63 AC fuel pump 4657 in judging manual

[John D.]

Re: 63 AC fuel pump 4657 in judging manual

I didn't read all the replies.I do know the two bottom screws are slotted black fillister scews. 10/32 x??
Todd. Txt me with the length of these screws please. John

[Tom R.]

Re: 63 AC fuel pump 4657 in judging manual

Todd,

Figure M 9.0 is supposed to be showing the "two cadmium or zinc plated recessed hex-head bolts with 7/16" heads". In addition to that picture showing the incorrect pump, it also doesn't show the 7/16" bolts. You can see an example of the recessed bolts (one shown on the left) on the pump in the picture below. By the way, that pump picture was also wrong in the V6 judging guide.

Chris
In your view, would the following correct the text?

Factory installed fuel pumps were manufactured by AC and attach to the block with two (1963) or four (1964) cadmium or zinc plated recessed hex-head bolts with 7/16" heads and integral lock washers. (M9.0 reference dropped)

[Gary B.]

Re: 63 AC fuel pump 4657 in judging manual

Chris
In your view, would the following correct the text?

Factory installed fuel pumps were manufactured by AC and attach to the block with two (1963) or four (1964) cadmium or zinc plated recessed hex-head bolts with 7/16" heads and integral lock washers. (M9.0 reference dropped)

[Chris M.]

Re: 63 AC fuel pump 4657 in judging manual

Chris
In your view, would the following correct the text?

Factory installed fuel pumps were manufactured by AC and attach to the block with two (1963) or four (1964) cadmium or zinc plated recessed hex-head bolts with 7/16" heads and integral lock washers. (M9.0 reference dropped)

Hi Tom.

I agree with what you wrote above for 1963 fuel pumps (for the pump itself). I have not restored any 1964 cars, so, you should get that info from someone that's restored 1964's to confirm the number of bolts, but I believe it to be the same. I can put you in touch with a couple of '64 restorers if needed. But there's more detail to describe. There's actually a plate between the pump and the block and pump is bolted to that with two bolts...so there are 4 in total in that area for '63. Getting this accurate and in a formal way presents some questions.


Tom, as the V7 "Manual Coordinator" maybe you could help the '63/'64 community understand the following questions regarding V7:



1. Is this NCRS forum the "Official" process for the '63/'64 team to collect feedback on corrections and improvements in the V7 manual? Todd asked this question above with no reply from the '63/'64 Team.


2. What was the process to collect and compile the corrections/suggested improvements that were submitted to Dave and Carlton since V6 was published in 2010? I'm aware of multiple NCRS individuals (many of which are master judges) that submitted well documented suggestions and improvements. In many cases, not a single one was included in the V7 TIMJG.


3. I would hope you and the rest of the '63/'64 team are aware by now, the V7 TIMJG has numerous errors, many of which are regressive in nature (correct in V6). I personally know of new NCRS members removing "original parts and components from their '63" and/or purchasing incorrect parts (very expensive parts) and in effect destroying the originality of their '63 Corvettes to ensure their car aligns with the errors in V7. Will corrections be published? If so, when will they be published? What's the process to get it right this time? If the corrections will not be published in a prompt manner, is there a communication NCRS will publish to help ensure the '63/'64 community stops "correcting" their original Corvettes to the V7 TIMJG?


Speaking for the '63/'64 NCRS community, we are anxiously waiting for your response to the above questions.


Chris

[Tom R.]

Re: 63 AC fuel pump 4657 in judging manual

Speaking for the '63/'64 NCRS community, we are anxiously waiting for your response to the above questions. Chris

This feels like an ambush and why team leaders typically do not participate in the tech forum...way too much sniping. And you don't speak nor represent the 63/64 community.

This is not a formal process nor is this forum an "official" process. Each team leader has their unique process for data collection and processing, all of which includes their core team who they look to for technical expertise. Some are more controlling than others but its typically shaped by the model years and the degree or availability of original cars to study and serve as benchmark vehicles. If the evidence is not compelling and among the team members, there is no consensus, then change does not occur. Let's face it...how many 63/64 cars out there have not been tinkered with? I know in the mid-1970s, there are many and we use them as benchmark vehicles.

It is an 18 month process and a process neither understood nor appreciated by the general membership...this is technical writing and clarity difficult to achieve with multiple years and numerous options to account for with each year. Your focus is a single 63 Z06 while the team is sorting out 63 vs. 64 and the various power team options. We get comments once a TIMJG is in print and within weeks it starts. We wonder where were they 18 months ago. The images have become an art form in and of itself with excessive of cell phone technology that produces marginal results. Newer ones do present images that are usable...examples above. But there is also the composition...camera flash, user reflections in chrome, too much lighting. etc. you get the point.

What is needed is a review process at the end of the 18 month review period with a fresh set of eyes to catch precisely what you've asked about...and that procedure is not in place. Understand, I leave the technical details for 63/64 to others such as this group represented here. But I do wish to understand the issues and why I ask for clarification. You can see here these blurbs lack clarity and posters asked for clarification along the way. Two screws vs. four screws or early 64 but where's the late 64? Or 63 only? Verification is a tedious process.

Frankly, I tell 1970 Corvette owners, if you believe the car came that way...don't touch it! Too often owners and judges want absolutes and there were few...this was manufacturing and production varied. Case in point...those 23 63 pilot production cars. Judges are expected to give owners the benefit of the doubt. Remember...the TIMJG is a guide...not an absolute. I guess if members are changing parts to accommodate the manual, then I wonder what are they chasing? Are they in doubt of their vehicle's originality?

[Chris M.]

Re: 63 AC fuel pump 4657 in judging manual

This feels like an ambush and why team leaders typically do not participate in the tech forum...way too much sniping. And you don't speak nor represent the 63/64 community.

This is not a formal process nor is this forum an "official" process. Each team leader has their unique process for data collection and processing, all of which includes their core team who they look to for technical expertise. Some are more controlling than others but its typically shaped by the model years and the degree or availability of original cars to study and serve as benchmark vehicles. If the evidence is not compelling and among the team members, there is no consensus, then change does not occur. Let's face it...how many 63/64 cars out there have not been tinkered with? I know in the mid-1970s, there are many and we use them as benchmark vehicles.

It is an 18 month process and a process neither understood nor appreciated by the general membership...this is technical writing and clarity difficult to achieve with multiple years and numerous options to account for with each year. Your focus is a single 63 Z06 while the team is sorting out 63 vs. 64 and the various power team options. We get comments once a TIMJG is in print and within weeks it starts. We wonder where were they 18 months ago. The images have become an art form in and of itself with excessive of cell phone technology that produces marginal results. Newer ones do present images that are usable...examples above. But there is also the composition...camera flash, user reflections in chrome, too much lighting. etc. you get the point.

What is needed is a review process at the end of the 18 month review period with a fresh set of eyes to catch precisely what you've asked about...and that procedure is not in place. Understand, I leave the technical details for 63/64 to others such as this group represented here. But I do wish to understand the issues and why I ask for clarification. You can see here these blurbs lack clarity and posters asked for clarification along the way. Two screws vs. four screws or early 64 but where's the late 64? Or 63 only? Verification is a tedious process.

Frankly, I tell 1970 Corvette owners, if you believe the car came that way...don't touch it! Too often owners and judges want absolutes and there were few...this was manufacturing and production varied. Case in point...those 23 63 pilot production cars. Judges are expected to give owners the benefit of the doubt. Remember...the TIMJG is a guide...not an absolute. I guess if members are changing parts to accommodate the manual, then I wonder what are they chasing? Are they in doubt of their vehicle's originality?

Hi Tom,

Thank you for the response. It's not an ambush nor sniping, just an honest set of questions that are being asked by many. I agree with your statement "What is needed is a review process at the end of the 18 month review period with a fresh set of eyes to catch precisely what you've asked about...and that procedure is not in place." - NCRS publishing should put that in place asap.

And a slight correction to your statement. My focus, and knowledge, is not on a "single '63 Z06" - that actually sounds like sniping to me. I'm not asking the questions for me, but for 20+ members (and I'm sure there are more) that I've spoken with regarding their concerns with V7.

Thanks again,

Chris

[Mike M.]

Re: 63 AC fuel pump 4657 in judging manual

totally agree with tom russo. mike mccagh

[Chris H.]

Re: 63 AC fuel pump 4657 in judging manual

This thread got me thinking bigger picture.

It would be nice to have some sort of official JG appendices area on this website, where as knowledge is gained, such as topics in this discussion board (63-64 fuel pump) ,the JGs could be updated "real-time" with the appendices or revisions or whatever we want to call the updates.

This way we wouldn't have to wait for the updates to be published in the next JG revision.

I'm sure some sort of official process could be implemented, for example final signoff by the Team Leader and then National Judging Chairman.

Then the updates can be posted in the "Sticky" section of this Discussion Board.