[KevinK7]

...Just curious what you think about the "numbers matching". (No I'm not buying the car...).

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...MakeTrack=true

[Meanchicken]

I was under the impression that ALL of the SS models came with 12 bolts.
The posi was not always there (optional) but all performance models (Z/28 ans SS) were multi leaf (3-5 leaf) 12 bolts.

Correct???

Perhaps the mono's and 10 bolt were swapped in at the same time.....?

Tim

[DanW]

10-bolt and mono-leaf incorrect as said above. The heads on the motor are not correct. In addition, the numbers stamped on the block are very suspicious. There there are two different "4" fonts and they seem too big.

It had manual drum brakes (now power drum) looking at the short front brake line and crooked distribution block that's missing the mounting bracket. They just added the booster and stretched the lines. Not that this detail would exclude it from being an SS, just an observation.

It's a nice looking car, but I wouldn't buy it as a numbers matching SS.

[tumper]

I agree that it is a nice looking car but from what I remember ALL SS cars came with the 5-leaf spring packs,always 1-more than the z and a 12 bolt to match. The price as of right now is not bad at all but as said I would not buy as a correct numbes matching car.

[mox67]

It's always been my understanding that all first gen "SS" camaros got a 12 bolt rear end. I find it somewhat hard to believe that anyone would put a factory gear ratio of 3.08 behind a 4 speed manual. That gear ratio would make much more sense coming from that factory behind a 3speed / powerglide. Again not proof, but makes you think.


To quote the page the guy links

Rear Axle Data:
For 1967, the L30/M20 "standard" rear axle ratio selection of 3.31 was identical to the L48. In 1968 the standard ratio for the L30/M20 changed to the higher top end 3.07 ratio, which the L48 used for an "economy" ratio instead of the 2.73 ratio used in the L30/M20. Both used 3.55 gearing for the "performance" ratio in both years. The designations of Standard, Economy, and Performance in the following tables apply only to the L30/M20. While the L30/M20 and L48 were only produced with the 12-bolt ring gear (barring an unusual special order), the rear axle data below attempt to summarize all documented rear axle codes for all 1967 and 1968 Camaros.

That sounds to me like a standard (AKA non-SS) car got a 3.08 ratio. The "performance" models (aka SS) got 3.55.



But again, I could be wrong.

[impreza13]

10 bolt rear with mono and 308's that's what my 67 with a two speed has. prob. no significance. i think that the car is beautiful and as long as it doesn't exceed more than 20 or so i think that a guy would be happy. it cracks me up sometimes when you see a nice redone car whether it's a standard or a z. and you hear the guy say oh that aint worth 20 well put one together.. we'll see how much juice you can squeeze out of your lemon. lol

[WildBillyT]

One of the CRG guys can correct me on this one but I remember seeing data that said some L48 SS cars came with a PG and a 10 bolt multileaf.

[mox67]

Hmm, out of curiosity what are the advantages of changing multi-leaf springs to a single leaf, as the seller said has been done on this car?

Originally Posted by impreza13

10 bolt rear with mono and 308's that's what my 67 with a two speed has. prob. no significance. i think that the car is beautiful and as long as it doesn't exceed more than 20 or so i think that a guy would be happy. it cracks me up sometimes when you see a nice redone car whether it's a standard or a z. and you hear the guy say oh that aint worth 20 well put one together.. we'll see how much juice you can squeeze out of your lemon. lol

I will agree with you somewhat. But look at it this way, if the guy is willing to try and decieve the buyer about the car being an SS to get a couple more bucks, what else is the guy willing to do. How do we know the seller didnt steal parts from another car and throw it on this one? Maybe he stamped all of those date codes on the car itself? Maybe the transmission or engine is 200 miles away from blowing up, but has no detectable problems.

I think everyones point is: If hes being decietful about the version of car that he has, what else is he willing to be decietful about?

Law enforcement uses this type of "deduction" all the time. Looking at past criminal histories, lieing about alibies, etc.

***DISCLAIMER, I'M NOT SAYING THE ABOVE AUCTION IS FRAUD IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM, I HAVE NO IDEA!!!

[elcamino72]

Mox, I think you hit the nail on the head ... what else is this guy willing to be decietful about? That is why I started the Collector Car Fraud section of law here at my law firm exactly for guys who get burnt buying antique, classic or collector automobiles that are misrepresented and they come to find out later that what they bought it's what they bargained for. Check out the website for more information, it may help someon you know down the road - www.dcdlaw.net/carfraud.htm

[WildBillyT]

Originally Posted by impreza13

10 bolt rear with mono and 308's that's what my 67 with a two speed has. prob. no significance. i think that the car is beautiful and as long as it doesn't exceed more than 20 or so i think that a guy would be happy. it cracks me up sometimes when you see a nice redone car whether it's a standard or a z. and you hear the guy say oh that aint worth 20 well put one together.. we'll see how much juice you can squeeze out of your lemon. lol

All '67s had mono leaf springs. Then they had wheel hop problems and had to add radius rods to keep from breaking springs.

Taken from the CRG:

http://www.camaros.org/suspen.shtml#MonoVsMultiSprings


Q: [23-Dec-1998] Update: What determined whether a Camaro got mono- or multi-leaf springs?

A: All 6-cylinder cars for all 3 years came with monoleaf springs (except for 1969 JL8 4-wheel disc brake cars - yes, JL8 was available on all models though few were sold).

All 1967 models used monoleaf design rear springs (however, with different spring rates and load ratings).

For 1968, only models with the 12-bolt rear end were selected for multi-leaf springs. This included all SS models, the Z-28, and the L30/M20 327ci-275HP/4-speed. All other 1968 models used monoleaf springs.

In 1969 all 12-bolt axles plus all 350ci engines received multi-leaf springs.


Q: [18-Jul-2002] Update: What models received 12-bolt axles?

A: 12-bolt axles were installed on all SS-396s, all SS-350s (with possible exceptions in 1969 noted below), and all Z-28s. In addition, 12-bolt axles were installed on the following cars:

1967-8 L30/M20 cars from approximately Dec 1966 through the end of the 1968 model year.
All models with the 1969 factory 4-wheel disc brake JL8 option.
1969 cars with the LM1 engine. It appears that the 12 bolt was used with all 4-speed and automatic transmissions. Use on the manual 3-speed transmission cars is unknown.
1969 cars with the L65 engine (which replaced the LM1 engine) and 4 speed transmission. Data is erratic on this drivetrain combination, some cars have 10 bolts, some have 12 bolts. Please contact us if you have a car with this drivetrain.
Note: GM documentation indicates that 1969 SS-350s and LM1s with automatic transmissions may have received a 10-bolt rear axle. So far only SS-350 cars with powerglides have been observed with 10 bolt axles. Please contact us if you have a car with this drivetrain.

[DanW]

This car was previously up for sale on ebay earlier this month:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1968-...QQcmdZViewItem

Got to $24,700 -- reserve not met.

[TOM BARKLEY]

Om a 69 ss396 with m20 isnt the standard ratio a 3.31 economy is 3.07 and perf 3.55 but you might not be able to get 355 w/a/c ??

[68 Ragtop]

This is a very nice looking car, but I would have to ask what numbers match?
The VIN on the deck is the only thing shown in the auction and to me it looks like the numbers are not correctly spaced. What about the casting dates and assembly dates? I have never seen a 10 bolt in a 68 4 speed 350SS. Even non SS 327/275 4sp cars got the multi leaf 12 bolt, so no way those numbers match. Also, never seen a 3 leaf spring or a 10 bolt with multi leafs on a first gen. What about the interior and paint codes, red is a very popular color to change to, and the seats look like they have deluxe covers in am otherwise standard interior. For the kind of money the reserve is set at (24,700+) there should be more answers than questions.

[foreverlookin]

How far back can one go Bryan? I had an expieriance to what you describe on your web site about 3 years ago. Would love to squeeze to SOB a little even if it just puts a scare into him! Oh yeah I did purchase the car in the U.S.

[Meanchicken]

Originally Posted by 68 Ragtop

Also, never seen a 3 leaf spring or a 10 bolt with multi leafs on a first gen.

The original rear in my 68 "SS" was a 12-bolt with 3 leafs. Reading around, 3 leafs were farely comon on SS first gens. Only the Z/28 came with 5 leaf 100% of the time from the factory. I just pulled it out of the car to replace with a Moser. I'm confident it's the orginal rear due to the condition and crud built up on it (including the clumps of greasy cat hair that matches the fur balls I've found all over this cars undercarriage and hiding places) and the springs and bushings matched the condition of all the other original parts on the car. There was no evidence of any work being done on the suspension or back half and chassis of the car. The guy I bought it from six years ago did not have any documentation to prove it was a true SS so I paid him $7K for what I considered a clean, rust free standard 68 California car.

He said it was originally a 350 TH350 SS. I bought it with a 396 and Muncie 4-speed in it. It still had small block frame stands and the original wiring harness was wired for a console and auto trans, so this appears to be a true story. It also had the 3/8 fuel line in it. Manual brakes and manual steering orignally also.

Anyway....I'm modifying the bejesus out of it and wasn't after a original car so I got what I paid for IMHO.

Tim