Messages

1

Site Comments/Discussion / Re: CRG website “not secure”

« on: November 13, 2024, 04:48:28 PM »

Other than “knowing there are problems”, any real hope of getting the site issues fully and permanently corrected in the near term?

Richard

2

6-cylinder Camaros / Re: 6 Cylinder Air Cleaner Base

« on: September 26, 2024, 10:18:01 PM »

3 more pics

3

6-cylinder Camaros / 6 Cylinder Air Cleaner Base

« on: September 26, 2024, 10:17:01 PM »

Found this air cleaner base while cleaning out some old inventory - probably have had it for at least 25 yrs.

If anyone wants it - yours for cost of prepaid shipping.

You can contact me @ grtnev@aol.com.

Richard

4

Decoding/Numbers / Re: Earliest known casting date for 3970010 block?

« on: September 20, 2024, 02:43:34 AM »

http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?topic=5743.msg37489#msg37489

Looks like April 1969 was the beginning of their production.

Richard

5

General Discussion / Re: Website not secure

« on: August 08, 2024, 02:08:25 AM »

1154 guest on right now…

I wasn’t going to say anything, but that number doesn’t come close to passing the smell test.  I know 1st gen Camaros are popular, but 1154 guest???  Really??


Richard

6

Originality / Re: Preservation of a 68 Camaro

« on: August 06, 2024, 02:28:38 PM »

It depends:

If you want old school - yellow
If you want a more aesthetically pleasing look to the eye - orange.

But then again, I’m biased-I have never liked yellow anything on a car.

Really have enjoyed following this thread - great project and great results!

Richard

7

General Discussion / Re: Website not secure

« on: August 01, 2024, 01:26:56 AM »

Now I see it. But lately the site takes a while to load, and sometimes I have to refresh for it to load. It will say 508 Resource Limit is reached.

You aren’t kidding!  Last few days CRG forum pages have been very slow to load.

I figured sooner or later Kurt or someone would explain what has gone tilt.

8

General Discussion / Re: Interesting period photos.... :)

« on: May 27, 2024, 01:39:19 AM »

Came across this recently.

Scroll left to right.

Richard

9

Decoding/Numbers / Re: Caveat Emptor...scam?

« on: April 12, 2024, 02:53:29 PM »

The listing has ended.  Very well might have been a scam.

Richard

10

Garage Talk / Re: 1968 Chevy CamaroZ28 for sale

« on: March 27, 2024, 12:53:25 AM »

Why would a car listed in Minneapolis Mn craiglist be located in Kansas. Sounds like a scam! Buyer beware!

A consignment?

Richard

11

General Discussion / Re: Interesting period photos.... :)

« on: February 14, 2024, 07:23:41 PM »

1967 Road America Can-Am pace lap.   (Scroll picture left-right.)

McLaren    Hulme
Gurney      Follmer
Donohue   Parsons
Surtees      Revson
Hall            Motschenbacher
Scott          Hayes
Hansen      Morin
Posey         Barber
.
.
.
Finishing order: Hulme, Donohue, Surtees, Hall, Scott, Hansen, Barber, Morley, Motschenbacher, Hayes

12

General Discussion / Re: Interesting period photos.... :)

« on: February 08, 2024, 07:30:57 PM »

Not very good quality - tv screen shots from the 1969 movie:  "The Racing Scene" with James Garner. 

Pace lap from the 1969 St. Jovite F5000 SCCA Formula A Continental Championship, 7 September 1969,

Now known as Circuit Mont-Tremblant, it is a 2.621 mile road course located approximately 81 miles north of Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

'69 Camaro Pace Car leading the field.

Richard

13

Maintenance / Re: electrical issue with console gauges

« on: January 30, 2024, 04:40:39 PM »

This has been posted before - perhaps may be of some help.

Richard

14

General Discussion / Re: 1969 driveshafts

« on: January 19, 2024, 04:29:13 AM »

.

I agree - there could have been a vibration problem in the drive train.  Offsetting the yokes to “fix” a drivetrain vibration problem would have been an inexpensive course of action. 

If that was the case, then nothing was “fixed” - just band aided - with what was possibly a drivetrain vibration issue shifted to something else.  The drivetrain only had to survive long enough to finish a Trans Am race or last past the warranty period.

It would be insightful to know - over the years how may transmissions (aluminum cases) and rear ends have failed due to the induced stresses and torsional vibrations originating from offset propeller shaft yokes operating under heavy acceleration, load, and higher rpm’s.

Just because Chevy did it doesn’t make it golden.

If you guys have time, read the full report.

We researched this for over 10 years.

I have read the full report.  It is a very good report for documenting what Chevy did.  However, there is nothing in the report that states why, gives a reason, or an engineering explanation for why the SB driveshafts had the yokes clocked at 32 degrees.

And by the way, I have been researching mechanical engineering principles since 1971 (53 yrs) and have been a registered professional mechanical engineer since 1980.  I have more than a basic understanding of how a propeller shaft operates.

Richard

15

General Discussion / Re: 1969 driveshafts

« on: January 19, 2024, 12:21:52 AM »

Both my 69 Van Nuys small block manual trans cars were offset 32 degrees. Original driveshafts. Pretty normal on First gen Camaros.

I know we have beaten this to death in the past....the report referenced in the 1st reply details what Chevy did. 

From the perspective of this retired registered professional mechanical engineer and strictly from looking at how to properly set up a propeller (drive) shaft, the idea of offsetting the yokes makes no sense.  The whole idea of a propeller shaft, beside transmitting torque, is to keep the angular velocities the same (or relatively so) at both ends of the drive shaft to avoid torsional vibration issues.  This is accomplished by keeping the angle between the transmission output and the drive shaft and the drive shaft and rear end as nearly equal as possible at all times - including when the rear end is moving up and down goin over bumps, etc.  Offsetting the yokes 32 degrees works against this fundamental principle of keeping the operating angles, as well as the angular velocities, the same at both ends of the driveshaft. 

My guess is that Chevy discovered a vibration issue and the easy fix it was to offset the yokes which effectively stiffened the driveshaft and shifted the vibration to a higher frequency that was no longer excited by the drive train - as opposed to changing the design of the driveshaft itself which would have been a more costly endeavor. 

I put mine in line over 30 years ago.  But for those who want "factory correct"......

Richard