1967 Camaro Ignition Coils

[Lynn]

The Sun chart lists part 1115115 as the coil for 1967 327 275hp. Same for Corvette, Nova Chevelle and Camaro, with or without a.i.r.
For what it is worth, Primary resistance is 1.25 to 1.46 ohms. Card was printed in 1967, so I would hope it is the after 10-20-66 change.

I don't know that you will find a definitive source.

This page says 1115242 before 10-20-66 and 1115267 after 10-20-66 (for Chevelle, but should be same as Camaro).
http://chevellestuff.net/qd/coil_numbers.htm

Even the Sun sheet isn't always gospel. They got their info from GM and mistakes were made. For a 69 Z the Sun sheet gives a procedure to check out the thermo air cleaner mechanism. Probem? It didn't have one.

[red67]

Thanks both of you for responding quickly. I've got a lot of documentation and service manuals etc on my car and cars in general from the era that I've accumulated over the last 38 years that my wife and I have owned the car. My wife worked for awhile at a GM dealer in the parts department so I have old parts books and other literature from the 1970s. I just can't find anything on the 039 coil at all. There are two for sale on Ebay so they do exist other than mine. The car is at friend of mines having some work done so I can't take pictures of the coil or measure the resistance of the coil or the resistance wire today but I'll try and do that tomorrow.

Thanks for the link for the Sun data. I was able to download the picture of the 1967 327/275 data from Ebay where a sheet is for sale. I don't think the 115 coil was installed on the 327/275 in 1967 model year on the assembly line. I have not found any data to support that. Although, none to support the 039 coil either. However, during the fall of 1966 there was a shortage of V8 engines for the new Camaro, particularly the 350, so it is quite possible a number of different coils may have been used depending on supply. I doubt the line would have been shut down for a coil issue. An example is the transistor ignition coils where I believe about 7 different ones were used in production but only one was available for service.

As noted, it likely may be hard to determine what actually happened and what was installed. However, it would be nice if members here posted a note with their coil data. I know it is likely not a high priority to have the exact coil but it can affect how your car runs.

[red67]

Also, thanks for the link to the Chevelle site. Best info so far. The big problem with this type of data is where does it come from? A lot of the data is from assembly manuals, parts books and the like. These can be incorrect in a lot of cases. Data from owners with what they believe to be original cars seems to be the best. But, hard to obtain without a concentrated effort by those who are interested.

[clnovaparts]

Go to page 146 of the 67 Camaro info kit.

https://www.gmheritagecenter.com/gm-...tion-kits.html

[red67]

Thanks very much for the tip. I had thought about the AMA data and I believe I have a copy of the file somewhere as I'm pretty sure I downloaded it sometime in the past. I was going to check it but never got around to it. The AMA data was issued on 10-7-66 which is the same date as the harness number was changed in the AIM. Possibly a coincidence. Looks like the 039 coil on my car is original equipment and meets the date criteria. I'll measure the resistance of the ignition to coil wire tomorrow. Today I measured another 1967 Camaro harness I have and it measured 1.8 ohms exactly as per the early specifications. I also measured a 1968 Nova and a 1967 Firebird 400 that I have and both were 1.5 ohms. Not sure what the spec is for Firebird but the 1968 Nova spec is 1.35 ohms.

[red67]

I went and checked out the Camaro today to measure the ignition to coil wire for resistance but it was really too difficult to do quickly now that it is pretty much finally assembled with all the sheet metal and wiring in place. I'll have to do it another time. I now know that the wiring harness and the coil were all born together so I'm not worried about an incompatibility problems.

For those who are interested I've attached the AMA spec.