106
General Discussion / Re: Engine Assembly Stamps
« on: March 04, 2007, 03:08:22 AM »
If you're using IE 7, make sure pop-up are allowed or the image will not be visible.
Steve
Steve
News:
Welcome to the CRG Discussion Forum!
Classified ads are not allowed on the forum.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
107
General Discussion / Re: ZL-1 Engine Found
« on: March 04, 2007, 02:04:39 AM »This car is one that was sold new with its original engine. Many were not. ........... Jerry
Jerry,
Please clarify your comment. What do you mean many ZL-1's were sold new without their original engines?
Who would have paid the price of a ZL-1 and not gotten the original aliminum engine back in the day?
Steve
108
General Discussion / Re: ZL-1 Engine Found
« on: March 03, 2007, 04:17:49 AM »
Nowhere on that resto page does it say that #40 ZL-1 has, or does not have its original block.
I'm just wondering if this car was reported to have its original engine? Anyone know?
Steve
I'm just wondering if this car was reported to have its original engine? Anyone know?
Steve
109
Originality / Re: Could a sept 69 built camaro have block 3935440 dated july 1968
« on: February 19, 2007, 12:01:51 AM »
I recently had a 396 engine from a 69 L/78 Nova. The assembly date of the engine was mid-February
1969 and the cast date of the '272 block was mid-august 1968. It was all original. Extremes do occur.
Steve
1969 and the cast date of the '272 block was mid-august 1968. It was all original. Extremes do occur.
Steve
110
Decoding/Numbers / Re: Date of mfg. based on VIN
« on: January 26, 2007, 01:17:28 AM »
Richard,
Thanks for the links and thorough explanation. Based on your example, I looked at 912 cars per day in October 1968 and arrived at 10/25/68 as the possible
build date for my SS ( N528412 ). That jives with the 10D build date on my cowl tag. Only question I have now is what was/is the allowable deviation in this
formula? In other words, is the build date +/- one day, +/- one week, within that particular build week?
Stated another way, if the cowl tag has 10D, could the car possibly have been built late 10C or early 10E? Sorry if I'm reading more into this that there should be.....
BTW, 10/25/68 was only three days earlier than my 11th birthday. How cool would it have been to have a car born the same day as you?
Steve
Thanks for the links and thorough explanation. Based on your example, I looked at 912 cars per day in October 1968 and arrived at 10/25/68 as the possible
build date for my SS ( N528412 ). That jives with the 10D build date on my cowl tag. Only question I have now is what was/is the allowable deviation in this
formula? In other words, is the build date +/- one day, +/- one week, within that particular build week?
Stated another way, if the cowl tag has 10D, could the car possibly have been built late 10C or early 10E? Sorry if I'm reading more into this that there should be.....
BTW, 10/25/68 was only three days earlier than my 11th birthday. How cool would it have been to have a car born the same day as you?
Steve
111
Decoding/Numbers / Date of mfg. based on VIN
« on: January 25, 2007, 05:17:49 AM »
I have a question for those of you knowledgeable with 69 Camaro VIN's. If a particular Camaro has a VIN, but no cowl tag, how can you tell the actual date
of manufacture? I know Jerry MacNeish published the VIN's and the corresponding months in his 69 Fact Book, but I was wondering how closely you can
zero in on the build date ( or week ) based solely on the VIN. I'm not sure why the cowl tag is missing on this particular Camaro.
Thanks,
Steve
of manufacture? I know Jerry MacNeish published the VIN's and the corresponding months in his 69 Fact Book, but I was wondering how closely you can
zero in on the build date ( or week ) based solely on the VIN. I'm not sure why the cowl tag is missing on this particular Camaro.
Thanks,
Steve
112
Decoding/Numbers / Re: How do I title a Camaro without one?
« on: January 25, 2007, 12:54:51 AM »
Well,
It really doesn't sound too bad, does it.
One other question. If I buy this car and the VIN turns out to be from a stolen car, what are my liabilities?
I expect to get a bill of sale, so I would be the one trying to justify posession of the car in question.
Steve
It really doesn't sound too bad, does it.
One other question. If I buy this car and the VIN turns out to be from a stolen car, what are my liabilities?
I expect to get a bill of sale, so I would be the one trying to justify posession of the car in question.
Steve
113
Decoding/Numbers / How do I title a Camaro without one?
« on: January 24, 2007, 05:56:36 AM »
Hi all !
I'm looking at a local Camaro that needs lots of TLC. I may want this for a project car.
The car comes with a bill of sale, but not a title. What are my options for getting a clear,
legal title to the car so I can put it on the road at some point? If it helps, I'm in NC.
Thanks,
Steve
I'm looking at a local Camaro that needs lots of TLC. I may want this for a project car.
The car comes with a bill of sale, but not a title. What are my options for getting a clear,
legal title to the car so I can put it on the road at some point? If it helps, I'm in NC.
Thanks,
Steve
114
Originality / '69 SHP throttle rod assembly
« on: January 02, 2007, 06:37:05 PM »
Does anyone know if the '69 SHP Camaro's all used the same two-piece throttle rod assembly? I am interested in the difference ( if any )
between Z/28 & L/78 ( this would encompass L/72 ). Recently, I got into a discussion with someone who claimed that they were indeed
different. As only having focused on big block Camaros, I can't say I've looked for a difference.
I went too Rick's and they do show two different SHP assemblies.
Steve
between Z/28 & L/78 ( this would encompass L/72 ). Recently, I got into a discussion with someone who claimed that they were indeed
different. As only having focused on big block Camaros, I can't say I've looked for a difference.
I went too Rick's and they do show two different SHP assemblies.
Steve
115
Originality / Re: Questions about properly refinishing my '69 bumper jack
« on: January 02, 2007, 05:38:32 AM »
Sam,
You are correct. I've had that book for many, many years now ( the pages are falling out ).
It doesn't address the color gray ( closest commercially available ) or where to
get the jack replated. Those are topics members here can best address for me.
I was hoping some members that had their jacks restored could comment on where
they got their jack shafts replated and how the process worked & approximate costs.
Steve
You are correct. I've had that book for many, many years now ( the pages are falling out ).
It doesn't address the color gray ( closest commercially available ) or where to
get the jack replated. Those are topics members here can best address for me.
I was hoping some members that had their jacks restored could comment on where
they got their jack shafts replated and how the process worked & approximate costs.
Steve
116
Originality / Re: Original '69 12-bolt posi rear tag & plug
« on: January 02, 2007, 05:33:46 AM »
Got it - THANKS ED !
117
Originality / Questions about properly refinishing my '69 bumper jack
« on: January 02, 2007, 03:34:27 AM »
Hi All !
Happy New Year !!
I saw an auction on eBay for a "restored" '69 Camaro bumper jack assembly and it got me thinking about my jacks condition ( not too good ).
This is the auction: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=016&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=260069578101&rd=1&rd=1
My main question concerns the jack shaft itself and the proper finish it should have. The jack in the auction used a Rustoleum Metallic paint finish.
I know this isn't original. I'm not knocking the seller of this eBay item, but I want to do my jack properly.
So, what are the correct finishes for the jack assembly? What color gray matches ( best possible ) the original gray?
What can I expect to pay to get the shaft replated? Anyone have recommendation on a vendor I can use?
Lastly, can the jack mechanism be separated from the shaft for the plating process? It's all in the details.
Thanks,
Steve
Happy New Year !!
I saw an auction on eBay for a "restored" '69 Camaro bumper jack assembly and it got me thinking about my jacks condition ( not too good ).
This is the auction: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=016&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=260069578101&rd=1&rd=1
My main question concerns the jack shaft itself and the proper finish it should have. The jack in the auction used a Rustoleum Metallic paint finish.
I know this isn't original. I'm not knocking the seller of this eBay item, but I want to do my jack properly.
So, what are the correct finishes for the jack assembly? What color gray matches ( best possible ) the original gray?
What can I expect to pay to get the shaft replated? Anyone have recommendation on a vendor I can use?
Lastly, can the jack mechanism be separated from the shaft for the plating process? It's all in the details.
Thanks,
Steve
118
Originality / Original '69 12-bolt posi rear tag & plug
« on: January 02, 2007, 03:17:55 AM »
I just finished the restoration of my 12-bolt rear for my 69 Camaro. Somehow, I misplaced the fill/inspection plug and can't find it.
Can someone post images ( top & side ) of what an original plug looks like? Also, I lost the little plastic red posi tag years ago. I believe
the originals had stamped ( incused ) letters that were filled-in with white. The newer ones use a white silk screen like process.
Can someone also post an image of an original posi tag so I know what to hunt for? BTW, where can I find these items ( correct )?
I saw this on "the bay" recently, but didn't bid because the tag doesn't look correct. What about the plug? Does the part number
on the GM box help?
Many thanks,
Steve
Can someone post images ( top & side ) of what an original plug looks like? Also, I lost the little plastic red posi tag years ago. I believe
the originals had stamped ( incused ) letters that were filled-in with white. The newer ones use a white silk screen like process.
Can someone also post an image of an original posi tag so I know what to hunt for? BTW, where can I find these items ( correct )?
I saw this on "the bay" recently, but didn't bid because the tag doesn't look correct. What about the plug? Does the part number
on the GM box help?
Many thanks,
Steve
119
Originality / Re: Markings on factory orignal Camaros
« on: January 01, 2007, 03:08:46 PM »These "markings" get carried to extremes, and some restored cars start to look like underhood graffiti galleries; original cars had very few normally-visible markings.
I agree with John. I had very few under hood markings at all. So, I didn't add any because others did.
Steve
120
General Discussion / Re: Front Spoiler
« on: January 01, 2007, 03:01:40 PM »
Very interesting article. I didn't actually know that Chevy Engineers did that much research into the aerodynamica of our F-bodies. COOL ! 
Steve
Steve