Re: under hood pics of orignal 68 GTX needed
[Re: yellowfin]
#586428
01/19/10 10:26 PM
01/19/10 10:26 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,691 MO
cdp
master
|
master
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,691
MO
|
|
|
|
Re: under hood pics of orignal 68 GTX needed
[Re: cdp]
#586429
01/19/10 10:27 PM
01/19/10 10:27 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,691 MO
cdp
master
|
master
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,691
MO
|
|
|
|
Re: under hood pics of orignal 68 GTX needed
[Re: superwrench]
#586431
01/20/10 04:30 AM
01/20/10 04:30 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 21,546 N.E. OHIO, USA
A12
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 21,546
N.E. OHIO, USA
|
Quote:
The placement of that Emissions decal is interesting...I would have thought it would have been on the drivers fender like so many other cars. I'm knee deep in a 68 GTX resto myself...So-o-o-o-o much to learn when you yourself didn't take apart the car!!
'68 emission label was on the passenger's side and '69 on the driver's side. There's a post a few month's back where I found this out and can only guess because the '69 hood bumper pad got larger and made it harder to read or place it there.......I'll try and find the thread. Anyway here's a '68 Sat'l with the paint ok stamp on the passenger's side and the label too
MikeR
|
|
|
Re: under hood pics of orignal 68 GTX needed
[Re: Dougsmopars]
#586438
01/21/10 09:01 PM
01/21/10 09:01 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 43 PA
yellowfin
member
|
member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 43
PA
|
Man, I wish my valve cover had come clean without destroying that mark! The reason being it is so visible when you open the hood - I would even be willing to trade it for some other marks that I do have, but in out-of-the-way spots. Does anyone know what these marks on the valve cover mean? Assembly date of the engine? Auto or manual trans? Special equipment? Anyway, the paint on my pass side inner fender just foward of the wiper reservoir still bore the faint outline of the emmission decal, (by way of the old adhesive still on the surface)affirming that it is the correct placement on at least my car, dougsmopars. Does yours still have the OK stamp in place? No trace of mine at all - I wonder how it was left off. I do have the inspectors stamp that was punched through the fender tag as it was bent up going down the assembly line, maybe the OK paint stamp was superseeded by this other inspection? There were no marks on my firewall, but that is pretty neat that you found them - any ideas what they mean? (maybe the last three digits of any of the optional components installed?)Lastly, the paint in the engine compartment in general was very rough-textured in mine,as though an inordinate amount of overpray found its way there somehow. One of the many restoration mistakes I have seen in this area is to try and make it the same gloss as the exterior. In most of the original engine bays I have seen, the paint here is very sloppy.
|
|
|
Re: under hood pics of orignal 68 GTX needed
[Re: Dougsmopars]
#586444
01/23/10 01:05 PM
01/23/10 01:05 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 43 PA
yellowfin
member
|
member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 43
PA
|
Dougsmopars - "A" in the 7th (not 6th -I can't count) spot indicates that your car was built at the Lynch Road plant, so not much on my car will apply to yours. I have manual brakes, so I also cannot confirm any decals on the Midland-Ross type power booster. One source I have does list the correct finish as being cadmium gold, so you might want to verify that on yours. BTW, a zinc-dichromate finish is much the same finish, and should be a little easier to obtain from your local plating shop - I have a 1gal zinc tank that I use for almost every bolt, bracket, washer, clip etc. that I pull off the car, and has proven to be a cheap and extremely helpful way for me to restore these parts at home. If a gold finish is called for, I just dip the freshly zinc-plated part in the chromate solution, wash and dry. Comes out perfect every time, and has been a real lifesaver for my OEM parts. As for the marks on the left valve cover, A12's remarks are interesting, a one source I have lists the shortblock assembly for HP440's as 3462615. If the practice in 68 was to list the last two digits, it might be that your 16 is a 15 - you might want to check on that. Or, it might have something to do with the date the engine was assembled - your date code on the block (if original) might help there, but is based on a 10,000 day calendar so I'm told.
|
|
|
|
|