CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 31, 2014, 02:03:27 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.
105859 Posts in 12353 Topics by 4762 Members
Latest Member: HarryQ
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  CRG Discussion Forum
|-+  Camaro Research Group Discussion
| |-+  General Discussion
| | |-+  Possible find 67 L30/M20
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 6 [All] Print
Author Topic: Possible find 67 L30/M20  (Read 22433 times)
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« on: April 17, 2008, 12:11:46 PM »

Hi guys, this is my first forum registration and first post ever! 

I would like to thank Rich Fields for responding to my initial questions about my newly purchased project, 1967 V-8 Camaro.
 My new car may possibly be a 67 L30/M20 car and any help on the mystery would be greatly apreciated. I just recently bought it as a project/restore it is a rolling shell minus engine and transmission and has standard black interior with bucket seats and has clutch pedals. The rear end is a 10 bolt # PA 0320G1   The car vin is 124377L142144  The fisher body tag below.

  02B                                    L378

ST 67-12437 LOS-23134        Body
TR 760-Z                   H-H     Piant
      2LG   3K
    4P

 I guess one of the key things is where the speedo cable pierces the fire wall. I checked this and it is on the drivers side of the steering column closer to the fuse block and I believe under the clutch rod.The speedo cable is still intact. There are no provisions for a radius rod on either the rear end housing or the body. It has manual steering and manual drum brakes. No AC.
 So, the person I bought the car from said his buddy, the previous owner before him took the engine and trans out (said it was 327) when the front end got banged up, and put it in one of his other cars. Niether of those individuals new the car was possible SS or L30/M20. This is again going to be a shining H-H Mountain Green beauty.
 Any opinions on this mystery car? I can post pictures if anyone is interested, Thanks, Jeff.
Logged
1968RSZ28
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4785



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: April 17, 2008, 01:08:19 PM »

I can post pictures if anyone is interested.

Post away please!     Smiley

Paul
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: April 17, 2008, 02:37:00 PM »

Thanks guys for moving that post, I now know that 67 orphans is for items needing a home. Is the only way to put up pictures is to put them on webshots? I'll get some togather as soon as I can Paul.

Jeff.
Logged
KurtS
CRG Coordinator
*****
Posts: 3253


View Profile Email
« Reply #3 on: April 17, 2008, 10:24:42 PM »

Hit 'reply' and you can add photos under 'Additional Options'.
Logged

Kurt S
CRG
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: April 21, 2008, 01:43:31 AM »

Well, I hope Rich and Kurt don't mame me for theese 15 posts just for pictures, I've reduced them as far as I can and there is a 192KB limit per post. Big project, hope everybody is'nt let down too bad. At least it's not all rusted out. Alot of sheet metal swapped out. I found a access panel under rear seat, drivers sideabout where the radius rod would attach to the body. do all 67s have theese? Also I was just informed that the old previous owner took just the 4 speed trans for his big block car not the engine too.  The engine that came with it is supposed to be the the original one. I posted pictures of casting no. and date code. I believe the shifter is in the boxes of stuff too. The fuel line is 3/8 OD. I have a truck load of stuff that is suppose to be the whole car. Yep, a big labor of love, Oh well.

Jeff.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: April 21, 2008, 01:44:43 AM »

Jeffs 67.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: April 21, 2008, 01:45:29 AM »

Jeffs 67.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: April 21, 2008, 01:46:09 AM »

Jeffs 67.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: April 21, 2008, 01:46:49 AM »

Jeffs 67.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: April 21, 2008, 01:47:26 AM »

Jeffs 67.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: April 21, 2008, 01:48:08 AM »

Jeffs 67.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: April 21, 2008, 01:48:47 AM »

Jeffs 67.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: April 21, 2008, 01:49:22 AM »

Jeffs 67.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: April 21, 2008, 01:50:00 AM »

Jeffs 67.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: April 21, 2008, 01:50:35 AM »

Jeffs 67.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: April 21, 2008, 01:51:08 AM »

Jeffs 67.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: April 21, 2008, 01:51:49 AM »

Jeffs 67.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: April 21, 2008, 02:03:23 AM »

Jeffs 67.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: April 21, 2008, 02:06:41 AM »

Ok, newbie is a perfect name for me. On theese last two pics I found out how to reduce them way further.

Jeffs 67.
Logged
rare4k
Member
***
Posts: 96


View Profile Email
« Reply #19 on: April 21, 2008, 07:25:56 AM »

I think the rear is wrong just by date, should be a 12 bolt round bar,Ithink the car may have had a saginaw trans thats why the cable is on the drivers side, I haven't seen a saginaw in along time I can't remember what side it's on, Also just a NOTE you have a big block cross member  great color when done
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: April 21, 2008, 07:26:22 PM »

Thanks, I agree, I have seen a few pictures of Mountain Green cars and I like them.
 What is the difference between big block and small block cross members?

Jeff.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: April 22, 2008, 12:52:41 AM »

Hey all, I was just researching the forum and I noticed that my early 67 has the same plastic speedo cable plug in the same hole (just above and right of throttle lever) as qwertyme77 posted under decoding/numbers board on March 26. What's up?

Jeff.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: April 22, 2008, 01:03:15 AM »

Does anyone know if GM used different size fuel lines on 67 models for different engine applications?

Jeff.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: April 22, 2008, 03:05:29 PM »

It looks like (qwertyme77) 67 is very close to mine. His has a tag build of 01B and my car is 02B and both 4 speed cars. Does any one know if I can message him directly so I can catalog the similarities?

Jeff.
Logged
1968RSZ28
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4785



View Profile
« Reply #24 on: April 22, 2008, 04:30:02 PM »

Does any one know if I can message him directly so I can catalog the similarities?

Sure, just click on his user id, then on "send this member a personal message".

Paul
Logged
Stillwater Camaro
Member
***
Posts: 60



View Profile
« Reply #25 on: April 22, 2008, 08:50:46 PM »

Hey all, I was just researching the forum and I noticed that my early 67 has the same plastic speedo cable plug in the same hole (just above and right of throttle lever) as qwertyme77 posted under decoding/numbers board on March 26. What's up?

Jeff.

That's not a speedo cable plug. It is a 2 wire electrical bulkhead connector.
Logged

1967 Camaro SS/RS 350
1966 Chevelle SS 396
1970 Chevelle SS 396
1967 GTO
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: April 22, 2008, 10:47:22 PM »

Thanks for clarifying that electrical connector for me, I can clearly see the other two holes now.

Jeff.
Logged
68Zproject
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1624



View Profile Email
« Reply #27 on: April 22, 2008, 11:33:25 PM »

Reverse light hookup
Logged

68Z28
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: April 23, 2008, 01:29:31 AM »

Can anybody direct me to a picture of a 67 radius rod (bracket) that is allready bolted to the bottom of the floor pan?
Logged
1968RSZ28
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4785



View Profile
« Reply #29 on: April 23, 2008, 11:29:15 AM »

Can anybody direct me to a picture of a 67 radius rod (bracket) that is allready bolted to the bottom of the floor pan?

Sure, see page 81 in Jerry MacNeish's "The Definitive 1967-1968 Camaro Z/28 Fact Book", third edition.     Smiley

Paul
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: April 23, 2008, 12:28:44 PM »

Thanks Paul, I am looking foward to that.
Jeff.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: April 23, 2008, 05:05:24 PM »

Paul, now I really can't wait to get that book, check this out. I can't find a suffix code on my engine, where it is supposed to be there is nothing, no vin either. The engine has not been decked ever it still has original bore 4.00 in.   and GM domed pistons #3866954. I have not measured the stroke yet but getting ready to. Could it be possible that this engine with theese numbers  could be a 302?
 Also my car is factory bracketed in 2 places both sides of car for dual exhaust. It also has a 3/8 fuel line, 3/8 OD.
 Also some one mentioned there is a big block cross member in there. Do you know if there were big and small front drum brakes for 67? and also, do you know when GM first sold Z28 and big block cars to the public? 66 or 67?

Jeff.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: April 24, 2008, 07:57:10 PM »

I have been pouring through archived forum discussions for the last few days and WOW! What an unbelieveable web site. Hats off to Kurt, Rich, senior members and everybody else associated with CRG that has organized and contributed to this effort. Research on the site is made easy and there is indeed a vast pool of expierienced knowledge to draw from. Although in some threads reference is made to not wanting to devulge some parts of the data base on a public forum, with so much information, one can almost extrapolate to the same conclusion as if he had recieved it. WOW! again, really cool.
 My favorate reading  so far has been the conversation about the first two L78 pace cars and Bill Jenkins' first car argument. That was very interesting because it ended I believe postulating the question, (where are the 20 L78 cars before Jenkins') likely 4P coded. And someone concluded, probably destroyed.
 I have to admit my 67 is only the second Chevy I have owned, a 64 283 Nova the other. Yep Rich, Camero, remember, that's why I guess I'm not that knowledgeable.
 Oh well. I am very fond of them both and I am learning thanks to you guys.
 Thanks to everybody who has responded to my questions thus far. But can you guys definitively conclude for me that my car is not an early 02B 4P coded L78 so I can concentrate on getting back to L30/M20 specs?

Facts so far:
               1 (wrong rear end)
               2 (Factory dual exhaust but not optioned on tag) (or maybee is should only be optioned on build sheet not tag?)
               3 (speedo cable usage on drivers side of steering column, no hole cut for other)
               4 (manual drum brakes)
               5 (manual steering)
               6 (radius rod stiffener plate on floor under back seat)
               7 (4 speed car yes)
               8 (4P car yes)
               9 (current small block heater box)
             10 (hidden VIN matches title)
             11 (fisher tag looks undisturbed)

questions:
               1 (were there any Saginaw L78 cars in early 67? contain laughter please  Grin
               2 (mentioned was that I have a big block cross member, did he mean transmission or engine cross member?)
               3 (do my engine mounts appear to be small or big block?)
               4 (were there small and big front manual drums in 67?)
               5 (how do you measure fuel line diamater? ID. or OD.)
               

              Ya, Ya, I know....... dream on.              If you guys get a chance, thanks alot.
             
               Jeff.
Logged
Stillwater Camaro
Member
***
Posts: 60



View Profile
« Reply #33 on: April 24, 2008, 08:25:39 PM »

The speedo cable hole is the best evidence of a Saginaw trans car and they weren't put behind anything bigger than a 327..I think you know the answer....L30/M20....don't be disappointed. No, it wasn't a big block car, but that 327 was a VERY close match to the 350. That's why they got the same 12 bolt axle and radius rod.
Logged

1967 Camaro SS/RS 350
1966 Chevelle SS 396
1970 Chevelle SS 396
1967 GTO
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: April 24, 2008, 08:47:10 PM »

Thanks Stillwater Camaro, Ya, but not a BIG dissappointment. A L30/M20 is still a very unique car and some of the original parts are rumored to be possibly available way up north of me. And Mountain Green  with a exterior molding group package. Smiley
Logged
Stillwater Camaro
Member
***
Posts: 60



View Profile
« Reply #35 on: April 24, 2008, 08:57:32 PM »

some of the original parts are rumored to be possibly available way up north of me.  Smiley

That would be awesome. Get after them before they are gone.
Logged

1967 Camaro SS/RS 350
1966 Chevelle SS 396
1970 Chevelle SS 396
1967 GTO
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: April 25, 2008, 12:28:42 AM »

Can anybody confirm for me that the 67 L30 engine was rated at 275 HP? and was there any higher HP rated 327 in 67? Did they obtain the 270 HP rating with flat top pistons and 1.94 closed chamber heads?
Logged
1968RSZ28
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4785



View Profile
« Reply #37 on: April 25, 2008, 01:33:27 AM »

Can anybody confirm for me that the 67 L30 engine was rated at 275 HP?

Confirmed.

and was there any higher HP rated 327 in 67?

Not available in a Camaro, but the '67 Corvette had two 327 cid engines; the base 327 rated at 300hp and the L79 327 rated at 350hp.

Paul
Logged
Stillwater Camaro
Member
***
Posts: 60



View Profile
« Reply #38 on: April 25, 2008, 09:21:19 AM »

They also came in the Chevelle, Chevy II and Impala lines. If you do some research on the engine specs across the line you will see that the 275 and 300 were IDENTICAL engines. Chev rated the hp lower for certain models, but all the parts have the same part number. The 350 hp had different pistons and heads to achieve a higher compression and to accommodate the higher lift cam. All the configurations were built on the same block, so you can easily use similar parts to get well into the upper 300 hp range with the 327 engine. If you can get the original engine...snag it !! No need for a 350 unless you plan to build a h p monster. The original is worth far more in value in that car.
Good Luck..... Smiley
Logged

1967 Camaro SS/RS 350
1966 Chevelle SS 396
1970 Chevelle SS 396
1967 GTO
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: April 25, 2008, 10:20:25 AM »

Right, I want to put it back to original.
 
When I bought the car a few weeks ago, I just assumed the engine that was in the trunk was a core that was rounded up some where along the line with the blue nose that is on the car because the gut I bought it from said the owner before him took out Quote "the hot rod engine and transmission" unquote, and put it in one of his other cars. But, I have recently talked to that person, (Jay) and he says no, he took just the transmission and put it in a big block 2nd gen. car about thirteenyears ago. He says he thinks it's around somewhere. Iv'e also offered him 100.00 just for the orriginal VIN tag that he says he still has somewhere. Still waiting on a price for the M20 if he finds it? He said that car was a special optioned Quote "hipo engine" unquote, camaro. Check out the pictures I posted of the engine, I can't find the casting no. of that block anywhere, but the casting date looks to be very correct for the early 02B car. There is no suffix code or vin stamped in the pads and it has never been decked because it still has original 4.00 bore with stock GM domed pistons in it. Right now I'm soaking and cleaning the bores so I don't damage it when I rotate it to measure the bore. Right now I don't even know if it is a 302, 327, 350,  accually the crank flane looks like a 327, never seen a 302 before. It does sound logical though that Chevrolet wouldn't have stamped an engine with marks if it (wasn't) one of them engines, and maybe they didn"t have a code stamp for a higher HP engine in 67 if it wasn"t the norm but only A one time (speacial option)
Logged
1968RSZ28
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4785



View Profile
« Reply #40 on: April 25, 2008, 10:34:55 AM »

Right now I don't even know if it is a 302, 327, 350,  accually the crank flane looks like a 327, never seen a 302 before.

The 302 crank flywheel flange has a unique shape, with a pie slice-shaped cutout on the edge, shown below...

Paul
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: April 25, 2008, 11:18:08 AM »

Thanks paul, I see it. Mine does not look like that, no long lost 302 here!

Jeff.
Logged
Stillwater Camaro
Member
***
Posts: 60



View Profile
« Reply #42 on: April 25, 2008, 12:13:30 PM »

All production engines had a factory code stamped in the pad. Without a code the assembly line workers would've have a clue what it was. If it was bought as an over-the-counter, it might have come plain. The crankshaft has a casting number on it too. Get that and post it and it will tell you what it is.
The casting number of your block is a 62-67   327. It was also used for replacement blocks/engines. If it had been a warranty replacement it would have  "CE" stamped in the pad. As i said above, if it was bought by a customer as an o-t-c new engine, it may not be stamped at all. The cast date does align with the build date of the car but, again, it could've been shelved for some time and sold o-t-c. It's possible the block had head gasket issues and was decked but not bored. It's 40 years old and who knows where it's been and what's been done to it.
I wouldn't bet on the original Saginaw having survived, as they were too weak even for the 275 327 and if run hard didn't last long.
Gotta go for the weekend here, but I'll be interested in seeing what has transpired when I get back Sunday. Have a happy weekend of researching... Wink
« Last Edit: April 25, 2008, 12:24:39 PM by Stillwater Camaro » Logged

1967 Camaro SS/RS 350
1966 Chevelle SS 396
1970 Chevelle SS 396
1967 GTO
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: April 25, 2008, 02:46:40 PM »

Very good points, I just read some where in the CRG archives although I remember where, but it seemed like the engine stamp was sometime late in the vehicle  assembly process. I think I remember reading the assembly line had to remove the altenator to do it. That seems like a  pretty complete car  to me. I guess I'll get the crank number when I dissasemble the short block. Right now I'm kind of cleaning it up (the cylinders) that is. I'll post a picture of the front pad right away.

Jeff.
Logged
JohnZ
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 4126


View Profile Email
« Reply #44 on: April 26, 2008, 10:26:42 AM »

Very good points, I just read some where in the CRG archives although I remember where, but it seemed like the engine stamp was sometime late in the vehicle  assembly process.

On a production engine, the engine plant stamp on the pad was applied in the engine plant, right after the heads went on. The VIN derivative was stamped on the pad in the car assembly plant, on the engine dress line.
Logged

'69 Z/28
Fathom Green
CRG
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: April 26, 2008, 11:47:53 AM »

Thanks JohnZ, that would make sense that the suffix  stamp would be applied in the engine shop.

Jeff.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: April 28, 2008, 02:24:26 AM »

GOOD NEWS!! Jay has confirmed for me that the engine I have, is the original engine that came in my 67 Camaro. He also still has the 4 speed that was in the car, but now I am going to be paying through the nose for it, just like the vin tag. Probably because I have been bugging the crapola out of them. My L78 dreaming is officially over. I posted pictures of that bare front pad.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: April 28, 2008, 02:26:17 AM »

Another Pic.
Logged
1968RSZ28
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4785



View Profile
« Reply #48 on: April 28, 2008, 11:23:19 AM »

Is it me or the photo?  I don't see any numbers on the engine pad...     Huh

Paul
Logged
Stillwater Camaro
Member
***
Posts: 60



View Profile
« Reply #49 on: April 28, 2008, 02:04:22 PM »

What Huh you can't see the numbers .... Grin 

 He is showing that there are no numbers stamped on the pad. It appears to have been decked.
Logged

1967 Camaro SS/RS 350
1966 Chevelle SS 396
1970 Chevelle SS 396
1967 GTO
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #50 on: April 28, 2008, 05:28:07 PM »

Is it me or the photo?  I don't see any numbers on the engine pad...     Huh

Paul
What Huh you can't see the numbers .... Grin 

 He is showing that there are no numbers stamped on the pad. It appears to have been decked.


Ya, Paul and Stillwater, I know, that's what I've been saying. It must have been decked like you said. I have this engine! it came in the trunk of the car when I bought it. Me and the guy I bought it from, (not Jay) didn't know it was the original. It looks like there may have been a E near the middle and then a little ways down a V but that's all. Off to the left it looks like there may have been a row of very tiny numbers starting right at the pad edge. Not sure though.

Jeff.
Logged
Stillwater Camaro
Member
***
Posts: 60



View Profile
« Reply #51 on: April 28, 2008, 06:54:15 PM »

The row of tiny numbers would be the VIN. If you can use a crayon to fill what's left of the depression and wipe the rest level with the metal, a hand held magnifying glass may make the numbers visible enough to read. That is the number that will tell you if it is the original engine. Shocked
Logged

1967 Camaro SS/RS 350
1966 Chevelle SS 396
1970 Chevelle SS 396
1967 GTO
KevinK
Member
***
Posts: 232



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #52 on: April 30, 2008, 08:01:41 AM »

The row of tiny numbers would be the VIN. If you can use a crayon to fill what's left of the depression and wipe the rest level with the metal, a hand held magnifying glass may make the numbers visible enough to read. That is the number that will tell you if it is the original engine. Shocked
   ...Was the VIN# stamped on the '67 L30's? ...I didn't think it was(it wasn't on mine...), ...I could be wrong, ...maybe the did on L30/M20's
Logged
Stillwater Camaro
Member
***
Posts: 60



View Profile
« Reply #53 on: April 30, 2008, 08:54:41 AM »

The row of tiny numbers would be the VIN. If you can use a crayon to fill what's left of the depression and wipe the rest level with the metal, a hand held magnifying glass may make the numbers visible enough to read. That is the number that will tell you if it is the original engine. Shocked
   ...Was the VIN# stamped on the '67 L30's? ...I didn't think it was(it wasn't on mine...), ...I could be wrong, ...maybe the did on L30/M20's
The consensus seems to be NOT and if his block has remnants of a VIN, it strongly suggests non-original.
Logged

1967 Camaro SS/RS 350
1966 Chevelle SS 396
1970 Chevelle SS 396
1967 GTO
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #54 on: April 30, 2008, 10:55:22 AM »

Crayon did not work. What looks like charactors are not depressions, May just be my imagination.
 How many 325 hp optioned 67s are in your guys data base? Remember it would not be a L30 engine, an L30 engine is defined as 275 hp. You say it would have no number but why would they stamp (all) 295 hp L48s and (not)? a much better car such as one with a 325 hp engine.
 That is a very premature statement that you have made.
 I am going to look at the M20 trans this weekend that is supposed to be also original to the also. Do you want to shoot it down right now before we see the numbers on it too?
  Remember, A data base is a data base because you are continually adding and compiling data to it. If at some point you stop adding data to it and call it the (all) stanard norm, then you would have your own personel luxury of excluding particular examples.
 Rich has communicated to me that there is only one other car in the data base with an early build date as mine. That does not sound like a very big data base at all, or else I have a really, really rare car indeed.
 If the M20 comes through and has the correct numbers you will have to add to your data base or you truly will not be benefiting the community you claim to be.
 Also, you members may not be as informed as you think you are,
 Example: the very first responce to my thread was Quote:" rear is wrong, should be a 12 bolt round rod".  unquote.
 I know the rear is probably not the original due to the late date stamp, but that was  a wrong statement because I believe my car was an early 10 bolt non radius rod  transition car and I think Rich or Kurt would attest to that fact.
 So, there's my vent, Oh well, nothing personel.

 Jeff.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #55 on: April 30, 2008, 11:47:30 AM »

Also on November 5 or November 25 a member named Lars Sweeden made a post about his 67 wanting information. He only made two posts I believe. My vin is 142144 and his vin by memory was 142845 both cars LOS cars. Does anybody know how close theese cars would have been togather on the assembly line? and is there any way to contact Lars know?

 Thanks in advance, Jeff.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #56 on: April 30, 2008, 11:55:32 AM »

That Lars Sweeden posting was in year 2007 and I believe he was posting from the country of Sweeden.

Jeff.
Logged
Stillwater Camaro
Member
***
Posts: 60



View Profile
« Reply #57 on: April 30, 2008, 12:33:59 PM »

Jeff, NOBODY is shooting down your car..... Sad  The known facts, so far, are that it appears to be an early build L30/M20. There was NO 325hp 327 in a 67 Camaro. The 325 hp rating was for a L34/396. If the small block engine you have is indeed the original, that eliminates a big block car. If the aluminum Muncie transmission that you are going to look at has the matching VIN to your car, then it very well could be a big block car and the small block you have can't be the original UNLESS the engine is a 302. The car very well may have come with a factory 10 bolt axle, as you point out, and it then wouldn't have a radius rod either. You are correct on that point. The fact that is has the stiffener plate under the rear seat for the rod, indicates that it is from the mid-year, transitional period, where GM was attempting to address the severe wheel hop in the higher hp, manual trans cars. I know you are excited and are still hoping you have a 1 off, super rare car, but the odds of that are pretty remote.
The reason GM stamped the VIN in the 350's was because it was considered a high performance engine and at greater risk of theft than the 275 hp 327. The 327 had been around for a number of years and the 350 was brand, spankin' new in the 67 Camaro ONLY.
The M20 designation for the transmission in the tt decoder was for ANY 4 speed equipped car. It is confusing because Muncie used that designation for one of their transmissions. M20 behind a 327 would've been a Saginaw brand, cast iron case, transmission. That will be the first thing to look for when you view the "original" trans that he has. A lot of people don't know the difference between a Saginaw, Muncie or Borg-Warner 4 speed trans and the owner may be mistaken as to what it really is.
By the way......my 67 was built about 1200 after yours. Build date 2C and is from Los Angeles too...... Wink My car does have an original 12 bolt axle with the bracket provision for the rod, but no evidence of one ever being installed due to the transmission being an automatic and not as prone to the wheel hop issue.
Hang in there, man. It's still exciting and I'm very interested in what you have yet to discover, as are probably others... Grin
Logged

1967 Camaro SS/RS 350
1966 Chevelle SS 396
1970 Chevelle SS 396
1967 GTO
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #58 on: April 30, 2008, 12:56:01 PM »

Wow! I had no idea you had a 67 2C car. Thanks Stillwater, I guess I get to excited on this car stuff. It's just a darn car. What's your color?

Jeff.
Logged
Stillwater Camaro
Member
***
Posts: 60



View Profile
« Reply #59 on: April 30, 2008, 01:46:41 PM »

Here's a link to my webshots album. It was originally Granada Gold with Black deluxe interior. True SS/RS, missing original engine and trans.... Cry

http://rides.webshots.com/album/557974721HYToph?start=0

Logged

1967 Camaro SS/RS 350
1966 Chevelle SS 396
1970 Chevelle SS 396
1967 GTO
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #60 on: April 30, 2008, 06:17:39 PM »

Ooooowh, I feel your pain with the engine tranny thing. That looks like a nice solid car, I don't think mine is in that good of shape. I think I've seen pictures before of the gold cars with the black nose stripe, and blacked out grill, very nice. It looks like it is a driver now, how long did it take you to put it back togather?

Jeff.
Logged
Stillwater Camaro
Member
***
Posts: 60



View Profile
« Reply #61 on: April 30, 2008, 07:24:14 PM »

Ooooowh, I feel your pain with the engine tranny thing. That looks like a nice solid car, I don't think mine is in that good of shape. I think I've seen pictures before of the gold cars with the black nose stripe, and blacked out grill, very nice. It looks like it is a driver now, how long did it take you to put it back togather?

Jeff.

It was a complete, running car before the previous owner brought to WI from the Bay area. He then dismantled it and lost interest. I bought in pieces, like you saw, and reassembled it to running in 3 days. I spent another week stripping, sanding and painting the interior metal. I do drive it around the area and have had it to a couple car shows with my local Camaro club. I park it in the back row as a "barn find". There is quite a bit of rust repair needed from the salt air down there.
Logged

1967 Camaro SS/RS 350
1966 Chevelle SS 396
1970 Chevelle SS 396
1967 GTO
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #62 on: May 01, 2008, 01:45:28 AM »

Thats' gotta be satisfaction, putting an older camaro back together in three days and then driving it. Great job. I think my three boys are wondering if I can "EVER" put a car back together.
 
Here's another quirky question for you guys, does anybody know if the engine to body ground straps were the same size/lenth on 67 small blocks  and big blocks?
Logged
Stillwater Camaro
Member
***
Posts: 60



View Profile
« Reply #63 on: May 01, 2008, 08:46:25 AM »

Thats' gotta be satisfaction, putting an older camaro back together in three days and then driving it. Great job. I think my three boys are wondering if I can "EVER" put a car back together.

I had a sideline hobby/job repairing and parting GM cars from this era during the 70's and am quite familiar with their assembly. I have a big shop too and layed out all the pieces, like an exploded view, on the floor. I dumped out the box of fasteners that he gave me and sorted them all out. I even have a large assortment of vintage fasteners from my parting out days to supplement any missing from the car. I had to buy a radiator, as he had trashed the original, but with that I was able to have it running and movable under it's own power. He had gutted the right door and broken the window glass and rear window moving them around for a year, so I found used glass locally. It was a real challenge reassembling the right door from scratch without having taken it apart. I used the left door as an example of where all the pieces went. That stage and the partial restoration of the interior aren't included in the 3 day sheetmetal reassembly. I did have to buy new carpet and rear package shelf as well as the trunk divider board, since it has the fold down seat option too. I have since bought and installed a nice pair of standard buckets to use until I can get my originals rebuilt. This week, I replaced the upper control arm bushings and installed new KYB shocks on all 4 corners. I'm currently working on sandblasting and painting a set of 78 Z28 wheels for it. I didn't like the rally wheels that came on it and I had my set of 88 IROC wheels on it while my 88 was being painted, but I put them back on the IROC last week too. It all takes time, but is do-able if you have some mechanical aptitude and the desire to see it emerge as you want it. You'll get there...Smiley
Logged

1967 Camaro SS/RS 350
1966 Chevelle SS 396
1970 Chevelle SS 396
1967 GTO
Stillwater Camaro
Member
***
Posts: 60



View Profile
« Reply #64 on: May 02, 2008, 08:04:41 PM »

It looks like there may have been a E near the middle and then a little ways down a V but that's all. Off to the left it looks like there may have been a row of very tiny numbers starting right at the pad edge. Not sure though.

Jeff.

Jeff, I was digging around in the CRG info and found this http://www.camaros.org/public/acidetch.txt  It is a way to bring out the faint stamp marks to better read them. Might be worth a try, if you are comfortable working with the Muriatic acid.
Logged

1967 Camaro SS/RS 350
1966 Chevelle SS 396
1970 Chevelle SS 396
1967 GTO
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #65 on: May 05, 2008, 12:31:27 AM »

I am very hapy to report tonight that it looks like I have found the original Saginaw 4 speed for my car. Two owners back before me still had it stashed away in his storage container. He swears it is the original one from when he had the car. A hefty 500.00 would probably confirm that alone. He know knows what I'm doing, trying to put it back to original. I gave him half down to hold it until the end of the week when I can pay him the rest. It looks like a 4 speed Saginaw and the numbers just under the side cover are R7T27. I'll post the pictures at the end of the week when I get it.

 Thanks Stillwatwer, I'll study up on that link you provided.
Logged
Stillwater Camaro
Member
***
Posts: 60



View Profile
« Reply #66 on: May 05, 2008, 07:58:11 AM »

I am very hapy to report tonight that it looks like I have found the original Saginaw 4 speed for my car. Two owners back before me still had it stashed away in his storage container. He swears it is the original one from when he had the car. A hefty 500.00 would probably confirm that alone. He know knows what I'm doing, trying to put it back to original. I gave him half down to hold it until the end of the week when I can pay him the rest. It looks like a 4 speed Saginaw and the numbers just under the side cover are R7T27. I'll post the pictures at the end of the week when I get it.

 Thanks Stillwatwer, I'll study up on that link you provided.
That's great that it may be the original, Jeff, but make absolutely certain before you pay that King's ransom for it. I love it when people take advantage of you when they know they have something you want. For that price, I suggest getting all the numbers off the pad and any casting numbers and post them here first to have the CRG guys verify it as the original. .....If it isn't the original it's worth $100 around here.
I was at a big swap meet yesterday and could've bought 6 Muncie's for LESS than that. It seems the old 4 speeds are dropping in price with many people opting for 5-6 speeds now.

Good luck with the quest on the transmission. You're very lucky to even be able to trace the history back that far. I can't get the last owner of mine to answer my letters for history.
Logged

1967 Camaro SS/RS 350
1966 Chevelle SS 396
1970 Chevelle SS 396
1967 GTO
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #67 on: May 05, 2008, 10:52:14 AM »

Ok,
I think the reason it's so high also, is he's getting ticked that I'm bugging him so much.

Jeff.
Logged
Stillwater Camaro
Member
***
Posts: 60



View Profile
« Reply #68 on: May 05, 2008, 11:55:18 AM »

Jeff, found this in CRG. The 67 Saginaw had a unique casting number from the 68-69. The one you are looking at needs to have that casting number.
Transmission               1967           1968  1969
Saginaw 3-speed    3859986    3925647
H-D 3-Speed    Borg-Warner M13
                            T16-1            Muncie MC1
                                                   3911940

Saginaw 4-speed        3915032        3925656

Muncie 4-speed             3885010     3925660

I'm pulling for you, man. I know how it would feel to be able to track down and obtain the original drivetrain for my car........just don't want to see you get "taken" on parts that aren't original.
Logged

1967 Camaro SS/RS 350
1966 Chevelle SS 396
1970 Chevelle SS 396
1967 GTO
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #69 on: May 05, 2008, 06:01:53 PM »

Thanks alot for those numbers. are they the two you highlighted in red type? Can it have either of those  two casting  numbers on it?

Jeff.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #70 on: May 05, 2008, 06:06:28 PM »

I think I get it now, just looked at your post again. Is it only the one under the 67 column ending in 032.

Jeff.
Logged
Stillwater Camaro
Member
***
Posts: 60



View Profile
« Reply #71 on: May 05, 2008, 06:38:27 PM »

I think I get it now, just looked at your post again. Is it only the one under the 67 column ending in 032.

Jeff.

Yup, should be the 032 only.
Logged

1967 Camaro SS/RS 350
1966 Chevelle SS 396
1970 Chevelle SS 396
1967 GTO
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #72 on: May 06, 2008, 05:15:17 PM »

I was doing some research on CRG and it says that the RPO Z23 option was available independantly of the RPO Z87 in 1967, but not 68 and 69. Does the bright pedal trim on my gas pedal and the bright roof rail moldings mean that my car had the Z23 option? and if it did, would that also had to of included the bright pillar molding?

Thanks, Jeff.
Logged
RickH
Member
***
Posts: 105


View Profile Email
« Reply #73 on: May 06, 2008, 08:33:28 PM »

In 1967 RPO Z23 included bright pedal trim, bright interior roofrail trim AND bright pillar moldings. According to your trim tag you do not have the Z23 option. You do have Z21 exterior style trim option.

Rick H.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #74 on: May 06, 2008, 09:55:06 PM »

Thanks Rick, I guess I'm just confused as usual, since I don't see the Z21 on the tag, does that mean it's somehow coded in the 760-Z and the 3K.
 Also I thought the roof rail and pillar trim was exterior items, I see now from your post that it is interior.
 Could you me all that the Z21 option would have included?

 Thanks, Jeff.
Logged
RickH
Member
***
Posts: 105


View Profile Email
« Reply #75 on: May 07, 2008, 06:56:41 AM »

RPO Z21 included rocker moldings, wheel well moldings and driprail moldings. Also pinstripes.

Rick H.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #76 on: May 07, 2008, 11:12:17 AM »

Thanks Rick, I found at CRG that the 3K is the code for RPO Z21.

Jeff.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #77 on: May 13, 2008, 10:28:54 PM »

Well, I think I've got my original transmission for my 67 L30 car finally Grin
 The numbers on it don't seem to match what Stillwater Camaro was suggesting though. I sure hope it's the one. All the casting date codes are Dec. 66 and I believe the assembly is also the last day of Dec. So this should have been applied to a 67 car.
 I am making three different posts incuding this one with two pictures each so you guys can check it out.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #78 on: May 13, 2008, 10:31:10 PM »

M20.
Logged
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #79 on: May 13, 2008, 10:32:18 PM »

M20.
Logged
68Zproject
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1624



View Profile Email
« Reply #80 on: May 17, 2008, 11:41:01 AM »

The maincase casting shows to be a '66 casting #.  The rest are 67.
Logged

68Z28
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #81 on: May 17, 2008, 10:05:43 PM »

No, they are all 1966. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the CRG info clearly shows how to decode casting dates. All three components, case, side cover and tail housing were cast in Dec. of 1966.
 That's  L 19 6 and L 14 6 and L 21 6  All December of 66. And then the whole saginaw transmission was assembled on the 27th day of December 1966 for a 1967 model year car.
 That is how the CRG website describes how to interpret theese numbers. Is the website wrong?

 Jeff.
Logged
68Zproject
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1624



View Profile Email
« Reply #82 on: May 17, 2008, 11:18:02 PM »

I was looking at Colvin's BTN's.  He has been off on some things and I don't claim to be an expert on this anyway.  I'm just showing what he says about the side case #.  According to him it was used for the 1966 Model year not the 1967 model year which is different than the cast dates.  That's not say there wasn't some kind of holdover on certain casting numbers to the new model year.
Logged

68Z28
Jeffro67
Member
***
Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #83 on: May 17, 2008, 11:53:52 PM »

Ok, thanks for confirming that source for me 68Z. That is a book that is on my to get list. I noticed that the CRG page also has only one casting number for a 67 Saginaw ending in 032 but other members also have 67 cars  with different casting numbers on their Saginaws'

 Thanks again Jeff.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 6 [All] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.162 seconds with 17 queries.