Messages

Post 4 of 4

Richard

Post 3 of 4

Richard

Post 2 of 4

Richard

FYI

Due to limitations on size of an attachment as well as number of attachments per post, I had to significantly resize (reduce the quality) of the original images as well as needing 4 posts to get all 16 pages uploaded.

This is post 1 of 4; 3 more to follow

Richard

" Richard, your fan spacer is NOT the stock 69 one inch version. Looks like 2 or 2.5 inch."

Not surprising - spacer was what was on the car when I got it.  I no longer have either it or the 4 bladed fan, so no opportunity to check whatever the p/n was.

One other point I forgot to mention is my distributor vacuum advance is connected to full manifold vacuum and the ported vacuum line from the carb is capped.  Something else to maybe consider if you are using ported vacuum.

From JohnZ's (John Hinkley) "Timimg 101" article: 

"Now, to the widely-misunderstood manifold-vs.-ported vacuum aberration. After 30-40 years of controlling vacuum advance with full manifold vacuum, along came emissions requirements, years before catalytic converter technology had been developed, and all manner of crude band-aid systems were developed to try and reduce hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen in the exhaust stream. One of these band-aids was "ported spark", which moved the vacuum pickup orifice in the carburetor venturi from below the throttle plate (where it was exposed to full manifold vacuum at idle) to above the throttle plate, where it saw no manifold vacuum at all at idle. This meant the vacuum advance was inoperative at idle (retarding spark timing from its optimum value), and these applications also had VERY low initial static timing (usually 4 degrees or less, and some actually were set at 2 degrees AFTER TDC). This was done in order to increase exhaust gas temperature (due to "lighting the fire late") to improve the effectiveness of the "afterburning" of hydrocarbons by the air injected into the exhaust manifolds by the A.I.R. system; as a result, these engines ran like crap, and an enormous amount of wasted heat energy was transferred through the exhaust port walls into the coolant, causing them to run hot at idle - cylinder pressure fell off, engine temperatures went up, combustion efficiency went down the drain, and fuel economy went down with it."

Richard

I was having a similar issue with my '69 RS w/ 327/210 engine in the 2004-2009 timeframe.

I solved my problem by changing from the 4 blade fixed to 6 blade w/clutch in Aug 2009.  Since then my engine temp has not exceeded the 1st segment past the 1/4 mark on the temp gage (195-205 on the thermostat housing with an IR temperature gun).

I also sealed the gap between the top of the core support and the fan shroud to reduce air flow leakage around the radiator. (The RS core support by design appears to me to have less leakage around the radiator which inherently helps.)

My issue with the car tending to run warm in slow traffic on summer days started after the engine was rebuilt in 2004.  My issue had nothing to do with timing but resulted from increasing the compression ratio & head mod during the rebuild, that coupled with the reality that the 3 core radiator is marginal, IMHO, from the factory in the first place.

Picture shows my 327 running during break in back in 2004.  From what I can see in the picture, looks like the fan is pretty much fully covered (90%) by the shroud.

Richard

I messaged him on EBay...

I did too.

He's changed the ad and removed Z28 from title & refers to the car as a "Z28 tribute" in the description.

Richard

[and later engines]

John Hinckley's article on "Building the Small-Block V8 at Flint Engine" ......."

The attached picture is from this article. 

Question:  Was this decal only used in 1967 or was it used as the caption states:

"67 and later engines had a Flint Engine "Number One Team" sticker applied to the front of the passenger side valve cover.


Richard

The bottom line is, in my estimation maybe DOT 5 is more prone to imperfections and sealing surfaces have to be very good.  I was disappointed at the workmanship on the rebuilds......I know the rebuilders don't like DOT 5 and maybe it's due to the above. 

I do know that if you spill DOT 3 or if the rebuilt part leaks and damages an expensive paint job, will they reimburse you for the paint work?  I think we all know the answer to that.  It's just not worth the risk to me.  If I had used DOT 3 and it leaked as the 5 did, I would be out thousands in paint repair to disamantle and pull the subframe to fix it.  If you have a driver level car and you are not worried about having good paint, go for it and use DOT 3 (or 4 or 5.1)

Get good folks doing the work, but trust that no one did the job right.  When assembling your engine, verify that all the machining was done correct and that all clearances are correct.

Exactly

Reminds me of a thread a few years ago on this forum where someone was stating that Pertronix had a 50% failure rate on their electronic distributor conversion kits - which was obviously not an accurate fact.  But since he couldn't make it work - fault had to be with Pertronix.

Always easier to assign blame than address root cause.

Richard

These templates are readily available from multiple sources .........

Not recommending this - simply showing as one of many examples.

https://classicparts.com/1969-backup-lamp-template-rs?srsltid=AfmBOooJfLoIs2a2qcQysfJtYhtOLO1hTNEGIRKGDzXgVxmVVhPu8haJ

Richard

I've also used DOT 5 brake fluid for probably 20+ years in my '66 Chevelle & '69 Camaro RS and am still using it.

Haven't had any issues to date.

Richard

Any possibility of overfilling with too much oil in the replacement oil pans?

Richard

Very nice - well done!

Richard

Just had a new set of BFG Radial T/A's put on my '69 RS.  The set of T/A's that were on the car were installed back in 2007 and had hardened to the point where there was a definite degradation / harshness in ride quality.  The car rides much nicer now with the new rubber.

If you are not being attentive to it, tire age will definitely sneak up on you, it did on me,

No point taking any risks - and for cars that do not accumulate a lot of miles, tread wear is not what you need to monitor.

From what I've read, tires need to be changed at least every 10 years (if not sooner), regardless of mileage.

Although in the U.S., there are no specific laws prohibiting using or servicing tires older than 10 years, many (most?) tire shops these days simply will not service a tire 10 years or older due to the potential liability involved if it were to later fail in service.

I just ran into this when I asked the shop to put one of the old T/A's on my spare and they said no way. 

Richard

Good to see the forum up & running again!

Richard