Tweet
The AIM shows the smaller grommet and washer on the bottom and the larger grommet and washer on top. When I removed my shocks I had one washer under the upper bushing on top of the A arm. It has a flange that sticks down into the opening for shock in the A arm. There was one on the drivers side, none on the passenger side. This is not show in the AIM. Can anyone tell me if this washer in that position is right. Thank you Dale
-
-
Re: 67 front shocks
Dale-----
I'm not sure that I'm understanding what you're trying to describe. However, I'll respond thusly: first of all, the front shock upper mount is in no way connected to the upper a-arm. It is attached at the bottom to the LOWER a-arm and at the top to the frame tower.
On the UPPER side of the frame tower should be the large, convex retainer GM #3790342. Between it and the top of the frame tower should be bushing GM #3790342. This bushing has the extension on only ONE side and that side goes DOWN, into the hole on the frame tower through which the shock rod passes.
The LOWER side of the frame tower hole should also have a retainer and bushing, but they are different. The retainer should be the smaller OD type which are usually supplied with shocks and which have the hex recess in the center. This retainer seats on the machined area of the shock rod. Between it and the lower surface of the frame tower is a rubber bushing. This bushing is different than the upper bushing. It has extensions on BOTH sides. This bushing is usually the type supplied with the shocks.
If you don't have the lower retainer and bushings, they are currently GM #25628204 and GM #6270752, respectively.
If someone left out the lower bushing and retainer on one side, then that shock has been essentially useless.In Appreciation of John Hinckley -
thanks Joe *NM*
Comment
-
66 Front Shock Hardware
Does the 66 use the same front shock hardware as the 67.Comment
-
Re: 66 Front Shock Hardware
Yup, '66 uses the same hardware as the '67.Comment
-
Re: 66 Front Shock Hardware
John and Larry-----
....and the same as 68-82, too.In Appreciation of John HinckleyComment
Comment