I took my 65 apart 11 years and three move ago. Some of my parts from different Corvettes have gotten mixed. I'm putting together the trailing arms and I have two sets of shock supports. One type is bright plated(cad?) with no parts numbers. The other set appears almost "as forged" finish but with part numbers as follows; 3829265-6, the second has 3820929. Which are correct? Any help from you numbers experts would be appreciated. Jerry
-
-
Re: Shock support part numbers
Jerry -
'65 A.I.M. says 3820929 & 930 are the originals. -
Re: Shock support part numbers
Jerry-----
Well, it depends whether or not your car was equipped with F-41 suspension. If it WAS so-equipped, then your car was originally fitted with the GM #3829265 and GM #3829266 shafts. However, if your car WAS NOT equipped with F-41, then it was originally built with the GM #3820929 and GM #3820930 shafts. If you compare these two sets of shafts you will note that there is a significant difference in the configuration of each.
After the mid-70s, the 3829265/3829266 shafts replaced the 3820929/3820930 for SERVICE of all 63+ Corvette applications. They remain available to this very day, although current SERVICE versions no longer have the part number on the raw forged portion of the piece.In Appreciation of John HinckleyComment
-
Re: Mixed bag
My car originally equiped with F 41 so that explains why I have a 3829265. The other is a 929. I can see the difference in the two. So at some point in my moving and rebuilding of other Vettes I may have gotten them mixed with some other but I think that this was a pair. Maybe the factory did a little mixing a matching? I've owned the car for 30 years and I'm not aware of either of these being replaced. Aaaaa the joys of restoration research. Thankyou for your help. I had never heard of a 295 in the literature.Comment
-
Re: Aim documentation on F 41.
I looked through my 65 AIM and did not see the instructions for the parts difference between the standard suspension and the F41. Did the documentaion fo into an AIM? Where do I find this?Comment
-
Re: Aim documentation on F 41.
Jerry------
I don't think that you'll find this info in the AIM. As I recall, the F-41 section is rather "skimpy". Usually, for parts like the shock mount shafts it will say "installs same as production" and "see bill of materials". The "bill of materials" are where the part numbers are for the different pieces that replace the PRODUCTION pieces. A lot of folks would like to get their hands on the "bill of materials" documents. But, not many folks have been able to.In Appreciation of John HinckleyComment
-
Re: Mixed bag
Jerry-----
If you have one 3829265 and one 3820929, you've got a problem. Both of these pieces are LEFT SIDE pieces. It would not be possible that both came off of the same car.
As far as having one factory installed HD shaft and 1 non-HD, I doubt it. Anything is possible, but the fact that it's often necessary to replace these shafts makes me think that if one finds such a situation, it's like a result of one of the two being replaced "somewhere along the way".
There are 3 reasons that these need to be replaced and it's a QUITE COMMON occurrence:
1) corrosion damage. The "legs" of the shafts often suffer from corrosion damage, especially the shock-mount leg. Although California cars have a reputation for rust-free chassis, even on California cars this part will corrode;
2) End mushrooming. These shafts often become "tightly engaged" to the spindle support forks as a result of even minor corrosion. In an effort to remove the shafts by pounding on the end of the large leg of the shaft, increasingly larger hammers are used and no thread protection tool is used. This results in mushrooming of the end of the shaft, totally destroying it since the cotter pin hole is soon "mashed over". At this point, the shaft is scrap metal. Pounding continues to no avail, though, in order to just get the darn thing out; then, the "mechanic" proceeds to the 3rd way that shafts are destroyed;
3) Sawzall removal. After relentless pounding to no avail and finally recognizing that the shaft has been destroyed anyway, the "mechanic" employs a Sawzall or similar tool to cut them out. Then a replacement, new or used, is necessary.
The botom line: a LOT of these shafts need to be replaced.In Appreciation of John HinckleyComment
-
Re: Mixed bag
In addition to what Mr Lucia stated, the additional offset of the F41 bracket is to allow clearance for the larger diameter F41 shock absorber. If you intend to use these shocks I belive the use of these brackets is a must.Comment
-
Re: Right/ left???
The 3829265 fits the right hand side and 3820929 fits the left. I guess I'm in search of a 3829266. IF anybodys has one I now need one. JerryComment
-
Re: Right/ left???
Jerry-----
If these 2 shafts fit on either side of your car, then I think that you are reading the number incorrectly on one of them. As a general rule with GM parts for which there are left and right configurations, the odd numbered part fits the left side and the even numbered part fits the right side. There are exceptions to this rule but these shafts, either the 3820929, 30 or the 3829265, 6 are NOT one of them. The odd-numbered part in the case of either set is the LEFT side part; the even-numbered part in the case of either set fits the RIGHT side.
If your "3829265" fits the right side, then what you are reading as the final digit is actually a "6" and not a "5". So, if this is, in fact, the case, you need a 3829265.In Appreciation of John HinckleyComment
-
Re:Righty tighty lefty loosy
In the orignal post in this thread I described the part number as 3829265-6. I'm wondering if this is how a 266 right hand is described? It definitely is a passenger(right) side shock mount. Does this make sense? Does anyone have some of these on their car?Comment
-
Re:Righty tighty lefty loosy
I have a box full and you are correct. The left and right F41 versions are made from the same casting. The difference from one side to the other is the machined "notch" which allows it to fit correctly into the respective (L or R) bearing support.Comment
-
Re:Going in circles(Thanks Sal)
Thankyou. This clears up the confusion. Now it makes sense. Now all I have to do is find a left one. JerryComment
Comment