Late '69 3/8 Fuel line

[Curtqq]

First post here on CRG (but longtime stalker of great information here-Thank You!)

I am trying to nail down how my car was fitted out when born.  I have a late 69 X11 coupe with SS350 badging, 350 4 spd non-original power train.  Dash VIN and Cowl Tag VIN is 12437 Norwood, so car was originally a V8.  I have all the things associated with Z21 Body Style trim except no wheel pinstripes.  Car has been repainted.  So far it is possible that it could be a real SS but maybe not.

What I don't understand is that I have a single 3/8 fuel line with NO vent line - this all looks to me to be original all the way back to the presumably original tank sending unit.  I thought all V8s had Rochester carbs and all 69 Rochester carbs used the vent line.  Only Holleys didn't require the vent line.

How do I reconcile this?  Were later V8 cars equipped with a carb that didn't need the vent line?

[bcmiller]

Are you sure it’s a 3/8 fuel line?

Take a look at this table.

http://www.camaros.org/diffs69.shtml

Is any of the drivetrain original? If so what does it have? What’s the axle code?

[camaronut]

I don't think the 327 v8 cars got the vent line - 2bbl car (which were early build cars).  SS350's (L48's) did have the vent line with the quadrajet carb.  Now - LM1's came with a 4-bbl carb, but no drawings in the AIM - just a mention in the option break-outs on page 186.  I'm sure there are verified LM1 cars that will show the vent line or not.

Curtqq - since you car didn't have a vent line, then I would assume the car left the factory with a 2bbl engine of some sort - more likely an L65 / 350ci engine (according to the AIM).

[Curtqq]

I think you are both right.  Looks like it had to originally be the L65 as it is the only late 69 V8 with a single fuel line.  I didn't realize that the 2 bbl Rochesters did not need the vent line.  Would have thought that all Rochesters then had the float valve leakage issue.

When I bought the car, Tranny is M21 # 3925661 ('70-'74).  Rear is BV Code 12 bolt posi (69) with multileaf springs - but the gears are no longer 4.10.    14 x 7 Rally wheels. Cowl Induction hood.  So lots of changes.  Somebody must have crashed another Camaro and pulled the parts (duh).  I subsequently put in a rebuilt engine from another crashed Camaro - Heads and intake manifold are from a '70 Z28 on a HA code block.

Also telling is that the speedo cable is left of steering wheel, so originally non-Muncie tranny.

Thanks for the guidance!

[CNorton]

Were later V8 cars equipped with a carb that didn't need the vent line?

Don't forget the ever-popular L14, 307 cubic inch V8. 

[Curtqq]

Don't forget the ever-popular L14, 307 cubic inch V8.
[/quote]

Yes, more probable that it was a 307, which brings up an interesting point since the 307 and 350 use slightly different height motor mounts.  I'll need to check what I have.

[william]

That's not accurate.

For '69, Chevy used different motor mounts and frame brackets for the 307/327 and 302/350 engines. The 307/327 parts were carried over from 67-68. 302/350 frame brackets/mounts were a new design, incorporating an interlock feature. The frame brackets are shorter and narrower; the mounts are taller.

The problem arises when 67-68 motor mounts are used on the '69 302/350 frame bracket. They fit but are wider. It is a sloppy fit, and will allow the engine to move around, causing perpetual clutch chatter and some fitment problems as the engine will be positioned too low.   

Each design places the engine in the same position. Don't mix the parts.

[Curtqq]

Thanks for clarifying.  I wanted to be sure they were the correct assembly for the 350 motor in case the car was originally a 307 and someone wasn't paying attention to details during the engine change.