Heater hoses

[RRMs69Z]

The AIM shows the lower hose crossing over the upper hose for a V8 engine. However, I see a lot of pictures that have a band around both hoses that attaches to the alternator. Which is the correct way to install the hoses?  Thanks.

[ko-lek-tor]

Drawings are not gospel, pictures are

[BULLITT65]

From my observations: The metal band attached to the alternator was used on the early cars, later cars did not use that band, and I have just seen the rubber ties.
Hopefully Kurt or someone may know when they stopped using that metal band.
Bentley (Ko-lec-tor) is correct, original pictures are best to go off of when you have them.

[x66 714]

The metal strap is on my 08E car but it's a 396 so that might be different. One hose comes from the water pump to the forward position & the other comes from the intake & it takes the rear position on the clamp (metal strap)...Joe

[Hans L]

Here's a picture back from 1990 of my Z/28 - it has the original heater hoses.   Note both metal clamps - on the alternator and on the inner fender.  04B Van Nuys Built.

[BULLITT65]

Pretty sure all of them have the inner fender clamp, but the alternator clamps I have seen hold both hoses, and it appears in your pic to be holding only 1?

[Hans L]

Pretty sure all of them have the inner fender clamp, but the alternator clamps I have seen hold both hoses, and it appears in your pic to be holding only 1?

Could be but it's a figure 8 style clip.  This the best pic I have so can't be sure.

[BULLITT65]

Ok, now it makes me think you have the solenoid clip (bracket) bolted in there? Pretty sure that is in the wrong spot.

[Hans L]

OK.  Correction!  Found a better image - how's this?  Again, these are back from 1990.  Original heater hoses.  04B Van Nuys Built.

[BULLITT65]

Hmm, that appears to be the right clip, but that also looks like a more recent picture?
I don't doubt your hoses could be original, but that clip could have been added anytime before the 90's.

I went through my pics from guys BITD or buying them new (1969), and I also have seen some unrestored cars. I have seen that bracket in your last pic on early cars, but then at some point it seems they stopped using it. Not sure if it was a big block only piece at that point, most of my pics are of small blocks.

[Hans L]

Hmm, that appears to be the right clip, but that also looks like a more recent picture?
I don't doubt your hoses could be original, but that clip could have been added anytime before the 90's.

I went through my pics from guys BITD or buying them new (1969), and I also have seen some unrestored cars. I have seen that bracket in your last pic on early cars, but then at some point it seems they stopped using it. Not sure if it was a big block only piece at that point, most of my pics are of small blocks.

Yeah, I took the picture with a 35mm Camera back in the day and had it digitized.   I'm 99% confident the hoses are original.  70K miles on the car.  Correct "ribbing", clamps, etc.  I still have them.   The car still had the original power steering belts and many other original components.  Unfortunately, the prior owners put a smaller carb and headers on it. 

[BULLITT65]

Well the hoses look original. My only question is when did they do away with that bracket? and was it only in certain applications ?

[RRMs69Z]

Thanks guys. I would like to know if any one can confirm the picture in the AIM is the way it was done for cars built later in 69.

[bcmiller]

Thanks guys. I would like to know if any one can confirm the picture in the AIM is the way it was done for cars built later in 69.

Knowing the build month and week of your car might help - to compare with another car. Things changed more than once during the model year. 

[X33RS]

Thanks guys. I would like to know if any one can confirm the picture in the AIM is the way it was done for cars built later in 69.

How much later in 69 are you looking for?

My 12D Norwood Z has the clamp on the alternator that holds both hoses, so what is seen in the AIM must be for cars after that date and maybe further.

[Hans L]

See AIM Page 223, under RPO C60 (AC), View B.  The clip, PN #3825416 is clearly show and there are no notes in the revision block that states that GM deleted the clip from production.   If some reason the clip was no longer needed, I would have suspected the AIM would have had a revision note stating clip had been deleted during the production year.   Granted, this is for an AC car...

I'm still searching the AIM, but so far, that's the only place I see it referenced.    Interesting, no where on Page 44 under heater hoses is the clip mentioned - not even in the revision notes stating it's been deleted. 

[BULLITT65]

For such small items, I'm not sure if it was worth the ink to have a revision, vs. A major component or options that was no longer available.
Larry does your car also have the rubber tie right by the heater hose bracket?
(The cars I have seen without the bracket seem to have an extra rubber tie in that location)

[X33RS]

Yes it has a rubber tie there as well.  It's holding the negative battery cable that runs over to the thermostat housing.

My car being an RS is plum full of those rubber ties. They went nuts with them holding all those vacuum hoses up. 

[69Z28-RS]

For such small items, I'm not sure if it was worth the ink to have a revision, vs. A major component or options that was no longer available.
Larry does your car also have the rubber tie right by the heater hose bracket?
(The cars I have seen without the bracket seem to have an extra rubber tie in that location)

Hmmmm...   if you didn't get a photo, did you really see it?  (Haven't I heard this before?).. 

[X33RS]

I have to correct and add to what I said after reading Bullitt's question again.  I had to go out and look at the car.  It does have a rubber tie but it's not right by the heater hose bracket as Bullitt asked the question.  Mine is further down the heater hose and not only holding the battery cable, but the alternator wire harness is also held in with it.

[RRMs69Z]

My build date is August 29, 1969.

[BULLITT65]

I have a 08C,(late 69) and I don't think there is any evidence of a bolt/screw ever being in that hole.

[RRMs69Z]

I was looking at UPC 1 M3.

[cook_dw]

10E of 69.  Original clamp, alternator bracket etc.  Photos from '96 after the engine swap.  It was there when it had the 307.  My belief is that items like this were either forgotten to be installed at the factory or just overlooked.  Why stop installing on just one type of engine or combo.?.  Wouldn't make sense.  Also I would think if an item was deleted from production then it would call for an ECN which in turn would require drawing updates. 

[X33RS]

Looks like it might also have the rubber tie holding the wires. 

[RRMs69Z]

The AIM shows the metal clip on the alternator for cars with AC but not on cars without AC. Thanks for the pictures.

[RRMs69Z]

This is how is set mine up, which is based on UPC 1 M3.

[X33RS]

The metal clip was most certainly factory equipped with cars that didn't have AC.

There are quite a few original 69 Z photos floating around from road tests back in the day that clearly show the heater hose clamp, metal clip or how ever it's referred to.

[X33RS]

Here's a vintage photo from the hot rod test car, clearly shows the heater hose bracket.  See if this works.....

[x66 714]

Here's a non air 396 with the clip.....Joe

[BULLITT65]

Larry I see what you are talking about with the Hot rod pic. That must be pretty early, no 302 sticker.

Also interesting is the digilite option, and was fitted with Bill Thomas headers with a provision for the smog tubes. Wish they would have had those from the factory. I wonder how much of a prototype that car was?

[BULLITT65]

Many of my vintage pics i see the bracket if the car did not have A.I.R.
If it did have smog, no bracket. Seems like the way the smog hose was routed it went between the heater hoses where that bracket would have sat.
Unfortunately I do not have a build date for each pic.

[Kelley W King]

I think Austin is right. A.I.R. no bracket.

[BULLITT65]

Lastly here is a pic of my 08C car unrestored, but the heater hoses were replaced at one point:

[cook_dw]

Nova pic is not really a fair comparison.

[Hans L]

A quick scan of "The Definitive 1969 Camaro Z/28-SS396 Fact Book" published by Jerry MacNeish shows the following:

Page 11:    302 Engine.  No clip
Page 13:    302 Engine.  Both photos show clips (probably the same engine)
Page 17:    "A Clamp mounted on this bracket on early production Z/28s to contain the heater hoses.  Later production cars use a Ty-rap tin place of the clip"
Page 91:     350 Engine.  Clip
Page 91:     302 Engine.  Clip
Page 120:   302 Engine.  In conclusive.  Nov '68 built
Page 125:   396-375:  Clip
Page 125:    427:  Clip
Page 131:    396:  Clip
Page 159:    ?  Clip
Page 163:    427:  Clip
Page 181:    Clip

And a quick scan of John Hooper's book, "The 1969 Camaro Reference Book", it shows 307s, 350 Pace Car, 396 Pace Car, 302's, ZL1's, 396/L89, 427's, Original Yenko Engine compartment, all with the clip...

Net-net - appears at some point there was a change in production from Clip to Ty-rap, Per Jerry's book, but when?  My Van Nuy's April built car has the clip and had the original factory installed heater hoses, so while things can happen, would seem weird someone along the way decided to add that factory clip....so the change probably happened after April. 

[X33RS]

So far it seems we have examples of factory installed heater hose clamps up through April production?  Is that what I'm reading?

I have a few vintage pics of Z's and 350's that have A.I.R. with the heater hose clamp, so I'll assume these all must be pre April 69 production.

[BULLITT65]

I would tend to agree with you Larry. It would be nice to find more originals to compare with though.
Hans I think it is tough to reference Jerry's book, since we don't know if those pics are restored cars or not. (So the clip could have been added, or was an early car and many of the cars got them?)
Good pick up on the pic DW, I think it is a nova. here is another :
(this one is a 05A car)

[RRMs69Z]

Thanks guys, great stuff. I am getting ready for the AACA event at Gettysburg, and I am trying to get my car ready.

[BULLITT65]

I would be curious how AACA would judge this since (our) Jury is still out. I am guessing they are going to say all V8 cars should have the clip, since some examples have been shown to have had it. Or maybe they overlook it all together...

[X33RS]

Larry I see what you are talking about with the Hot rod pic. That must be pretty early, no 302 sticker.

Also interesting is the digilite option, and was fitted with Bill Thomas headers with a provision for the smog tubes. Wish they would have had those from the factory. I wonder how much of a prototype that car was?

That's an early car from Van Nuys, but don't know how early.  I'm pretty sure it's before Dec 68 though.  It's a Hugger Orange White Stripe Z with black deluxe interior, spoilers, and VE3 bumper.  John Dianna drove that car and was a test bed for Hot Rod.   They installed the headers and other misc. stuff after the fact.   But yeah you can clearly see the heater hose clamp on that one.  I have a pic of another early one (Nov I think) from Norwood that also has the clamp.

[X33RS]

Here's an April built survivor with the clamp from our local cruise.   But again so far April seems to be the cutoff.


Aaa, file too big.

[69Z28-RS]

the AACA judges so many different automobiles, they do not have several experts on one car type to judge in such great detail.  A better place to do/judge Camaro detail is at the Camaro Nationals (which occurs next weekend), or via Steve Shauger's original judging...   

I'm thinking of taking my wife on an anniversary trip (#48) to the Fredrick, MD area next weekend...    It will be a surprise for her... 

[BULLITT65]

Gary your all heart.... 
Congrats on # 48, July 4th will be #15 for my wife and I. 

Regarding judging where they do know one car specifically: For something as small as that bracket, do they have enough data points and original cars to draw from, to go back and look at that in their data, or is Steve going to know a detail like that and when it may have switched?

I Know Steve and James (redneck quote) or other guys who see unrestored cars are busy guys, but they often chime in if they have some pertinent info to share on a topic, and not sure if this (small) detail has been looked into prior.

[69Z28-RS]

Austin:

1)  Yes, i am.... 

2)  No one has sufficient data on that one tiny issue, not even we fellas who spend ALL our time on first gen Camaros!  (and many other such small details that are not known/documented.

3)  Suggestion:  Go to the Camaro Nationals (or Steve's judging event) and SEE the detail that is gone into, and compare that to the judging on any car model that is judged at an AACA event.  Better yet, attend these events and sign up as a JUDGE!  I think my point will be VERY clear once you've done that. 

[X33RS]

There are dozens of changes throughout the model year on 69 alone.   I still don't think there is sufficient data on a lot of it.  May never be as good examples dry up.  I'm sure they do the best they can with what they have to work with.

[Kelley W King]

The pics of the feature car, (Solo) is 1D A.I.R. and has the clamp.

[BULLITT65]

FYI, solo car is 01D (early January). I am going say that the heater hose bracket was likely phased out by may of 69 on A.I.R. Cars,  may be earlier,  if I can find some more examples from prior months.

Larry good point.

Gary good suggestions. Steves show would be a great one. As my kids get older it may be an option 

[X33RS]

I have more pics of survivor 69 Z's that I can't find at the moment, and the one I did find I can't post.  But it's one of Larry Christensen's cars.  Built in Norwood in April and has the clamp.    That's the latest date I've found so far in my collection of survivors.

[firstgenaddict]

HERE IS LARRY's 04C JL8 survivor that has the clip  - This car runs out so nice, I drove it a couple of years ago when I was in Colorado. 3.73 and M20.




MAY NORWOOD


MAY 26k Norwood Survivor White white RS SS 350 conv


August Norwood


May Norwood


April 69 Norwood


March Norwood


September 1968 Van Nuys

[X33RS]

Yep that's Larry's, thanks James.  I see the car off and on when he brings it up to the cruise.

[BULLITT65]

Great pics, thanks James.
I knew you had been around many original cars. Other than the AC car which shows to have it in the AIM, seems most of the cars you have come across did not.
On that september of 68 car was there any evidence of it ever having the bracket?

[firstgenaddict]

I have been inspecting and messing with L78's and L72's for the last few years(they have the hose bracket) and had to think back...
So it took me a minute to think about Z's... my 10D Norwood Lemans blue car (parked in 1973) did not have one and there were no threads cut into the original alternator bracket.





As another data point. Mark Bulaw has recently - (within 6 months) acquired an early (Oct -Nov) LA SS/RS 350 survivor that has the hose bracket on the alternator.

[RRMs69Z]

Thanks James, good stuff. Interesting how none of the pictures have the lower hose crossing over the upper hose like this picture from AIM.

[X33RS]

That's interesting James, because my 12D Norwood has the bracket, and Larry's 4C Norwood has the bracket.  Seems we have this lapse or inconsistency.   Then there is the question of how many were a grey phosphate color and how many were black, because the books list both correct.   We can break this down to the point of driving people nuts 

Another question James,   since yours doesn't have the heater hose bracket, is the negative batter cable clip up there in that hole?  Because your battery cable is up pretty high.

On mine, I guess since the hose bracket is there,  the battery cable clip is toward the outside closer to the alternator pulley.  Most of the pics I'm seeing the battery cable clip is outside like mine, even the ones without the heater hose bracket.

[firstgenaddict]

I don't think there was a clip on there at that point in time...

[69Z28-RS]

My late 09C car did not have the hose bracket on the alternator bracket when I purchased it in April 1976; the hole showed no signs of having ever had a screw in it (so that confused me, as I thought the bracket/clip had been previously removed and I was missing it.   Instead it had a black 'tie' on it.

[firstgenaddict]

Thanks James, good stuff. Interesting how none of the pictures have the lower hose crossing over the upper hose like this picture from AIM.

RPM... The Assembly Manual image in your post illustrates 67-68.
69 is a different set up, the 3/4" hose nipple is on the top of the waterpump, not the passenger side like 67-68

[RRMs69Z]

Not sure what to say, I took the picture from the 69 manual. Very odd.