. Anyone know what that is all about? Anyone else have the same. Is it possible that the C was set as D and had to be changed?

bcmiller · « **Reply #50 on:** May 12, 2015, 08:43:11 PM »

That D is most likely an inspection mark. I have seen that before and it is not near the application code, so not related.

69 Zee · « **Reply #51 on:** May 12, 2015, 08:44:53 PM »

Wow. .sure looks like a "D"

Way to throw a monkey wrench into things Rob..

rspallina · « **Reply #52 on:** May 12, 2015, 08:52:50 PM »

I just came across it yesterday uncovering the C. It seems a part of my thread went missing. The pic that Gary reposted with the C circled in red after a member said they did not see it. Do posts get taken down?

BULLITT65 · « **Reply #53 on:** May 12, 2015, 09:43:11 PM »

Yes the moderators see to it, sometimes they give an explanation sometimes they don't.

Hey Rob does it ever look like the motor was resprayed at one point? Looks pretty dazzling in that engine compartment...

rspallina · « **Reply #54 on:** May 12, 2015, 10:40:56 PM »

It's been cleaned and detailed but does look good. Not sure if there is any new paint.

bcmiller · « **Reply #55 on:** May 13, 2015, 03:27:19 AM »

Quote from: rspallina on May 12, 2015, 08:52:50 PM

I just came across it yesterday uncovering the C. It seems a part of my thread went missing. The pic that Gary reposted with the C circled in red after a member said they did not see it. Do posts get taken down?

Edited by mistake. My fault. See above. Gary can repost that pic if he wants. I did not mean to remove it. Sorry.

But if anyone can't see the C, they need to look closer or get glasses.

And again, the D is most likely an inspection mark, it has nothing to do with the C BU application code.

69 Zee · « **Reply #56 on:** May 13, 2015, 04:17:24 AM »

Quote from: bcmiller on May 13, 2015, 03:27:19 AM

But if anyone can't see the C, they need to look closer or get glasses.

Funny Bryon, cause when I actually first saw the pic before Rob had posted and then again when he did post on #18, I saw what looked like to me another character. But I honestly didn't think anymore of it. As I was also unaware of the "C" punched on the later rears until I read your axle thread.

Learning something new everyday on these 1st gens, Smiley

bcmiller · « **Reply #57 on:** May 13, 2015, 09:32:36 PM »

Darrell, I definitely had to have my glasses on to see it.

rspallina · « **Reply #58 on:** May 13, 2015, 09:53:19 PM »

Guys - i just went to put gas in the Z and was curious to know what you guys are using. The prior owner was putting 93 in it and putting in a lead additive. Another buddy told me to put Rec fuel (90 octane) without ethanol as the ethanol is bad for the carb. Any thoughts?

1968RSZ28 · « **Reply #59 on:** May 13, 2015, 10:12:36 PM »

Quote from: rspallina on May 13, 2015, 09:53:19 PM

Guys - i just went to put gas in the Z and was curious to know what you guys are using. The prior owner was putting 93 in it and putting in a lead additive. Another buddy told me to put Rec fuel (90 octane) without ethanol as the ethanol is bad for the carb. Any thoughts?

Go with the one on the left...

Paul

rspallina · « **Reply #60 on:** May 13, 2015, 10:20:23 PM »

I would if I knew where to get it! That's funny!

BULLITT65 · « **Reply #61 on:** May 13, 2015, 10:48:51 PM »

They have 93 in Indiana, it and mine seems to run just fine on that. I am sure popping up to 100 would be alright as well.

If I was looking at the gas pump above I would go 3/4 or so 91, and then 100 the rest of the way to get around a 94/95 adjusted octane.

rspallina · « **Reply #62 on:** May 14, 2015, 12:00:20 AM »

what about the ethanol issue? Anybody have concerns?

1968RSZ28 · « **Reply #63 on:** May 14, 2015, 12:45:53 AM »

Quote from: rspallina on May 13, 2015, 10:20:23 PM

I would if I knew where to get it! That's funny!

Redwood City, CA
"Climate Best by Government Test"

Paul

BULLITT65 · « **Reply #64 on:** May 14, 2015, 12:47:57 AM »

That sign is still there today....although I wasn't aware of that 76 station in redwood city.

ko-lek-tor · « **Reply #65 on:** May 14, 2015, 01:22:19 AM »

Quote from: rspallina on May 14, 2015, 12:00:20 AM

what about the ethanol issue? Anybody have concerns?

By all means, absolutely Never, NEVER, if you can help it, run ethanol! One more NEVER!

69ZX77MP · « **Reply #66 on:** May 14, 2015, 02:08:20 AM »

I have a stock 69z rebuilt to factory specs, I run Sunoco 112 with 93 I use a 50/50 mixture the mouse likes the added octane no pinging or hesitation and it also runs cool at 180degrees. Something to think about, congrats with your new ride and good luck

JohnZ · « **Reply #67 on:** May 14, 2015, 03:16:36 PM »

A stock Z built to factory specs will run fine all day long on pump 93 octane with no additives of any kind, if it's tuned properly. Have no experience with 91 octane. We've had ethanol ("gasohol") in this area for 30 years - just makes it more sensitive to fuel percolation in the float bowls in hot weather.

1968RSZ28 · « **Reply #68 on:** May 14, 2015, 03:44:08 PM »

Quote from: BULLITT65 on May 14, 2015, 12:47:57 AM

That sign is still there today...

Yup, here it is today...

Paul

rspallina · « **Reply #69 on:** May 14, 2015, 06:32:47 PM »

thanks guys...beautiful shot of Cali! I searched hi and lo around my area and not a lot of places with race gas. A few non-ethanol places so I will stick with it. Right now I've got 18 gallons of fuel that is probably about a 92 with mostly non-ethanol. Will see how she runs and let you know. Read the thread on additives and not crazy about what i'm reading. Prior owner swears by it but not sure i should be using.

jdv69z · « **Reply #70 on:** May 14, 2015, 07:19:32 PM »

Quote from: JohnZ on May 14, 2015, 03:16:36 PM

A stock Z built to factory specs will run fine all day long on pump 93 octane with no additives of any kind, if it's tuned properly. Have no experience with 91 octane. We've had ethanol ("gasohol") in this area for 30 years - just makes it more sensitive to fuel percolation in the float bowls in hot weather.

This has been my experience as well. I've had no issues with 93 octane to date.

X33RS · « **Reply #71 on:** May 14, 2015, 07:39:06 PM »

Ditto. These engines get away with it thanks to the camshaft bleeding off a fair amount of low speed cylinder pressure. .050 duration numbers are healthy and the LSA is spread out pretty far on the stock cam.

However the tune has to be spot on with proper AFR's and I like to keep timing at no more than 36 total with a "not to aggressive" curve. On top of that I like to keep engine temps as low as feesable. When on the edge ambient temps can start playing a roll.

My only complaint is these cars not having a return style fuel system. Couple that with ethanol blend fuels that are more prone to vapor lock, and you can sometimes have a car that doesn't like the heat of the day. The higher octane helps here, but there are other tricks I do to fight this scenario if it becomes a problem.

Kelley W King · « **Reply #72 on:** May 14, 2015, 08:13:05 PM »

My L78 and my Z run on 93. But here in NC you can buy race fuel for $7.00 a gallon. I usually add about 2.5 gallons of race fuel to a tank of 93. This makes them run much better. But don,t run it in the shop long unless you don,t like your eyes. Here the fuel is not everywhere but usually at a station near a race track.

rspallina · « **Reply #73 on:** May 15, 2015, 10:02:53 PM »

Guys - I (actually Darell lol) found the casting date for the axle...it was actually on the opposite side (passenger side not driver side) from the pics that are shown on the rear axle page with all the decoding information for the 67-69 rear ends. Darell and I looked extensively for the casting number in all the places it should have been on the driver side. This is a 341 casting number car so I am wondering if it is in a different place than the picture that is shown on the page for the 860 casting number. Perhaps they did something different for the late 69 builds like they did for the casting date? Does anyone know where to find it? I updated the axle information thread with the casting date.

69 Zee · « **Reply #74 on:** May 16, 2015, 12:11:13 AM »

Your axle cast date is I 2 9 (Sept 2 '69) BTW !!

rspallina · « **Reply #75 on:** May 16, 2015, 01:40:48 AM »

Thanks D MAN!

bcmiller · « **Reply #76 on:** May 16, 2015, 02:01:53 AM »

Yes, I agree. I 2 9 - and I will change that over in the axle thread. Thanks!

rspallina · « **Reply #77 on:** May 16, 2015, 03:26:27 AM »

Here is casting number...3969341NF

rspallina · « **Reply #78 on:** May 16, 2015, 03:36:56 AM »

Nice shot of the alternator and its codes:

rspallina · « **Reply #79 on:** May 16, 2015, 04:00:18 AM »

PB booster code and Julian date 155=June 4th:

BULLITT65 · « **Reply #80 on:** June 11, 2015, 05:00:02 PM »

hey what happened to all the pics in this thread?

rspallina · « **Reply #81 on:** June 12, 2015, 12:26:34 AM »

When the site went down a few weeks back they disappeared. We are working to get them back up! Thanks Austin

x77-69z28 · « **Reply #82 on:** June 12, 2015, 02:50:43 AM »

Why don't I see any pictures?

rspallina · « **Reply #83 on:** June 14, 2015, 12:17:35 AM »

Pics are all back up!

dannystarr · « **Reply #84 on:** June 14, 2015, 02:38:34 AM »

I was just thinking I don't have much for a '69 that you would need, maybe a couple little things. I do have an extra original brake booster hose bracket with the AAC stamping. But I think another member said he might want it. I will have to go back and check some emails to see whom it was. Can you take a close-up shot of your brake booster hose bracket? I do have an original USA-1 front plate. If you are interested I can post some pictures. It is the correct heavy steel with the greenish/brown chromate back. Very little flawing. It's a pricey sucker..

Danny

KurtS · « **Reply #85 on:** June 14, 2015, 02:39:22 AM »

Robert,
Thanks for fixing those pictures!

rspallina · « **Reply #86 on:** June 14, 2015, 02:47:04 AM »

Thanks Kurt! Happy I could get them back up! I also added the the rear axle thread!

rspallina · « **Reply #87 on:** June 14, 2015, 02:51:49 AM »

Quote from: dannystarr on June 14, 2015, 02:38:34 AM

I was just thinking I don't have much for a '69 that you would need, maybe a couple little things. I do have an extra original brake booster hose bracket with the AAC stamping. But I think another member said he might want it. I will have to go back and check some emails to see whom it was. Can you take a close-up shot of your brake booster hose bracket? I do have an original USA-1 front plate. If you are interested I can post some pictures. It is the correct heavy steel with the greenish/brown chromate back. Very little flawing. It's a pricey sucker.. Danny

Danny - thanks but I have found everything that I needed. I have the USA-1 plate already on the car. I will take pic tomorrow and post. Thx

News:

Author Topic: My Z arrived today! (Read 31599 times)