1
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.
Pages: [1]
2
1969 - Orphans / Re: ZL1 MOTOR car no# 66 and rear
« on: March 15, 2008, 03:13:33 PM »
Does anyone know the story on this aution? Looks like some interesting projects.
How about the ZL1 motor? Do you think its the real deal? Any guesses on how much it will go for?
How about the ZL1 motor? Do you think its the real deal? Any guesses on how much it will go for?
3
General Discussion / Re: The Definitive 1969 Camaro Fact Book (Revised 4th Edition)
« on: March 02, 2008, 06:01:15 PM »
I still haven't received mine from Rick's, even though I paid for it (on backorder) a few weeks ago. Maybe they take care of new money before old money. No luck getting a response from customer service, either. Maybe I will salute the greasy hands theory, order directly from Jerry, and end up with two.
4
General Discussion / Re: The Definitive 1969 Camaro Fact Book (Revised 4th Edition)
« on: February 26, 2008, 08:50:39 PM »
Have the 4th editions been released for sale through Rick's? I have had one on back order there for a few weeks and haven't been able to get any word on its availablilty through their customer service.
5
Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1969 396 L34 Casting Number
« on: January 09, 2008, 04:28:51 PM »
Thanks for the help, Jerry and Kurt.
I have the report (and bought the car). There is no mention of an appraisal price in the report, which is probably good, because I don't want to confirm that I overpaid anyway. Sometimes you just want something.
Its seems like a nice solid driver car, it must have spent most if not all of its life in a garage. I know it looks great in mine. The odometer reads 41K which might be off, but it doesn't seem like a large multiple of that. Any thoughts on how many miles the chassis may have seen Jerry?
The report also doesn't mention anything about the probability of it having been an original big block. But, I think that implies that there is absolutely no way to tell. I have a couple of leads, maybe I can chase down some documentation. That seems like it may be the only way to prove the originality of any 69 big block.
If the database keeps current ownership information, let me know, I will email you my details.
Thanks again.
I have the report (and bought the car). There is no mention of an appraisal price in the report, which is probably good, because I don't want to confirm that I overpaid anyway. Sometimes you just want something.
Its seems like a nice solid driver car, it must have spent most if not all of its life in a garage. I know it looks great in mine. The odometer reads 41K which might be off, but it doesn't seem like a large multiple of that. Any thoughts on how many miles the chassis may have seen Jerry?
The report also doesn't mention anything about the probability of it having been an original big block. But, I think that implies that there is absolutely no way to tell. I have a couple of leads, maybe I can chase down some documentation. That seems like it may be the only way to prove the originality of any 69 big block.
If the database keeps current ownership information, let me know, I will email you my details.
Thanks again.
6
Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1969 396 L34 Casting Number
« on: January 07, 2008, 02:58:33 PM »
Thanks, I will get a look at your report. Do you assign a suggested value when you do your evaluations?
7
Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1969 396 L34 Casting Number
« on: January 05, 2008, 06:10:32 PM »
Thanks, thats interesting and seems to make sense. I guess the only way that this one could be legit is if the plant's inventory system was messed up and not always using first in / first out or an occasional old batch was pulled out of the back room.
Approximately what date were the old stock 68 440's used up? I guess it could be narrowed down by reviewing the registration database.
Since Z11's were not announced until Feb 4th, it sounds like there should be no legitmate pace cars with 440 blocks. As a matter of fact, it probably makes a 69 big block with a 440 casting a pretty rare car.
Your comment on the VIN on the pad also seems to make sense now that I reviewed the Drivetrain Partial VIN's information on this website. The statement that pertains is "The Norwood plant moved the VIN to the oil filter in the December 68 timeframe. Los Angeles was not as consistent and the VIN location varied during the year." I guess its possible that the language in the ebay advertisement might be a little ambiguous on where the VIN actually is located though.
Apparently, this ebay car can not legitimately be called a numbers matching car (which it isn't in the advertisement). Is there a way to assure that it was even a big block car? I know about the heater hoses, but am also aware that that can be modified as well. If it has been changed, should it be possible to see evidence in the firewall of the previous, small block location?
It seems like a lot for someone to go through to make a JF car when they could have just as easily made it a JH. Maybe thats part of someone's ruse, though.
Thanks again.
Approximately what date were the old stock 68 440's used up? I guess it could be narrowed down by reviewing the registration database.
Since Z11's were not announced until Feb 4th, it sounds like there should be no legitmate pace cars with 440 blocks. As a matter of fact, it probably makes a 69 big block with a 440 casting a pretty rare car.
Your comment on the VIN on the pad also seems to make sense now that I reviewed the Drivetrain Partial VIN's information on this website. The statement that pertains is "The Norwood plant moved the VIN to the oil filter in the December 68 timeframe. Los Angeles was not as consistent and the VIN location varied during the year." I guess its possible that the language in the ebay advertisement might be a little ambiguous on where the VIN actually is located though.
Apparently, this ebay car can not legitimately be called a numbers matching car (which it isn't in the advertisement). Is there a way to assure that it was even a big block car? I know about the heater hoses, but am also aware that that can be modified as well. If it has been changed, should it be possible to see evidence in the firewall of the previous, small block location?
It seems like a lot for someone to go through to make a JF car when they could have just as easily made it a JH. Maybe thats part of someone's ruse, though.
Thanks again.
8
Decoding/Numbers / Re: 1969 396 L34 Casting Number
« on: January 05, 2008, 02:05:07 AM »
For more information, this question refers to a car that has been recently for sale on ebay. Maybe this car is already registered here.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110209909101&ssPageName=ADME:X:RTQ:MOTORS:1123
c
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110209909101&ssPageName=ADME:X:RTQ:MOTORS:1123
c
9
Decoding/Numbers / 1969 396 L34 Casting Number
« on: January 04, 2008, 10:30:51 PM »
I have seen some conflicting information on a casting number for a 396 L34.
In this web site and in other references, casting number 3935440 is shown as having occurred with 1968 and 1969 VINs. In other references it is shown as only having occurred in 1968 VIN's.
I am nearly certain that this block is original and from a 1969 car, but have had an "expert" tell me that it must be a re-stamp. Can anyone shed any light on this controversy? Is it relatively newly recognized that 5440's appeared in 1969? If so, am I looking at older references and dealing with an even older "expert"?
I am an old Camaro guy but a newcomer to chasing originality. I hope most everyone here can relate to that. Thanks in advance.
c
In this web site and in other references, casting number 3935440 is shown as having occurred with 1968 and 1969 VINs. In other references it is shown as only having occurred in 1968 VIN's.
I am nearly certain that this block is original and from a 1969 car, but have had an "expert" tell me that it must be a re-stamp. Can anyone shed any light on this controversy? Is it relatively newly recognized that 5440's appeared in 1969? If so, am I looking at older references and dealing with an even older "expert"?
I am an old Camaro guy but a newcomer to chasing originality. I hope most everyone here can relate to that. Thanks in advance.
c
Pages: [1]