Messages

Congrats.  Very cool. What are those things in your grille?

[...] look for 68' spoilers. [...]

I don't know what you'll do with a spoiler that long, but 68 feet is a massive accessory that won't fit on any of these cars.

Most in this tread aren't saying that spoilers don't look good.  We're only saying that they're not correct.  Perhaps pedantic, but that was the question that was asked.  I think rear spoilers look good on all 67 Camaros.  I think the front spoiler only looks good on either RS or custom/modified Camaros.  Stock Camaros with a front spoiler just look a bit off to my eye ... but just one person's opinion.

"Correct 1967 spoiler" is an oxymoron.

I get a 403 error on my iPhone running its native Safari browser.  No issues on any of my PCs, but my mobile devices cannot ever access the forums.  Regular CRG pages are OK, just not the forum section.  I have not done an exhaustive settings trial & error, as I don't want to and literally no other site I visit has a problem with my settings.  Definitely a YMMV situation, it would appear.

[out]

Not sure if this falls into the "happened all the time" or "you have a big problem" bucket ... or somewhere in between.

But, in looking more closely at my engine block stamp, the engine was originally stamped as an MU (350/295, Automatic without smog).  Then, the "U" was dotted out with some sort of dimpled grid pattern ... like it was struck with a framer's hammer with waffled pattern.  Then, the "V" was stamped over the top.  MV being the 350/295, Automatic, with K19 Smog.  This car was a CA car -- I have the POP (sold in Hollywood/Los Angeles), the manifolds and block are all equipped with smog, the car came with the smog pump/equipment, etc.

The VIN matches and the date code aligns with the 11A build date of the car.

My thought was that they started to build this engine and then someone quickly realized, "Oh crap, this engine has the stupid smog stuff.  That needs an MV stamp, not an MU stamp.
Johnson!  What the hell are you thinking?!" 

Any thoughts on this apparent restamp?

[If you look above, you'll see this reply to your question:]

Then I'm confused, Ed.

The one in the first post is a non RS car but the one you linked to is an RS car. They don't appear to have the same cowl tag.

If you look above, you'll see this reply to your question:

Are these the same car?

Sort of.  There are two cars pictured in that thread.  The car that's the subject of this thread is shown in the before and during stages.  Then, there is a car shown at a car show.  That sort of looks like an after photo of this car.  It's not.  It's a different car that looks very similar to this one.  So, when you scroll through that thread, just know that the pics of this car end in the restoration phase ... there isn't a final after photo in that thread.

You are not arguing but you disagree.  [...]

Nope.  I don't disagree.  I'm merely stating the origin for my question.  That tag, to my eye, doesn't look right and I explained the reasons why it didn't look right to my eye.  But, that's why I asked the question.  I'm happy that Ed is correct and I'm not disputing that.  Cheers.

If you're referring to the VIN tag, I don't believe there's a picture of it anywhere on the site. If you're referring to the trim tag picture you posted above, that's not "drilled out". The factory applied filler has just come out. Those are original, factory rivets.

I'm only referring the pics posted -- the trim tag.  I'm not arguing with you here.  I never said that those aren't the factory rivets.  I have never seen such a clean, smooth rivet hole before that wasn't due to physical manipulation of some kind (drilling out, e.g.).  I have a hard time believing that the cement just fell out ... on both sides ... perfectly in each case.  To me, it looks like it was removed.  Anyway, I'm not arguing with you, just explaining why I asked the question above.  It just looks incredibly odd to my eye ... just one random guy's eyeball.  Thanks.

Are these the same car?

Sort of.  There are two cars pictured in that thread.  The car that's the subject of this thread is shown in the before and during stages.  Then, there is a car shown at a car show.  That sort of looks like an after photo of this car.  It's not.  It's a different car that looks very similar to this one.  So, when you scroll through that thread, just know that the pics of this car end in the restoration phase ... there isn't a final after photo in that thread.

I have pics of this car before, during and after the restoration. This vin tag has never been removed from the car. thanks

I'm not disputing you, but I'm curious to know why the rivets are drilled out.  Thanks.

Even if it wasn't a restamp and even if the dates weren't all wonky, how would we be able to pair this engine to this car?  There's no partial VIN that matches, no other markings to tie it to this car.  Why am I meant to believe that this is an original engine in an original Z28?  That's not a snarky rhetorical question -- as a guy who doesn't understand 69s very well, I'm curious how a person would entertain this ad at all.

For a stock engine, the Quadrajet is a really, really good carb.  I'd agree with others and I'd want someone with a lot of Quadrajet experience to tell me it's junk before I tossed it.

As of this Saturday (8/20), the engine came out.  I was shocked by how easily everything unbolted, including the exhaust manifold bolts.

Engine goes up north to Rochester, MN to be rebuilt.  Thanks to those who have given sound advice here ... I'm looking forward to moving this forward.

Hello al i am new to this group . i just bought a 69 pace car small block  . [...] any opinions on finding original pop or thoughts on a repop  please feel free to share

If you want to find out more information about the car, you'd have to share with us the details that identify your car:  cowl tag, VIN, etc.

I personally wouldn't do a repro of a POP.  There's too much information on an original POP that would end up being speculation.  Plus, it's not really a display item.  I've considered doing a repro window sticker, but largely because my car has a POP and complete cowl tag (in 67, there were lots of option info on the tag) to guide what that window sticker would look like.  For a 69 (or 68), I wouldn't do it.

Thanks, guys.  That's why I asked ... I had read lots of stories about these pans just not fitting or looking right. To my untrained eye, it would seem like a pretty easy part to get right, but that's not what I've read online.  I'll see if it can be saved.  The dent is visible, for sure, but the leak has always been miniscule (obviously, since I've lived with it for nearly 30 years).

Again, the responses and ideas are appreciated.

The guy at GM who came up with the idea for the cables should have never had to work again in his life, since he saved GM about $250MM (in 1971 dollars).  $1 in 1971 is around $7 today, so imagine today a guy/gal saving a corporation nearly $2B!

I'd still like to know the story about why my car only had a cable on one side ... something I'm sure I'll never know.