CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 31, 2014, 07:36:20 PM

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.
105865 Posts in 12354 Topics by 4762 Members
Latest Member: HarryQ
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  CRG Discussion Forum
|-+  Camaro Research Group Discussion
| |-+  Originality
| | |-+  Power steer pump cap
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5  All Print
Author Topic: Power steer pump cap  (Read 23191 times)
Pacecarjeff
Member
***
Posts: 342



View Profile WWW
« Reply #30 on: May 18, 2006, 02:06:18 PM »

So are you guys saying that ALL 1969 Camaros had a plastic cap?
And that the Norwood and LA cars are the same?

What does CRG state on the record?
Logged
lakeholme
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2174


*68-12D L30/M35*


View Profile WWW
« Reply #31 on: May 18, 2006, 03:07:07 PM »

Richard and Jeff, thanks for the pictures.  Great thread!  I guess we all learned something.  I did!
Logged

Phillip
HNR-AACA, Senior Master
Planning 2016 Sentimental Tour, AACA (and restoring a 40 Buick Special for it)
AACA Southeastern Division Spring Meet Chair
"Charlotte AutoFair, presented by the Hornets Nest Region, AACA, is the largest and greatest Collector Vehicle Event in the Southeast USA."
Pacecarjeff
Member
***
Posts: 342



View Profile WWW
« Reply #32 on: May 18, 2006, 04:00:51 PM »

Wait a minute?....I am not convinced yet.

The NCRS documented that the change from metal to plastic was in mid year 1969.
I believe the Camaro would have to be the same, should be the same. Huh
I would really need more examples, or a "real definitive" answer from Kurt or John.  Tongue

The metal caps came off pretty easily, so even a documented all original car, could have lost it's PS cap back in 1970. The plastic ones held on much better. I have even lost a few metal ones here and there.


« Last Edit: May 18, 2006, 04:17:10 PM by Pacecarjeff » Logged
Steve68
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 506


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: May 18, 2006, 08:23:19 PM »

Don't know that this will clarify things any but the 5690846 was definitely used for the 67 & 68 years and was superceded in May of 70 with part number 7803820.

Steve
Logged
lakeholme
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2174


*68-12D L30/M35*


View Profile WWW
« Reply #34 on: May 19, 2006, 10:59:36 AM »

That's why I was hoping someone with a P&A that covers those years would jump in...
So, Steve, are you verifying that there was no other cap "listed" from 5690846 to 7803820? 
In other words, what p/n(s) covered 69 cap(s)?
If 5690846 changed from metal to plastic in 69 at any time, would that have been reflected in the p/n?
« Last Edit: May 19, 2006, 11:05:14 AM by lakeholme » Logged

Phillip
HNR-AACA, Senior Master
Planning 2016 Sentimental Tour, AACA (and restoring a 40 Buick Special for it)
AACA Southeastern Division Spring Meet Chair
"Charlotte AutoFair, presented by the Hornets Nest Region, AACA, is the largest and greatest Collector Vehicle Event in the Southeast USA."
rich69rs
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 879


LF7/M35/Z22/Z87


View Profile Email
« Reply #35 on: May 19, 2006, 11:14:41 AM »

I think the other thing we must be cognizant of is when did this change apply to Camaros.  We aren't really interested in when it applied to Corvettes, Chevelles, Novas, etc.

There are many examples where parts which were eventually utilized by various GM cars were introduced at different times.  For example, 307 engine showed up in GM product in 1968, but not in Camaros until Jan 1969.  350 engines showed up in Camaros in 1967, but not in some of the other GM products until much later.

Just because a part became available on a certain date might not necessarily mean that from that date forward it was universally used by GM in all of their products.  In this case, the question is, did the black plastic PS Pump Cap become "standard issue" for the 69 Camaro perhaps earlier than others.
« Last Edit: May 19, 2006, 11:30:38 AM by rich69rs » Logged

Richard Thomas
1969 RS
JohnZ
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 4126


View Profile Email
« Reply #36 on: May 19, 2006, 12:47:13 PM »

That's why I was hoping someone with a P&A that covers those years would jump in...
So, Steve, are you verifying that there was no other cap "listed" from 5690846 to 7803820?
In other words, what p/n(s) covered 69 cap(s)?
If 5690846 changed from metal to plastic in 69 at any time, would that have been reflected in the p/n?

The P&A isn't always a reliable source for production parts usage; service parts were frequently released/listed that would "Service" the application functionally, with no concern for whether or not they "looked" the same, depending on inventory levels and usage rates.
Logged

'69 Z/28
Fathom Green
CRG
Pacecarjeff
Member
***
Posts: 342



View Profile WWW
« Reply #37 on: May 19, 2006, 01:35:41 PM »

For example, 307 engine showed up in GM product in 1968, but not in Camaros until Jan 1969.  350 engines showed up in Camaros in 1967, but not in some of the other GM products until much later.
In this case, the question is, did the black plastic PS Pump Cap become "standard issue" for the 69 Camaro perhaps earlier than others.

What we have to remember, this cap is an accessory item, not a new engine, or a newly available option. At some point the PS pump manufacturer started using a plastic cap on the pumps they were supplying to GM.  The new cap would pretty much be used across all model lines. It was likely cheaper (and it worked better) to make the plastic cap, so that was why it was changed.

Items like that are requisitioned up in large batches.
However the 1969 PS pumps are slightly different then the 67/68 pump - that may have had something to do with it. The rear return outlet was redesigned to accommodate the accessory holes that were now being provided in the cylinder heads.

Maybe with the new pump design, came the new cap?  Just a thought for consideration. Grin

Maybe the old caps were used up, before the new caps were used?
Maybe both caps were being install at the same time? Maybe not?
« Last Edit: May 19, 2006, 01:46:20 PM by Pacecarjeff » Logged
lakeholme
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2174


*68-12D L30/M35*


View Profile WWW
« Reply #38 on: May 19, 2006, 03:21:06 PM »

Thanks John.  That's a very pertinent point about "production" vs. "service" parts.

We actually have two different questions going here, and the second question seems to have superseded the original. 

So, a 68 cap 5690846 was metal and generally painted black with some possible exceptions to the paint... 

You 69 guys can solve the other question...
Logged

Phillip
HNR-AACA, Senior Master
Planning 2016 Sentimental Tour, AACA (and restoring a 40 Buick Special for it)
AACA Southeastern Division Spring Meet Chair
"Charlotte AutoFair, presented by the Hornets Nest Region, AACA, is the largest and greatest Collector Vehicle Event in the Southeast USA."
Steve68
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 506


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: May 19, 2006, 04:37:20 PM »

To clarify my earlier post.....
Don't know that this will clarify things any but the 5690846 was definitely used for the 67 & 68 years and was superceded in May of 70 with part number 7803820.

Steve
By superceded I meant the part was "removed from service".  It was not "transferred" as in a p/n being "mixed" with another p/n until exhausted nor "substituted" as in a p/n being "used" instead of another p/n that was still available.   Huh   Hope that helps and doesn't just make it more confusing.  Smiley

Steve
« Last Edit: May 19, 2006, 05:30:02 PM by Steve68 » Logged
Pacecarjeff
Member
***
Posts: 342



View Profile WWW
« Reply #40 on: May 21, 2006, 11:40:26 PM »

So it sounds to me like the metal cap was still being used untill May 1970,
or at least untill mid year 69, just like the NCRS has documented in the Corvettes. Kinda what I thought.

No reason to be anythiing different. There were not two caps being used.
So at some point, all GM models went to a plastic cap.
Logged
KurtS
CRG Coordinator
*****
Posts: 3253


View Profile Email
« Reply #41 on: May 22, 2006, 02:18:43 AM »

I had an Oct 68 Camaro, plastic cap. I've never seen any metal caps on an 69. Ever. That's way too many cars to be due to replacement. Smiley
Vettes have a different accessory design, the 69 metal cap may have been just that application.....
Logged

Kurt S
CRG
Pacecarjeff
Member
***
Posts: 342



View Profile WWW
« Reply #42 on: May 22, 2006, 09:22:00 AM »

Really I am trying to get someone to officially commit "on the record".
Kurt - Is it the CRG's official opinion then, That ALL 1969 Camaros used a plastic PS cap?

As always, there may be few exceptions I know, but for the most part, are you guys saying that:
ALL 1969 Camaros built in California and Ohio used a plastic PS cap.

67/8 used metal, 69 was plastic?. It would make sence because of the new pump design.
But possibly more reasearch needs to be done?  What do you think?  Huh

Logged
Ed Bertrand
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 2333


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: May 22, 2006, 03:28:35 PM »

Sorry guys but I've been away on business for the last several days.

Here's what the "good book" has to say (and remember, like JohnZ says, you can't always go by the P&A)...

Group 6.635

62-69 Nova, Camaro, Chevelle - Cap Assy, oil fill (tube gauge) - 5690846

However, again the P&A is inconsistant! On the very next line is shows:

69 Camaro - Cap Assy, filler - 7803820

No indications on what the caps are made of. Sorry...

Ed
Logged
Pacecarjeff
Member
***
Posts: 342



View Profile WWW
« Reply #44 on: May 23, 2006, 09:22:56 AM »

846 is metal.
820 is plastic.

At this time till someone can absolutly confirm,
I am going to keep the metal PS cap on my 03B Pace Car.
Sounds like we are just not sure.  Undecided

I am going to go with what the NCRS says. Tongue

At least untill something can be proved either way.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2006, 10:45:51 AM by Pacecarjeff » Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5  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 0.091 seconds with 17 queries.