Messages

76

Decoding/Numbers / Re: Rear axle codes

« on: July 24, 2009, 12:17:21 AM »

Well it was all for naught...my friend went down today instead and it was a "JP G" code on the axle tube (how does one get "@L" from that?? ...so that make sit a '73-'74 Nova piece, 3.42:1 posi....which is what it has.  Thanks anyway for the help.

77

Decoding/Numbers / Re: Rear axle codes

« on: July 23, 2009, 09:27:32 PM »

Is there a casting date anywhere on the center housing? 

Unknown until my friend looks at it tomorrow.  It would sure answer some questions though

78

Decoding/Numbers / Re: Rear axle codes

« on: July 23, 2009, 03:17:25 PM »

I think they need to do some more cleaning and use a wire brush.  I don't see that code in
any of the documentation that I have collected. The format of the stamped code should look like

CB G 112 1 E
(CB = Ratio, G = Plant, 112 = 112th day of year, 1 = shift, E = Positraction Source)

I agree that there should be more data (assuming that it wasn't obliterated by a grinder or what-not).  Since CBTN calls out "2L" as an open rear it would not have a posi source so what I seem to be missing is a shift code (not really helpful in determining OE application) and the plant code.  The real puzzler is the "2L" as it only appears in CBTN '70-'75 and no where else The seller (who is a friend of a friend) states that it came from a '71 (that jives with the "2L" code which he didn't know until I asked for it) and it is still packing 3.42:1 gears (which also matches the "2L").
 
I'm not saying Colvin is wrong, it's just that it is an odd code (numeric-alpha as opposed to the normal alpha-alpha) so I was looking for some sort of supporting references. I have a friend that is going to check it more closely today or tomorrow so maybe I'll get more data.  In the mean time, anyone every run into such a code or one close to it?

79

Decoding/Numbers / Rear axle codes

« on: July 23, 2009, 05:05:13 AM »

OK, not a 1st gen question but thought I'd tap the knowledge base here.  Looking at a 8.5" 10 bolt axle for the '71 RS/SS I am putting together.  The axle I have found has the following axle tube stamping: "2L 208" . 

CBTN shows "2L" as a legit code for a '71 Camaro with a 3.42:1 open rear axle.  Problem is that I cannot find any other references to support this and confirm its application.  Can anyone here? 

I don't have it here but am relying on someone else to pull the numbers. There's a lot of paint they said and indicated that  it could just as easily be a "ZL" instead of the "2L"...but I can find no reference for "ZL" anywhere.

80

Restoration / Re: Shackles

« on: June 25, 2009, 06:28:02 AM »

The shackles are the same, they just mount in a different orientation due to the direction in which the bolts mount.

The repos are no good if you're looking for originality.

Aside from the bent set I have three other sets of OE shackles so I don't need to go the repop route.  for all intents and purposes they appear to be identical (except that the originals from my '69 Z have an "S" stamped on the outside, center of each shackle - PN 3830840.  The others seem to have just one "S" per pair.  They came from a '67 convertible camaro, a '69 Firebird coupe and a '69 Camaro convertible.  the lack of the "S" got me thinking so I thought I'd ask to be sure before replacing my damaged shackles).

thanks for the input

81

Restoration / Re: Shackles

« on: June 25, 2009, 06:22:41 AM »

Flowjoe -

My '69 P&A list the same part number (3849248) for the rear spring shackle repair kit.  It states this kit is for '67-'69 Camaros and '62-'69 Chevy IIs.

Paul

Thanks - always good to have more than one (mine ) data point

82

Restoration / Shackles

« on: June 25, 2009, 03:21:07 AM »

In doing some work on my '69 Z/28 I find that my shackles are bent (I believe from an accident long, long ago).  I have several extra sets sitting around which appear to be identical (just not bent).  Is there only one shackle for all 1st gens regardless of configuration (i.e. Z/28, L6, BB, etc.)?  I am referencing PN 3830840 shown on UPC4 page B2 of the AIM.  I have a GM parts catalog from Dec '71 which shows one "repair kit" for the rear shackles on all 67-69 cars...PN 3849248.  Thanks in advance.

PS does anyone know if  Firebirds use the same part or is it different?

83

General Discussion / Re: Block question for JohnZ

« on: April 16, 2009, 12:38:44 AM »

Thank a bunch John - again!

84

General Discussion / Block question for JohnZ

« on: April 15, 2009, 12:21:15 AM »

I seem to recall you addressing the little drilled and tapped hole (an plug) just above the timing cover on some small blocks (passenger side).  I have searched but cannot fid the post.  IIRC it had to do with the implementation of a "best practice" at one foundry (or engine plant) and not at another.  Would you mind addressing that again?  Thanks

85

General Discussion / Re: Z/28 rear-end gearing

« on: April 11, 2009, 08:08:21 PM »

The way I understand it, is that the high-winding 302 is happiest with gear ratios even lower than 3.73 (say 4.10).

My '69 X-77 car had a 3.07:1 open in it for years (came to me that way in '84 - I never thought to question it for a long time - but not the original rear as it turned out)...it was a drag to drive under certain conditions (any stops on any slope )

86

General Discussion / Re: Z/28 rear-end gearing

« on: April 11, 2009, 08:05:45 PM »

There are documented [window sticker, shipper copy] examples of 307, 331, 355.

Thank you William - that answers the question nicely.

87

General Discussion / Z/28 rear-end gearing

« on: April 11, 2009, 06:12:07 PM »

Is there any evidence that a Z/28 was built using a gear ratio higher (numerically lower) than 3.73:1? 

This is not to prove that any particular car is genuine or anything like that.  It is a topic that came up in another forum discussion about what was possible  and if possible whether it ever happened.

Just to get it out of the way, I understand completely that a 302 (as built by GM) would not be a "happy camper" with, say, 3.07:1's.

88

Decoding/Numbers / Re: '67 Carb

« on: April 04, 2009, 04:51:12 PM »

The date reads  1420 which I am interpreting as 142nd day of 1970...am I in error here?

2nd question:

If that date is correct then is this a service carb?

Yup - service replacement carb, date as you noted.

Thanks John

It's very clean so I wonder when it came off the self. (that's one I'll never know)  I know where it has been for the last year or so (in a box according to seller)

89

Decoding/Numbers / '67 Carb

« on: April 04, 2009, 12:58:53 AM »

I picked up this carb:

Which Colvin identifies as a as a 327/275 (or 295) AT w/AIR, 3rd type.  I'm assuming that this would indicate a CA emissions carb.

1st question:
 Any idea of when the 3rd type was phased in?

The date reads  1420 which I am interpreting as 142nd day of 1970...am I in error here?

2nd question:

If that date is correct then is this a service carb?

Thanks

90

Originality / Re: Is this the correct air cleaner?

« on: September 24, 2008, 11:21:16 PM »

I am sure that it fits multiple models with Cali emissions...

I'm sure your right but I was still surprised by the size...do you know if the CA air cleaner is larger than the 49 state one?