Author Topic: Distributer..Possible factory mistake??  (Read 655 times)

jockwalker

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Distributer..Possible factory mistake??
« on: March 02, 2018, 07:26:46 PM »
My 67rs 327/275hp built in Dec. of 1966 is supposed to have a 1111249.  Mine has a 1111150 that was supposed to be in a 283/195hp (manufacture date Dec5/1966). Is it possible the wrong numbered distributer was put in the car because maybe they didn't have enough correct distributers that day? Date code for this "wrong" distributer is right on for the build. This 1111150 seems to have a worn bushing, but I don't want to rebuild it unless it came with my car. Thx!

Mike S

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2070
    • View Profile
Re: Distributer..Possible factory mistake??
« Reply #1 on: March 02, 2018, 08:55:58 PM »
what's the engine assembly date stamp?
67 LOS SS/RS L35 Hardtop - Original w/UOIT
67 NOR SS/RS L35 Convertible - Restored

jockwalker

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: Distributer..Possible factory mistake??
« Reply #2 on: March 02, 2018, 09:26:38 PM »
engine code T1207mm   Built in Tonawanda Dec. 7, 1966

jockwalker

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: Distributer..Possible factory mistake??
« Reply #3 on: March 03, 2018, 06:25:48 PM »
I just pulled out the 1967-1968 Camaro Reference Book by John Hooper. Under the casting numbers for 1967 distributers, 327/275hp (auto) 1111249
                                                                                                                                                                                 327/275hp (manual) 1111150
Now I am very curious. What would be the difference between the two?? I would really like to know why the 1111150 is in my car with automatic transmission...
This is the best Camaro forum so I am hoping the right person reads this post.   
   

KurtS

  • CRG Coordinator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4609
    • View Profile
Re: Distributer..Possible factory mistake??
« Reply #4 on: March 04, 2018, 03:11:36 AM »
Hooper is wrong.
It's 249.
Very small to none chance that it's original to the engine.
Kurt S
CRG