Body Mount Tape - Width

[Mike S]

Here are the R&L side pictures of the rear bushing from my 67 04B LOS coupe (I assume this is the #3 position).
They have the integrated washer. The 67 AIM also shows them in the drawing. Unless this was a '67 thing?
 I'll look closer and see if I can see the P/N.


Mike

[Edgemontvillage]

Here are the R&L side pictures of the rear bushing from my 67 04B LOS coupe (I assume this is the #3 position).
They have the integrated washer. The 67 AIM also shows them in the drawing. Unless this was a '67 thing?
 I'll look closer and see if I can see the P/N.

Mike

Interesting. Can you confirm the bushings are factory original to your car?  Are the PNs still visible? It "appears" the upper bushing has the integrated washer and the lower bushing doesn't? In the 1968 and 1969 AIMs the Position 3 top bushing image is the same (integrated washer bushing) however we know that's not definitive as the bushing construction is different.

[Mike S]

 There is no doubt about being original. I have owned the car since 1980 and I bought it from the original owner who had it sitting his his garage for 6 years prior (with beach chairs and other junk piled on top of it). I'll look on the sides for the P/N. As for the lower busing, I assume you mean the one between the body bolt washer and chassis. That sounds correct....no washer in the lower one. That's the same as on the 67 convertible I restored.

Mike

[68camaroz28]

Chick I couldn't help but notice the bushing in your photo appears to have the integrated washer which would be the 3928380 instead of the 3901361 bushing or is that camera flash?

Dang it Lloyd now you ruined my new Year..... LOL I'm not sure how that has happened as I'm confident I had all my biscuits and donuts all lined up by part # for the sub-frame as the owner I purchased the car from had already bought them and I checked all those against the AIM but it sure would look like I must have screwed up and will have to examine that. 

Chick - Well - appears you had the right body mount bushing here:  http://www.camaros.org/forum/index.php?topic=7497.0.   

Hans, none of the factory installed 3901361 bushings I have seen use an integrated washer, it might be a later service replacement bushing that Chick has and, as we have seen frequently, NOS / service replacement and assembly line originals, are often different. 
[/quote
Guess you have seen one now! LOL Thanks Hans as I've had some family health issues to assist with and had not really investigated other than a comment that I was sure what I put in was correct part # wise. Lloyd might be correct but I've only looked at a small amount of gen I sub-frame bushings to speak of. Looking at the 68 AIM just now and the picture indicates the integrated washer but know that there are other mistakes within the AIM and one cannot justify something based on a AIM picture. The pieces I used were purchased mainly in 1979 time frame.

[Mike S]

 I looked at the bushing and there is a lot of cracking where the numbers are so it is hard to make out what they are.
But, looking at the various pictures posted in this thread, all the bushings show the metal between it and the floor.
What is different about the bushing construction that's in question?

Mike

[Edgemontvillage]

I looked at the bushing and there is a lot of cracking where the numbers are so it is hard to make out what they are.
But, looking at the various pictures posted in this thread, all the bushings show the metal between it and the floor.
What is different about the bushing construction that's in question?

Mike

Mike, the bushings shown in Reply #1, 3, 18 (lower photo), 20 and 22 are examples of upper bushings that don't have the integrated washer so there is no metal washer to floor pan contact. The difference in bushing construction is best seen in my posting Reply #20. The bushing shown in the digital caliper is a hard grainy rubber compound as compared to the installed bushing (...361) in the photo below it which is a smooth flexible rubber compound allowing more  "squish" when torqued. (both are NOS)

[Mike S]

 Hi Lloyd,
  In reply #20, the metal sleeve is only in the center of the bushing with no washer on the outside?
I see in reply #22 (10/10 69 RS) the bushing shows what looks like a metal ring w/oxidation against the floor.
This is interesting!  This weekend I may venture to remove the rear bushing on the 67 LOS and see if the chassis will move enough to get it out.
  On another note.....while looking closely at the '67 LOS, I've noticed, for the first time since I have owned this car, exposed tape on the rear right shock. Below is a closeup. I see just partial edges on the other side shock. But, I see no evidence on the floor openings but I won't know for sure until I remove one of the bushings.

Mike

[Hans L]

Well, nothing conclusive, but here's the body mount bushings I removed from my '69 04B LA Built Z.  All have integrated washers but  unfortunately, no signs of part numbers left as they appear to have corroded/cracked away.  But with that, upon closer inspection, I believe there are hints of body tape remnants left on the #3 bushings.   While possible, I have no reason to believe the body bushings were replaced - the lower cushions all had legible part numbers and correct per the AIM. 

[Edgemontvillage]

Hi Lloyd,
  In reply #20, the metal sleeve is only in the center of the bushing with no washer on the outside?
I see in reply #22 (10/10 69 RS) the bushing shows what looks like a metal ring w/oxidation against the floor.
This is interesting!  This weekend I may venture to remove the rear bushing on the 67 LOS and see if the chassis will move enough to get it out.
  On another note.....while looking closely at the '67 LOS, I've noticed, for the first time since I have owned this car, exposed tape on the rear right shock. Below is a closeup. I see just partial edges on the other side shock. But, I see no evidence on the floor openings but I won't know for sure until I remove one of the bushings.

Mike

Mike, in the Reply #20 photos only the lower bushing shown in the digital caliper has a washer and the upper bushing (female side, PN ...361) doesn't have any steel in it.  Reply #22, is a photo from my former 10 10 car (Norwood 4C build date) and the oxidation you're referring isn't from the top bushing. As I previously owned the car I can attest it didn't have steel washers in the Position 3 upper bushings. 

The photo of the '67's rear shock mount is interesting and the first I've seen evidencing tape in that area - please post your findings. On Charlie Lillard's (former) 1,100 mile 1970 Z there is a photo of the tape on the inside of the trunk at the shock mount location. Possibly a change in procedure with the Gen 2 body? 

[Edgemontvillage]

Well, nothing conclusive, but here's the body mount bushings I removed from my '69 04B LA Built Z.  All have integrated washers but  unfortunately, no signs of part numbers left as they appear to have corroded/cracked away.  But with that, upon closer inspection, I believe there are hints of body tape remnants left on the #3 bushings.   While possible, I have no reason to believe the body bushings were replaced - the lower cushions all had legible part numbers and correct per the AIM. 

Great intel and photos Hans. The only manufacturer's identification I've seen on any subframe bushings is "WHITE" however I wonder if the construction varied by source. On my current project, the 2B Norwood RS/Z, there were no integrated washers in the Position 3 upper bushings either. 

[Camarocards]

Lloyd,

Just another reference point for you....

These are the bushings that came out of my '68 01D car. All have integrated washers. Yes, I know, they were pretty bad!  I found no additional washers on the 380's or 361's when the car was disassembled and unfortunately no sign of any tape. I can't attest that they were never changed by a previous owner but I've owned this car since 1978 and it's never been apart. Judging from the condition of them I highly suspect they're original to the car!

Also interesting to note that none of the bushings or cushions had any part numbers or manufacturers mark on them.

Bob

[Mike S]

  Interesting Bob & Hans....I looked (and even used a bore scope to get real close) and found no part numbers on my 67 04B LOS. Unless they weren't very pronounced and the cracking makes them impossible to make out.
I did find a few NOS bushings in the shed and they do have P/N's on them.

Mike

[luv2sixty9]

Chick,
I my opinion your 361 bushing is correct and has the washer style collar on top that all bushing come with to assist the thin floor board. It 's also required to aid in holding the lower cushion in place.
I believe sometime in July of 68 the lower cushion was replaced with a #720 cushion vs the #802 cushion. I don't know what your car currently has installed but because I think your car is a June or July build date if you have the 802 it would also be correct. So, with that said I say your car has no issues.

I have never seen a 361 or any of the other Camaro bushings ever missing the top flat washer collar, but it can be removed. I don't know if the factory worker assembled them or if the were ready to use when the subframe was installed.

[Hans L]

  Interesting Bob & Hans....I looked (and even used a bore scope to get real close) and found no part numbers on my 67 04B LOS. Unless they weren't very pronounced and the cracking makes them impossible to make out.
I did find a few NOS bushings in the shed and they do have P/N's on them.

Mike

Same.  I washed them, hoping the water would bring out tell tale signs of PN's.  Took photos, zoomed in, played with contrast/lighting and found nothing.  Only the front radiator bushings had discernible PN's and all the lower cushions had PN's (and as they were in decent shape, re-installed them as the NOS font style was quite different than the originals).

Radiator Core Support Bushing/Mount:

[Danzo]

Mike, very interesting find on the rear shock ! Please let us know your findings!!
Doc.