Rear Stripes - again

[asm69]

To Jerry,

I had an earlier post regarding the rear stripes on a early build 1969 z28 (october 1968).
The stripes begin under the rear glass as though it had come with a vinyl top. The trim
tag under the hood does not support the vinyl top theory. The spoiler has the tell tale
signs of being dealer installed. Have you ever seen this before? I also do not see any signs
of an accident.

So if you can help me solve why the stripes start lower than other 69Z's without a vinyl
top, I would appreciate it.

Pics attached.

Valleyhugger

[Jerry@CHP]

Valleyhugger,

I have never seen any original cars like the photo of yours, so I don't know what the answer is.  Is your car suppose to be original paint?  Without me seeing the car in person it would be hard for me to establish any kind of answer for you.  Sorry.

Jerry

[asm69]

Jerry,

Yes, as far as I know it is the original paint. The Stripes are even irregular where they end under the hood cowl and where
they end under the trunk lik. I believe I was the second owner. I have had the car for about 20
years. Maybe there was a mix up at the factory or maybe the stripes were painted by the dealer. Here is
the trim tag information.

ST 69      12437      LOS131478   BDY
TR 711               72  72   PNT
    OD            U471

So, my plans are to paint it the same original colors. Do you think that I should maintain the rear stripes as they
are or update the stripes according to the camaro communities sentiment.

Valleyhugger

[GaryL]

It probably should be painted the correct way.

[JohnZ]

It's unlikely that the plant painted the stripes that way - they knew where the stripes were supposed to start relative to the window opening, and if it was a vinyl top car, there was a line of weld studs across the tulip panel for the molding for them to work from. This car didn't have a vinyl top, so there would be no reason to start the stripes so far from the window opening.

[asm69]

Are the length's of 1968 stripes shorter that those for the 1969?

Is the 1968 camaro rear portion (bottom of rear glass to end of trunk lid)
shorter when compared to the 1969 camaro?

If they are could the 1968 stripe stencil been used instead of the
the 1969 stencils. I only bring that point up due to the fact that I
have the shorter 1968 spoiler installed.

Another point is that it appears that the dealer may have installed
the rear spoiler (spoiler facts found on crg website). I'm not sure
if the stripes were painted at the dealer or not.

 
Valleyhugger

[thodl]

I am having a '68 Z28 painted and am looking for the dimensions of stripes for the painter. any drawings or dimensions out there???

[GaryL]

I am having a '68 Z28 painted and am looking for the dimensions of stripes for the painter. any drawings or dimensions out there???

Best thing you can do it spend $50 for the template kit.

[69er]

John Z.

What are the possibilities that the stripes were to be installed on a camaro with
a factory installed spoiler. I noticed that the width of the spoiler almost matches
the extra space between the top of the stripe and the bottom of the rear glass.

It appears that my spoiler was dealer installed (no camaro emblem on the trunk lid). The
stripes on my camaro go all the way down the trunk lid.

So, what I am saying is could the factory worker have received the stencil that was to
be for a factory installed spoiler. But, he notices that the build order for the camaro has no
rear spoiler. But, he still uses the same stencil but moves it down so that the entire
trunk lid is laid with a stripe, but now leaves that extra space between the top of the stripe
and the bottom of the rear glass.

Let me know what you think, I hope I was clear.

Valleyhugger

[Gramps69Z]

I find in hard to believe that's the original paint.   Looks good for almost forty years old.  Maybe the stripes were just improperly installed when it was painted.   

[asm69]

As far as I know it is the original paint. You cannot see the imperfections in the paint, but after all those years sitting
in a one car garage, paint will start to fade and crack. And yes, I agree with you I think a mistake was
made and no more than that. I was just trying to find out if that is possible. And if it is possible then
why not repaint it again with the same mistake.

Its the history of the car.

Valleyhugger

[GaryL]

......... And yes, I agree with you I think a mistake was
made and no more than that. I was just trying to find out if that is possible. And if it is possible then
why not repaint it again with the same mistake.

Its the history of the car.

Valleyhugger

While you are right it possibly could be history, it just is not right. It would look odd. Paint it the right way. In no way is painting the correct stripes over-restoring. JMHO. 

[asm69]

I agree with you that it's not right compared to the majority of production. But, in the same respects early
1969 Z28's like mine had the shorter 1968 spoiler installed. And to some that looks odd as well. It would
be very interesting to find out if other early 1969 Z28's had the same mistake made with the rear striping.

Jerry would probably be the person in the position of possiblly seeing this oddity somewhere else.
I know it is odd but maybe mine is not the only one.

valleyhugger

[JohnZ]

John Z.

What are the possibilities that the stripes were to be installed on a camaro with
a factory installed spoiler. I noticed that the width of the spoiler almost matches
the extra space between the top of the stripe and the bottom of the rear glass.

It appears that my spoiler was dealer installed (no camaro emblem on the trunk lid). The
stripes on my camaro go all the way down the trunk lid.

So, what I am saying is could the factory worker have received the stencil that was to
be for a factory installed spoiler. But, he notices that the build order for the camaro has no
rear spoiler. But, he still uses the same stencil but moves it down so that the entire
trunk lid is laid with a stripe, but now leaves that extra space between the top of the stripe
and the bottom of the rear glass.

Let me know what you think, I hope I was clear.

Valleyhugger

Not likely. If the car was ordered with a spoiler, it would have had the holes already drilled in the deck lid for the spoiler when it arrived in the Paint Shop, just as it would have had the weld studs on the tulip panel if it was ordered with a vinyl top; both of those were "clues" to the painters for how to position the front of the mask and how to terminate the stripes at the rear. If the mask was mis-positioned at the front as yours shows, it wouldn't have left the plant that way - it would have stuck out like a sore thumb and would have been corrected in Paint Repair.

[GaryL]

I agree with you that it's not right compared to the majority of production. But, in the same respects early
1969 Z28's like mine had the shorter 1968 spoiler installed. And to some that looks odd as well. It would
be very interesting to find out if other early 1969 Z28's had the same mistake made with the rear striping.

Jerry would probably be the person in the position of possiblly seeing this oddity somewhere else.
I know it is odd but maybe mine is not the only one.

valleyhugger

My 02D has the short spoiler also. JohnZ's 02D has a short spoiler also, I believe. I think the "oddity" thing is carried too far sometimes like there was no quality control at all back in the 60's.

[asm69]

John Z.

Thanks for your comments. From what I see the rear spoiler was dealer installed. There is no camaro emblem
on the rear deck lid. But, from underneath the deck lid I do see brazing where the holes may have been for the
camaro emblem. It may be possible that the dealer painted the stripes. But, again from the CRG website the
evidence leads me to believe that it was factory stripes. Evidence such as under the front cowl panel where the
wiper motor arms are located is painted white. The stripes do not have a clean line where they end under the hood
or the rear deck lid.

What are the possibilities that the only mask available when my car came down the line was a mask for a vehicle
with a rear spoiler ordered. And maybe due to production pressures they used it because the correct longer mask
was not available yet. (just like using the shorter rear spoiler because the longer rear spoiler was not available).

John Z. I just look at the springs for my rear deck lid. I noticed that one spring has a larger diameter that the other
I also noted that there is a rubber insulater on the larger spring and that there is orange overspray on the rubber
insulator as well as the spring. Does this have any significance.

I have attached some pics displaying the stripes ending unevenly as well as showing the front cowl wher the wiper
motor arms reside painted white. I have also included a pic showing what I believe is brazing where the camaro
rear deck emblem may have been.

Valleyhugger

[asm69]

Decklid pic

[asm69]

Sorry, Deck lid pic

[Mark]

If you have brazing material in the original holes, then the trunklid or at least the paint on it is not original,  The factory did not braze the original emblem holes shut when a spoiler was installed they just put a peice of tape over each hole and bolted the spoiler over it, and I doubt that a dealer would do that either, since it would require the lid to be repainted.

[asm69]

Thanks for your comments Mark. I believe that there was a thread discussing that when the dealer installed a rear spoiler they
removed the Camaro emblem due to it being installed at a lower point on the rear deck lid and would be in the way of a
the dealer spoiler installation. The dealer then brazed over the holes.

I wonder if the dealer brazed over the holes would this mean he would also paint the entire deck lid and rear stripes?

Valleyhugger

[JohnZ]

I wonder if the dealer brazed over the holes would this mean he would also paint the entire deck lid and rear stripes?

Valleyhugger

The presence of brazed-shut holes definitely indicates that the deck lid was repainted when the dealer (or owner) installed the spoiler.

[asm69]

So, because the decklid is painted all the way down to the end. I guess I can assume that
the factory painted the stripes, and the dealer or someone else installed the rear spoiler.

I have to ask this again.

What is the possibility that the masking that was used was for a car with a factory installed
spoiler. So when my car came down the line in order to make the masking work, the factory
moved the masking downward  in order to have the stripes go all the way down the trunk lid.
Thus, you have the extra space between the top of the stripes and the bottom of the rear glass.
Maybe this happened because the proper masking was not available yet.

Valleyhugger

[Gramps69Z]

What is the correct trunk lid striping for a Z-28 with a spoiler?

A: If the spoiler was installed at the factory:

The paint stripes go over the spoiler, and end at the bottom of the spoiler (and therefore not on the back lip of the trunk lid)
The Camaro trunk lid emblem was moved forward, up the trunk lid, from station 125.00 to station 121.73, a distance of 3.27 inches, and the Z stripe was masked (1967-68 only) around the emblem.
If the spoiler was installed by the dealer:
The stripes were painted on the trunk lid at the factory and thus, without a spoiler, run all the way through to the lip of the lid. The dealer installed spoiler was attached over the factory stripes and then the dealer painted the spoiler to match.
The dealer did not relocate the Camaro emblem.


As Gary stated earlier, for whatever the reason, it's not right.  I believe it was improperly done in the 19 years before you got the car.

I have a 72 72 car with black stripes instead of white.   Yes, I know it's wrong, but I'm happy with it.  It's your car do what you want to with it.   

[GaryL]

asm69, with all due respect it appears you want to repaint the way it is now. Go ahead, it is your car. Sounds like you are trying to rationalize something wrong. If you do it you will have to endure people coming up to you at a show and talking about the wrong stripes. A copule of years ago I told this lady at a show how wrong the "Caution Fan" sticker was on her nicely restored Pace car. Well, Year One sold her the sticker and assured her it was corect. Good luck and have fun.

[asm69]

Thanks for the information WYKOFF69Z and GaryL. I agree with the comments regarding the how rear stripes at the
factory were painted. And Yes, the stripes on my Z run all the way through to the lip of the rear lid, as indicated by
WYKOFF69Z and the CRG forum. The Camaro emblem was not relocated, but the holes were brazed by someone.

I'm just trying to find out under what circumstances this rear stripping oddity could of happened. I have had the
car since the 1972 or 1973. When I bouht the car the paint was only five years old. I dont think the previous
had it painted and I dont see any evidence of an accident. I only see that one rally rim is a "YH", a later production
wheel, the rest of the rims are "AD" rims and are dated correctly. So, I know something happened to one rim.

If it is truly an oddity or a mistake in production for the reasons that I suggested before, then so be it, just like the short
spoilers are a type of oddity on 69z's. So, when and if I repaint the car, I'll decide then as to how to have the
rear stripes done.

valleyhugger

[tom]

My 2¢'s worth. If you beleive you have a rarity, and it sounds like you do, Document as well as possible before you do anything.

After that, do what works for you, it's your car.

Post photos when your done, and ENJOY!

Tom

[asm69]

Tom,

Thanks for your comments. I dont know if I have a rarity or not. But, it's an oddity as I said before like a 1968 rear
spoiler on a 1969 camaro. Maybe other owners of early camaro's also had this odd painting scheme for the rear
stripes, but felt that it was'nt right and had the stripes repainted to match the others. This topic reminds me of a
similiar CRG thread where owners of early 69 camaro's were removing their short spoilers to install the longer 69 spoiler
because it was reported that the short spoiler was improper, until the facts came out that Chevrolet had actually used
the short spoiler due to the longer spoiler was not yet available.

So, again, maybe my vehicle had a similar issue. That issue is that the rear stripe mask for a vehicle with a spoiler was
used on a car that was ordered with no spoiler, and in order to complete the stripe down the lip of the trunk lid, they
moved in down as needed. And thus what you have is the extra space between the top of the stripe and the bottom of
the rear glass. By the way, the extra space matches the width of the spoiler. 

Valleyhugger

[JohnZ]

So, again, maybe my vehicle had a similar issue. That issue is that the rear stripe mask for a vehicle with a spoiler was
used on a car that was ordered with no spoiler, and in order to complete the stripe down the lip of the trunk lid, they
moved in down as needed. And thus what you have is the extra space between the top of the stripe and the bottom of
the rear glass.

There was only one mask for the stripes; on a spoiler car, they just taped a piece of masking paper across the bottom of it between the two rows of spoiler attaching holes. On a non-vinyl top car, they located the top end of it from the bottom of the rear window opening, and on a vinyl top car, they located it from the line of weld studs for the vinyl top molding.

[asm69]

John,

You mention that there was one mask for the stripes on a spoiler car.
What about the mask for the stripes on a non-spoiler car? How did
this mask differ?

Is it possilbe then that the mask for a spoiler car could have been
used on a non-spoiler car?

What would the factory do if a non-spoiler car came down the line
and the only masks available were for spoiler cars?

If the factory did decide to use this mask on a non-spoiler car then the
only way to make it work at all would be to move it down so that the
lip of the rear lid would be painted.

Valleyhugger

[x77-69z28]

if there were no holes on the deck lid, they painted to the end of the deck lid.

[Mark]

Theres only one mask.  The treatment at the back end of the car was the only difference, on spoiler equipped cars (indicated by the holes in the trunklid) they just taped off the last 3" or therabouts of the trunklid.  All masks were positioned off the rear window, vinyl top molding, or convertible top trim and were always the same, 5/8" off the bottom of each or these reference points.

I really don't see how the factory could have mispositioned your stripes, they were doing at least 50 Z28's a day so it's not like it was something they weren't familiar with, and the paint and trim inspectors would have caught it and had it repaired.

[olympic69]

A few observations...the early '69 Z's as evident in Mag road tests had the narrow stripes, which in the photos look like maybe they terminated a little lower than the later ones, but the car in question seems to have the wide stripes? The termination point looks like that of a '68 w/o vinyl top...with the narrow stripes. The fact that the holes were brazed just kinda indicates anything could have happened after delivery, since that is not a factory thing. No reason to dismiss the cars authenticity, which I dont think anyone has even implied- just not factory rear striping, IMO.

Cheers 

[asm69]

Thanks for your comments. Could you post those pictures. I'm also looking through my
old magazines as well for any rear stripe oddities. I also had the opportunity to look at
the assembly manual. It specs out the placement of the rear stripes. I think you should
review the assembly manual, I'm not sure if I am interpreting it correctly.

There is a CRG thread that points out that when a camaro came through the assembly
line without a spoiler the camaro emblem was positioned a little lower on the deck lid
than usual. So, when a dealer installed the rear spoiler the emblem was removed and
the holes were then brazed over. The emblem was not repositioned. I read this on this site.

Anyhow, post those pictures if you can, check out the assembly manual as well.

Valleyhugger

[olympic69]

I will try to get them scanned for you asap. Also, the diagram in the Assy manual is esoteric at best. I have inspected a few original cars, and mine still had the old stripes under a rather crappy scuff and shoot. It has been discussed quite a bit that the AIM for whatever reason does not represent what was done in production. I am sure you have done it, but a search here and over at camaros.net re-affirms the error of the AIM.

A nice example of a survivor:

http://www.camaros.net/forums/showthread.php?t=81626&highlight=z28+stripes

And other threads:

http://www.camaros.net/forums/showthread.php?t=101799&highlight=z28+stripes

http://www.camaros.net/forums/showthread.php?t=84805&highlight=z28+stripe+measurements

Its been kicked around exhaustively!!! Note that JohnZ is an engineer, and was there when the cars were being made, so you gotta believe, at least from a factory perspective.

Regards-

[Jon Mello]

With all due respect to the many people who have responded, I believe the low stripes on your car are correct as an "exception" to the typical process. I have seen many of these lower stripes on LOS-built cars. There was even one in my hometown, a silver non-spoiler car with the same striping, owned by the original elderly lady owner (her husband who purchased the car had passed away). I cannot ever recall seeing it on a NOR car. I have also seen other LOS cars in original paint with rear spoilers where the stripes went all the way down the lid and did not end under the spoiler. I happened to own one and viewed the original owner's pictures of it parked in the driveway when he brought it home. Check out the picture at the link below which has been on Wayne Guinn's Untold Secrets website for years. A picture taken back in '69. Remember that there is always a lot to learn about these cars. Avoid the temptation to say something is impossible or could NEVER happen. This is part of why CRG exists and continues to research these cars. I encourage any others who have noticed stripe "irregularities" to share what they have seen.

-Jon

http://www.camaro-untoldsecrets.com/stuff/stuff_fs.htm

[Jon Mello]

I didn't do the link right but I have attached the picture below. You can tell the picture was taken in 1969 due to the fact that the California license plate has the registration sticker in the upper LH corner. In 1970, the registration sticker switched to the upper RH corner and a month sticker was installed in the upper LH corner. This two-sticker method was not previously utilized by the state of California.

-Jon

[Gramps69Z]

I believe the question that started this post, was where the stripe started near the rear windshield, not where it ended. 

[Jon Mello]

My main point did not concern where the stripes end up in the back. I realize the angle of the picture I posted of the Camaro on the dyno is not ideal for this purpose but if you look closely at the panel below the rear window, you will see that the stripes do not come anywhere close to approaching the back glass. This is an example of a car with the low stripes, the kind that would ordinarily be seen on a vinyl top car (but of course the car in the picture does not have a vinyl top). I am using this picture because I do not have another one to show you  for better illustration purposes. This type of striping has been observed by me on some other '69 LOS-built cars although a pattern of why and when this occured has not yet been established. There have been many observed differences between NOR-built Camaros and LOS-built Camaros such as the 2Z cowl tag code, the sporadic use of the rear brake proportioning valve, the cowl tag w/o code, the way the cowls were masked off for Z stripes, the start date of the 4P cowl tag code, etc, etc, and I believe this to be yet another legitimate anomaly associated with the LOS plant. I have spent a lot of time, 30+ years, researching Zs as Jerry can attest. I am trying to pass along some of what I have found out because that is what I enjoy doing and that is why I am part of CRG.

[asm69]

Thanks for your comments Olympic69 and  Mr. Jon Mello. I have compared the dimensions of my
rear trunk lid stripes to that of the AIM. They are very close especially the 5.20 gap between the
bottom of the rear window molding and the start of the stripes. As indicated in the AIM manual the
width of the stripes on my Z change from starting point to ending point. That is they are wider by the
rear glass molding and narrower at the bottom of the trunk lid. The are also curved on the top by the
rear window molding.

The picture posted by Jon Mello confirms that at least two LOS built camaro's had the larger gap between
the rear window molding and the start of the stripes. And of course Mr. Mello has commented that he has
seen other Z's with this striping as well.

My Z is a (LOS) 10D camaro, VIN sequence is 505424 with a short rear spoiler. There should be
other vehicles close to this squence that may have the same striping.

In one of the links that olympic69 posted, it was commented that "the 5.20 inch measurement is a
leftover from the 67/68 model year". So, maybe its possible that this measurement was used on
some early Z's until a change was made.

I have posted another picture of my rear stripes from the top. This picture clearly shows the curve
at the top of the stripes closest to rear window molding and of course the 5.20 gap between the
rear window molding and the start of the stripes.

I would like to hear from John Z or Jerry regarding this information
 
Valleyhugger

[Jon Mello]

Thanks for the larger picture of the trunk area. I suspect John Z or Jerry will not have seen examples of this as I believe it to be a Van Nuys plant anomaly and not something that occured at Norwood. I appreciate you submitting your VIN and cowl tag info as this can then be logged into the CRG database and we can use it to compare with other cars. It is possible that it is something that was done during a narrow window of time. There are a couple of scenarios which could account for this to occur whether accidently or by design. It is possible that the supplier for the stripe templates was not the same between the Norwood plant and the Van Nuys plant, just like the carpets were not sourced from the same supplier between the two. If it was the same supplier, the plant may have run out of the upper template [for the stripe on the rear window filler panel] and simply used the vinyl top template to avoid a line stoppage. They may have made a decision for their own plant to standardize on one template for both vinyl top and standard roof cars to simplify things and then reversed the decision either on their own for aesthetic reasons or by Central Office edict. I believe the Van Nuys plant did deliver some '69 Zs in this stripe configuration. This is similar to the situation with the early '69s with the closer ['67-'68] spaced rear stripes. Most people thought that was not legit either until it made it into Jerry's book and now it is accepted. More research is needed here but it is being worked on. I understand everyone wants to make a judgement here but keep an open mind on this one.

-Jon

[GaryL]

This discussion turned very interesting. Way to hang in there asm69.

[Jerry@CHP]

I have seen many in my 37+ years of my involvement in the Camaro arena, but have never seen any deviations like the example shown in the photos here.  I made a tracing templet 30 years ago and have check many original cars with this templet and all have been pretty much right on the money.  I also own the original GM stencil kit that appears in my 67-68 Z28 fact book.  My personal opinion is that either plant would have never screwed up the rear stripes and their position.  They used a GM templet and that would not allow the plant worker to do something different........period.  It could not happen in my opinion.  I would have to see the car in person with my own two eyes before I changed my thoughts here.

Just passing along to this discussion.

Jerry 

[asm69]

Thanks for your response Jerry. I was just trying to find out why my stripes appear different than
others. My quest led me to find the AIM where the rear stripes specifications are very close to the
specs on my vehicle, especially the 5.20 gap between the rear window molding and the top of the
stripes. Mr Mello posted a picture of a 1969 z28 that also has a larger gap between the rear window
molding and the top of the stripes. That makes two z28's with similiar rear stripes. Mine of course is
LOS built, I'm not sure about the other one. I'm located in the Bay Area in California, email me if you
plan on being in the area, I would be happy to have you inspect it.

asm69

[Jon Mello]

I respect that Jerry has a different opinion but I know what I have seen over the years. I will work on trying to come up with more examples of this and further the research.

-Jon

[KurtS]

I've seen several original paint early LOS 69 Z's. None were painted like this.

The dealer could install the spoiler as he saw fit. Move (or not) the emblem, braze or tape the holes, etc....

What color is the wiper linkage?

And you've had the car longer than you remember, 33 years not 20.

[asm69]

Sorry Kurt for not being consistent with purchase date. I looked at my purchase
receipt and it is dated December 7, 1972. The wiper linkage on the drivers side,
appears to be a black color, the cowl area under the linkage is painted white like
the stripes.

asm69

[asm69]

Jerry, what are recent thoughts on this discussion. Is their any additional data you can provide, do you
think you will research this in any way. I know you have a very busy schedule. I will continue to research
this as well.

asm69