1969 Camaro battery

[lcmc]

When did they start using the side post battery for 69? What is correct for 04C car?

[bertfam]

Danny,

The side post stared in May, 1969.

HERE'S A LINK to the info.

Ed

[Dave69x33]

According to Jerry MacNeish, in his book, The Definitive 1969 Camaro Z/28-SS396 Fact Book, p.18, "In approximately March of 1969, a new side terminal battery was introduced replacing the Y-55 top post; however, original cars with top-post cables have been found which were built June-July of 1969."  He goes on to state that it was possible for the T-60 top post heavy duty battery was specified when car was ordered.

The 69 AIM, on page 161 under Battery & Cables, shows the top post battery and cables for the L-6, and on page 162, it shows the side post for V-8 applications. The release date of the drawing appears to be 11-5-68. 

I wondered about this same question.  I have a restored 69Z built 1st week of May.  I went with the R-79S side post, purchased from Restoration Battery out of Cincinnati (513-451-1083), based on Jerry's book, and to be a little different from many restored Camaros I see typically with tops post.  Not many go with the side post yet based on this discussion thread, there are original cars out there with the side post cables still in tact.

I would like to see pic of these battery cables.

[Jerry@CHP]

Current research indicates that the side terminal battery started in late April, 1969.  I have an all original 69 Z28 survivor car that still has the original battery cables which are side terminal cables.  The B/D is 05A, 1969.  I should also point out the original side terminal cables have two different attaching bolt sizes, the positive has 3/8-16 threads and the ground is 5/16-18.  All of the repro cables are the same size making them incorrect. 

When I purchased a repro battery from the only remaining oem battery company (Ohio based), I found out that I could not use their battery.  Their incompetent answer was to install repro cables and throw the originals away.  I opted to drill out and install a heli coil in the battery terminal so I could use the original cables.

Wonder what the general feeling is for anyone who has dealt with the only remaining repro battery company.  We have found them less than courteous, and incompetent when trying to get good technical support.  They are also very expensive and offer very little discounts to other dealers.  New Castle Battery, the originator of reproduction batteries was a much better vendor to deal with but unfortunately, they are no longer in business.

Jerry

[Jerry@CHP]

Just wanted to make sure I made this clear.  The current reproduction side terminal batteries do not come with the correct cable mounting hole sizes.  Both attaching bolt holes on these batteries is 3/8-16.  Not technically correct.

Jerry

[JohnZ]

Jerry, the reproduction batteries have a VERY poor reputation in the Corvette restoration community - few live more than two years. Many involved in NCRS judging (like me) simply use a current Delco replacement (like the top-terminal #24-7YR) and take a 50% (12-originality-point) hit for it (out of 4500 points for the whole car) rather than having $250-$300 tied up in an unreliable battery you can't trust in a car you drive and enjoy.

[Jerry@CHP]

John,

I agree 100%.  At least when New Castle was around, they did a better job with their customers.  Not the case with the remaniing battery company.  Plus New Castle batteries were under $200 retail.  Need I say more?

Jerry

[m22mike]

Current research indicates that the side terminal battery started in late April, 1969.  I have an all original 69 Z28 survivor car that still has the original battery cables which are side terminal cables.  The B/D is 05A, 1969.  I should also point out the original side terminal cables have two different attaching bolt sizes, the positive has 3/8-16 threads and the ground is 5/16-18.  All of the repro cables are the same size making them incorrect. 

When I purchased a repro battery from the only remaining oem battery company (Ohio based), I found out that I could not use their battery.  Their incompetent answer was to install repro cables and throw the originals away.  I opted to drill out and install a heli coil in the battery terminal so I could use the original cables.

Wonder what the general feeling is for anyone who has dealt with the only remaining repro battery company.  We have found them less than courteous, and incompetent when trying to get good technical support.  They are also very expensive and offer very little discounts to other dealers.  New Castle Battery, the originator of reproduction batteries was a much better vendor to deal with but unfortunately, they are no longer in business.

Jerry

They only hosed me once..... I will NEVER deal with them again !
                                                                         

[sdkar]

Since the side post battery sold is garbage, is there any indication that a side post battery topper will be made?  I spoke with guys at batterytoppers.com at least a year ago and they stated they were looking into a side post topper, but it is still not available.  I imagine that all it is is their top post topper only without the holes.  Am I correct.  Are they going to ever make this?  I thought of getting a top post topper and attempting to fill in the holes but it is something I have been holding off doing since I keep hoping a side post topper is coming soon?

[lcmc]

So, what battery do I need for my 69 SS350  Rally Sport 04C car? Is it a Y55, R59 or a T60, R89? I have seen all these used. My goal is to find the right NOS battery for the car for show purposes. The car is a survivor that scored 88% of it's total possible pointsl at the Camaro Nationals last year. I am trying to get this car to around 95%. That will be about the best it can do because of paint issues.

[lcmc]

According to Jerry MacNeish, in his book, The Definitive 1969 Camaro Z/28-SS396 Fact Book, p.18, "In approximately March of 1969, a new side terminal battery was introduced replacing the Y-55 top post; however, original cars with top-post cables have been found which were built June-July of 1969."  He goes on to state that it was possible for the T-60 top post heavy duty battery was specified when car was ordered.

The 69 AIM, on page 161 under Battery & Cables, shows the top post battery and cables for the L-6, and on page 162, it shows the side post for V-8 applications. The release date of the drawing appears to be 11-5-68. 

I wondered about this same question.  I have a restored 69Z built 1st week of May.  I went with the R-79S side post, purchased from Restoration Battery out of Cincinnati (513-451-1083), based on Jerry's book, and to be a little different from many restored Camaros I see typically with tops post.  Not many go with the side post yet based on this discussion thread, there are original cars out there with the side post cables still in tact.

I would like to see pic of these battery cables.

I was checking out Jerry's book and noticed he says the Y55 is a "reverse-polarity." That is confusing because that term usually means it would be a positive ground system instead of negitive.

[william]

For some reason Z/28s and maybe other small-block Camaros used a reverse-polarity top-terminal battery; aka Ford battery. All it means is the - terminal is on the RH side as you're facing the the engine bay, [+ -] not the norm for GM. BB Camaros used a 'normal' battery [- +]. Some will argue this but there are a number of Z/28 engine bay photos in vintage magazines that clearly show it.

The 69 AIM only shows side terminal battery cable assembly for the standard battery and shows 6 cylinder Camaros used RP; section 12 page A10 of the AIM. The next page shows the 'V-8' cables for the side terminal battery; all same. The 67-68 AIM shows the same thing for top terminal; all 8 cylinder cars had the same battery/cable configuration. But we know that was not how they were built.

There is no [+ -] topper; do not know if Z/28 side terminal batteries were also RP.

Why GM did this is unknown.

[KurtS]

I'd looked into this in detail a little bit ago. The change happened in May, Jerry's car is one of the first. April cars are all top posts. I had it narrowed down to exactly when, but I need to look again.

Usages:
67, 68, and early 69 L6, 307, and Z28: The standard battery was the Delco Y55 (reverse polarity)

67, 68, and early 69 327, 350, 396, and 427: The standard battery was the R59 (61 A-hr).

Late 69 L6, 307, and Z28: The standard battery became the Delco Y77 with side posts.

Late 69 350, 396, and 427: The standard battery became the Delco R79 with side posts.

[lcmc]

I'd looked into this in detail a little bit ago. The change happened in May, Jerry's car is one of the first. April cars are all top posts. I had it narrowed down to exactly when, but I need to look again.

Usages:
67, 68, and early 69 L6, 307, and Z28: The standard battery was the Delco Y55 (reverse polarity)

67, 68, and early 69 327, 350, 396, and 427: The standard battery was the R59 (61 A-hr).

Late 69 L6, 307, and Z28: The standard battery became the Delco Y77 with side posts.

Late 69 350, 396, and 427: The standard battery became the Delco R79 with side posts.

Kurt.....Looks like I need to go with the R59. If anyone out there has a NOS R59 let me know. I'll pay good money for one but not stupid money.

[KurtS]

Anyone have any experience with this place? Car Man's Garage -  http://www.carmansgarage.com/category/vintage.restorationbatteries/
They only have the R59, but it sounds interesting. They say the batteries have modern internals. Reseller?

Poking around, I found at least 3 other manufacturers (I assume none are not resellers):
* Axion Power Battery New Castle, PA 16105   724-654-9300
(sounds like the company that bought New Castle Battery)

* Restoration Battery, Cincinnati, OH   513-574-4481

* Antique Auto Battery, Hudson, OH    800-426-7580