View Single Post
  #4  
Old 02-12-2017, 04:17 PM
William William is offline
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: New Berlin WI USA
Posts: 2,658
Thanks: 253
Thanked 2,912 Times in 811 Posts
Default Re: 69 Camaro 4 Row Radiator in L-78?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Kurt S</div><div class="ubbcode-body">4-core in 69 was required to have the curved neck to clear the AC.
There was no 4-core straight neck in 69. Only in 68 and in service. </div></div>

That’s probably correct. But, still entirely possible that Chevrolet did use a few production ’68 BB 4-core radiators for ’69 production; either due to a shortage or to consume excess service stock. Chevrolet has some history of doing this. For ’65 a Corvette could be ordered with drum brakes; stated reason was to consume inventories of drum brake parts.

In the August 1968 issue of Chevrolet Service News there is an article titled “1967 Camaro Manual Steering Gears Used in 1968 Production.”

<span style="font-style: italic">“In order to use up a surplus of 1967 Camaro manual steering gears, all 1968 Camaros equipped with manual steering built from May 22, 1968 to June 7, 1968 at the Norwood Assembly plant […N438680 through N448071] or from March 29,1968 […L338182 through L359064] were built with 1967 manual steering gears. “</span>

This was somewhat involved as it also required those cars to be built with 1967 pitman, steering and idler arms. That’s why it was noted in service news.

That Chevrolet did this tells me there was a process in place [cycle count?] to monitor inventory levels and take steps to consume excess. If they identified excess 1967 steering gears well into the 1968 model year it is entirely possible there were some leftover radiators. 1968 4 core radiators would be just fine in non-A/C applications. No need to note it anywhere.

ZL1 #68 N650643 below. Purchased 1988 from the original owner. Same radiator in COPO N651524.

__________________
Learning more and more about less and less...
Reply With Quote