Topics

[No returns]

Navy blue shirt with print on front.
S-XL $15.00
XXL $17.00
XXXL  $20.00

Navy blue shirt with print on front and on back.
S-XL $20.00
XXL $22.00
XXXL $25.00

Shipping:  1 shirt $5.80 and 2 - 3 shirts $12.35

Shirt designs:  http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?topic=10570.0

No returns so get the shirt size right the first time.    

Steve

Navy blue shirt with print on front or back.
S-XL $15.00
XXL $17.00
XXXL  $20.00 L

Navy blue shirt with print on front and on back.
S-XL $20.00
XXL $22.00
XXXL $25.00

Shipping:  1-2 shirt $5.80 and 3 -7 shirts $12.35

Shirt designs:  http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?topic=10570.0

No returns so get the shirt size right the first time.  Shirt is Navy Blue preshrunk 100% cotton.

Just to be clear, if you told me in this thread or sent me a PM that you wanted shirts you will need to now order them using the below link.  We received a great response from members regarding how many we're interested and what they wanted.  We received a request to set up payment by PayPal and after looking at several options it was decided this wold be the way to go.

Link to Paypal order screen:  http://www.riversedgesoftware.com/CRG/

Steve

The winning designs for the front, back and color for the official CRG shirt were:  front - design A, back - design 4, and the color is navy.  We will proceed with taking orders shortly......I need to decide the best way to collect order info.

Steve

One vote only.  14 day voting period.

Steve

We have seen in some recent posts brief discussions regarding judging of Camaro's and points being deducted for recall equipment being on the car.  The points are deducted because the vehicle did not have this equipment when it left the assembly plant.  I am curious as to how you all feel about this and invite you to participate in the poll.

A story to set the stage:  A few years back one of my sons wanted a 1st gen Camaro for his graduation from college.  One was for sale in the next neighborhood for a very reasonable price.  Bought the car and did some refreshing here and there.  He loves his car and it is his daily driver.  The only complaint has been the braking.  The car has always passed state inspections.  About a month ago the braking started to become very bad.  Pedal almost had to pushed to the floor to get it to stop.  I told my son to drive my old truck for now, pull the Camaro into my garage and I would try and fix this problem once and for all.  After replacing a couple of wheel cylinders that were "suspect" it still had little to no front brake action and some rear brakes.  Checked and re-checked everything a million times for leaks, air in the lines, replaced the master cylinder (mc) several times (even tried two different suppliers), and so on.  All to no avail.  Even took it to a nationally recognized brake shop and had them look at it....they too could not figure it out.  I finally called the tech people at Cardone and NAPA Brakes and asked them if their master cylinders for a '67 4 wheel drum with no power assist had check valves in them.  Both said no.  The factory manuals for both the '67 and '68 show check valves in the drawing and in the discussion for replacement/overhauling of the mc talk about how important it is to get the check valves seated in the outlets etc.  The manuals go on to say that if you don't you will not get the proper amount of pedal.  Exactly my problem.  When I asked the suppliers Cardone said that they would be willing to build me one with check valves and exchange it for the one I currently had however NAPA insisted check valve were not needed and stated that they had installed many on 67/68 Camaro's without a problem.  NAPA said it would not be a problem because the mc was above the wheels.  I took Cardone up on the offer and installed the new one (mc with check valves in both outlets) on the car.  Problem fixed.  Pedal is high and firm.  Car has GREAT breaking and almost feels like it has power assist it is so good.  I am planning on passing this info back to both the suppliers tomorrow.  I just wanted to pass this on to you all as this problem was one of the most confounding ones I've dealt with and I've been working on cars since I was a teenager.....I'm old now.      I would like to know how many of you have tried to fix your brake system at one time or another because you felt the mc was bad and just either gave up and accepted the situation or tried replacing the mc several times before getting acceptable results or went to a front disc system to get good braking.

[1966]

My research on the 68 RS center grille, yes I'm still at it,    (http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?topic=1087.0) has revealed some interesting "facts" regarding the 67 RS center grille.  I thought that I would share some of those observations with you folks at this point.  Hope you 67 guys and gals will find them somewhat interesting.  BTW, the 68 grille is a direct descendent and linked to the 67 grille right back to the blueprint.  More on that in the 68 thread later.  Some of what I've gleamed so far:

1966

Feb – March  "Original" RS grille is blueprinted.

April              Grille is redrawn and redesigned.

1967

Jan                Grille is redesigned and part number is changed from 3898141 to 3921841.  The material is mandated to be ABS black plastic.  The earlier grille (3898141) may have been   produced as gray and then painted black "on the line".

Sept              Grille revision made – not sure what that revision was at this time.

Oct                You could not get a separate 67 RS center grille (3921841) but you could get a 67 RS grille assembly (upper/center/lower already put together) part 3905745.  That part was then substituted with the 68 grille assembly part 3929281 in December of 68.

Side notes:      I have yet to find in any P&A where you could buy a separate 3921841.  This part number has never been substituted, transferred, or removed from service.  It would appear they were never reproduced separately as the 68 (3919060) was.

The differences between the 67 RS and 68 RS center grilles are that the 68 has the raised horizontal ribs (bars) and the 67 does not have the silver/chrome horizontal bars as did the 68 (the research continues to show up to 05D of 68 model year had chrome and after did not – see above link for more on this).  The shape and size of the grille openings (rectangles) and all the other dimensions are the same between the two years.

Steve

Anyone else having slow connection problems lately?

Powered by SMF 1.1 | SMF © 2006, Simple Machines LLC    
Page created in 56.467 seconds with 11 queries.

Were getting pages created in hundredths of a second before.

I have also had connection problems the last couple of days when trying to enter the "Forum" from the CRG home page.  Get error message that can't connect to SMF server.

Steve

Edit: Here is the exact error message "Connection Problems
Sorry, SMF was unable to connect to the database. This may be caused by the server being busy. Please try again later. "

Ed

Would you mind checking your 68 P&A (date) for me in 1.266 and see if the 67 center grille (3921841) is still listed separately from the 68 center grille (3919060) or if they have been listed as 67-68 w/ RS center .....3919060 at the point of your P&A printing.  I'm curious about something and would appreciate your checking for me.  Thanks!!

Steve

With regard to the camaros.org/coolingsystems report.  I have been looking into the question of just how valid the 68 part numbers are that are provided in the assembly manual (AM).  I want to say up front that I think Kurt did a nice job on the his (CRG) Report and I mean no disrespect to him or the work with what I've put in the attached table for folks to review.  While there are typo's in the AM part numbers I think that we can generally accept them as accurate until proven otherwise.  I've put together a table of valves that I could find in the 68 manual and some support info found in the AM for each where I found it.  Even though I can't find supportive info for each, as is the case for the Z28, I think that the fact it is in the manual is good enough for us to use for the hobby and think it's not unreasonable to utilize it in a list of numbers when "checking" valves.