I recently picked up this coil and have a dumb newbie question. As illustrated below, do I need another of the square terminal 'washers' (for lack of a better term) on the negative terminal? It probably doesn't matter as a practical matter, but if you're going to be compulsive.......
-
-
Re: 091 coil terminal 'washers'?
Rob,
If you are complusive, you better find you another square washer. It came with two.
Regards,
JR -
Re: 091 coil terminal 'washers'?
OK Newbie guy, you also have the wrong plate or ( washer) original had a locking tang on one side , the tang fit in to the holes next to the post , keeping it aligned so that you could slide the wire on. Plus a lock washer and nut used.Comment
-
Re: 091 coil terminal 'washers'?
I also need one of those tanged square washers. Any idea on where to get one?
ChrisComment
-
Re: 091 coil terminal 'washers'?
Look in your friendly salvage (junk) yard that still has any older GM cars. I find them and pick them up even when I see that the coil is wrong for my needs. Usually the junk yard owner will not even consider charing you if you are buying other items. Email me and I will look to see if I have any in my parts box.Comment
-
Always good photo examples w/questions
Rob, I've got to ask you what camera and other photography details can you provide? The pictures you provide with your questions and examples are excellent.Comment
-
Re: Always good photo examples w/questions
Clare-
The camera is a Canon Powershot S500 (see it at http://www2.newegg.com/Product/Produ...82E16830120120). I use it almost exclusively in automatic point-n-shoot mode, so any good pictures that result are purely coincidental. The trick is that the camera is only 3.5 inches wide, so it fits into lots of nooks and crannies in the car, and it has an LCD screen, so you can thread it into tight spots and compose the shot at arm's length. The other nice thing is its macro mode, which focuses down to 2 inches. The only real secret is that I usually shoot about 5-6 pics of any given object, some with flash, and some without. Then I only post the ones that are actually in focus and where the flash doesn't obscure what I'm trying to show. You should see the BAD pics of the coil.....Comment
-
PS- (Photo tech)
The raw images off the camera are crazy, like 22x14 inches at 72 dpi. I bring them into Photoshop and resize, usually to 3x5 at 150 dpi, which makes for a reasonable file size that still fills the screen when posted on a discussion group. Sometimes I'll mess with brightness and contrast levels just to bring out a particular feature of what I'm trying to show, but the defaults from the camera are usually fine.Comment
-
Re: PS- (Photo tech)
I've got basically the same camera in the S410. I think the only differences are 4Mp vs 5Mp for the S500. I'll admit that I haven't mastered the camera or digital photography yet. You mentioned your raw images are huge. Did you know can set the camera for smaller files before taking the shots? You'll be able to take more shots pr card and the photos should be fine for web publication and normal sized prints. Unless you're enlarging to max size print there is no need for large files, so I've been told. I've read that at high ISO sensitivities the S500 is noisier than the S410.
I haven't tried Photoshop yet, just the Arcsoft Camera Suite software that came with the camera. I need to practice and experiment more. I've had some shots turn out excellent but have missed some macro details in other shots. Glad to hear you have alot of rejects, so do I. Sometimes I can't tell unless I download first. My seatbelt shots I forwarded to you are a good example. I thought they looked good on the LCD. Still haven't posted any on the site yet.
A digital camera is great to have. I can do shots, even with my limited ability, way beyond the capabilities of my old point and shoot 35mm. Very convenient to have.Comment
-
Maybe not, Roy...
According to NCRS member, Ken Kayser, in his Fall '95 Restorer article, Delco changed the Bakelite top of these coils in the 1961 era (who knows when the revised units actually got onto production Corvettes) by adding the squared anti-swivel shoulders on the bottom of the center tower adjacent to the +/- mounting pads. At the same time, Delco eliminated the early style washers with locking tangs that prevented the washers from spinning.
The coil shown is of the second generation configuration (HAS the shoulders + still has the recessed holes in the +/- terminal mounting pad to accept the locking tang on the older style washer). Evenutally (circa '66-67) the holes in the terminal mounting pads to accomodate the tanged locking washers were eliminated (3rd generation coil configuration).
So, if the poster's car is late '61 or later, the coil he shows with the non-tanged washers may actually be correct! That's IF you accept Ken Kayser's article and its research....Comment
-
Re: Maybe not, Roy...
agree with jack, disagree with roy. coil in photo should have tang-less square washer since its tower had the tabs in bakelite. mikeComment
-
Re: Maybe not, Roy...
Jack, I read the article and if I understand it the tang was not taken out until around '63 model year. Please read and let me know if I am wrong.
the coil did get the bosses sometime during the start of '61 model year as you stated.
ChrisComment
-
Re: PS- (Photo tech)
And... they're GREAT for taking pics as you disasseble something so you can put it back together !
JimComment
Comment