|
![]() |
#21 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Arkansas - In the middle of everything.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 64
Liked 779 Times in 193 Posts
|
![]()
GM issued "unofficial" bulletins back in the day with similar instructions for the Camaro bodies being used in TransAm to the racers, too. That's the reason I zipped up the seams of my '67 in 1982.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 852
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
![]()
Ford needed it more than Cheby as the front susp. was part of body spring towers and cross members engine mounts Camaro had sub frame that bolted on, weren't the seams on them rewelded up?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#23 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Arkansas - In the middle of everything.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 64
Liked 779 Times in 193 Posts
|
![]()
The welding on the subframes from the factory was atrocious - incomplete, overburned, etc. The racers were instructed to reinforce and reweld the subframes. There were some skunkworks subframes in '69 that were hand crafted in the R&D department with subtle changes in shape and material. The factory instructions concentrated on the firewall/front footwell area and the area from the front of the rear spring eyes back past the "crossmember" where the shocks were mounted.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 852
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
![]()
And mounting points for susp
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|