Hey guys... I am trying to gather up a few parts for my 69 350SS.

I sometimes run across more than one item that is claimed to be correct and I am slowly realizing that some production parts the car shipped with were replaced by parts
that looked different yet still are claimed to be correct.

some examples I THINK that were different:

Air Filter... A212CW production was square wire, replacement was diagonal?

Door lock knobs... production had flutes replacement were smooth?

Plug Wires... dated black boots vs replacement Delco's with red boots

Oil Dipstick... green tip vs replacement yellow tip????

Oil filter.... early productionPF24 later PF25??

Headlites.... early were T3's and late 69 got PowerBeam

If anyone can confirm or elaborate on my observations I would REALLY appreciate it.

Also any other situations with differences you may have noted:

like two piece brake rotors being replaced by one piece..
you get the idea.

Might be good to gather up a list of sorts!

GM would stock replacement parts from "production" numbers only for a short while. Then as the cars and parts changed, the "production" numbered parts were replaced with similar (but not the same number) parts. These are called "Service" parts. You really have to do you homework when it comes to NOS parts. Also, there were a lot of NOS parts that were returned due to poor quality (i.e. later fenders made with worn dies). So a bunch of the old NOS body parts still around could be poor fitting as much as the repro ones. Also, quite a number of repro parts were taken from GMs service parts, which would work, but not quite correct (cowl air cleaner and 69 rear license bracket come to mind).

It is the norm for the industry that service replacement parts may differ from those used in production. They may not be from the same supplier; they may have had engineering changes over time. I was involved with a Camaro business for many years; we had a tremendous inventory of NOS for our "house" cars. One memorable example was rebuilding the front suspension on our '67 Z/28. NONE of the NOS GM service parts we had exactly matched the original tie rod ends, sleeves, etc. Pulleys are another example-the pieces used in production are usually phosphated, service parts are almost always painted. OE '458' AIR pulleys had a hard-stamped part number and were phosphated, the service part was painted black and had an ink-stamped part number. The deep-groove alternator pulley [actually an aircraft part BTW] GM sold for years was not an exact replacement for any year. It was the '67 style but had no stamped part number and gold-cad plating instead of silver. The 68-69 multi-leaf spring anchor was serviced with the '70-'73 piece that has the sway bar mounting tab. Same with the 12 bolt rear axle cover; the service part was notched for the '70-up brake line block. The service replacement '69 Camaro rear license frame has a completely different mounting bracket than the original.

Another isssue with NOS is quality. Some of the GMPD service stuff was pretty nasty as tooling became worn. '69 Camaro dashpads had a bald spot; console lids had almost no grain; some sheet metal [69 LH quarters, 67 LH fenders] simply no longer fit.

I could go on but you get the point. And I laugh when people insist on "NOS" parts thinking they are getting the same stuff used in production.

Thanks guys.... so the list could be quite long!!

Also leads to some controversy if you happen to be interested in "restored" class, where the replacement part has become more the norm... ie the licence bracket and air filters.

William, Is the 69 deep groove alternator pulley supposed to be gold cad, or silver cad. I picked up a gold cad one at a swap meet, but thought it was supposed to be silver cad. Tell me I lucked onto the correct one!

As for the air filter, Originals were hardware cloth (wire mesh) cut at a diagonal to form diamonds. I'm told the Chevelle (LS6, I think) had hardware cloth cut straight to form squares. I've seen a few of both. Later ones were expanded metal that was stretched to form diamonds.

William, Is the 69 deep groove alternator pulley supposed to be gold cad, or silver cad. I picked up a gold cad one at a swap meet, but thought it was supposed to be silver cad. Tell me I lucked onto the correct one!


My bad; I stated it backwards. Service alternator pulleys are gold; OE were silver. No matter; the service part is not correct for any car.

One of our customers had a business that rebuilt generators, alternators and starters for automotive and aviation. He bought the exact same #3829387 pulley from the manufacturer for about $8; GMPD cost at the time was about $17.

My bad; I stated it backwards. Service alternator pulleys are gold; OE were silver. No matter; the service part is not correct for any car.

Just curious if the same thing applied for the brake booster?

They were always gold cad far as I know but not how they look on todays' overdone restorations. We had several NOS boosters and they were far duller. The quality of the plating was not good; occasional streaks, the shade of gold also varied.

Careful with NOS GM accessory retrofit booster kits as they are almost always Bendix. They are black and do not look same as Delco.

Thanks Bill. I asked because I noticed the brake booster on Richard Maksyms 1821 mile RS/Z looked argent in color.

They were always gold cad far as I know but not how they look on todays' overdone restorations. We had several NOS boosters and they were far duller. The quality of the plating was not good; occasional streaks, the shade of gold also varied.

Careful with NOS GM accessory retrofit booster kits as they are almost always Bendix. They are black and do not look same as Delco.

William... I was told by a plater that all of the gold cad boosters fade with time and if you went back 40 years in time ... the original booster would have had a brighter color than what you observe on the original boosters that we see today. If we take a look at the replates in 40 years they will look much more faded..

William... I was told by a plater that all of the gold cad boosters fade with time and if you went back 40 years in time ... the original booster would have had a brighter color than what you observe on the original boosters that we see today. If we take a look at the replates in 40 years they will look much more faded..

That's true; gold cad fades over time. What I specifically don't like about todays' "restored" boosters is how shiny they are. I know some restorers polish them prior to plating much like show chrome. Looks nice but does not look OE. I had a local production plating firm do one and it still looks great 20 years later-not at all shiny. Thats how they were.

Here's my original. Never been touched except to wash it every ten years or so. Same for the MC cover. Note the blue paint smear on the edge of the booster. Wonder what it meant????
http://epitomesrebuild.com/images/147.JPG

Quote-"I asked because I noticed the brake booster on Richard Maksyms 1821 mile RS/Z looked argent in color."

IMHO todays replated boosters are way too shiny, the original booster on my 42,000 mile 69 Z also has a different tinge from todays replates. Same deal with 5361992 smog check valves, I have seen some boxed NOS ones and they are dull also.
I have also had a lot of boosters apart in the last 25 years( I worked at a Corvette/Camaro Restoration Shop) and the insides of the boosters are way duller than todays replates, and almost a different tinge as HYLTON observed. I kinda doubt that the insides would fade like the outside, considering they are sealed from the elements.
I have a friend who has a 6,000 mile 67 435HP Corvette and his booster is also not as Gold as todays boosters.
Maybe there was a different plating process back in the 60,s? HMMM,? JWOL

Ths shinier gold plating today is zinc. I don't know where you can get cad (cadmium) plating done now. It is an EPA problem.