OK Foss lake Discovery

[December]

In Oklahoma, they ought to be able to find someone who knows Chevy engines backwards and forwards.

But, it would be even better to get someone who worked in Detroit back in the day.

 

[PFF]

Most recent article to date OCt 27, 2013
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/loca...cle_e74f2d16-84f6-52e4-8d00-ee887f9375ae.html

 

[toddr]

http://www.autosafety.org/chevrolet-motor-mounts

This link details what can happen if the left motor mount were to break as the defect could cause them to. So what if the kids were doing what kids in a muscle car do...drive a little too fast....do donuts on the boat ramp...rev the engine in forward and reverse....the motions cause the weak motor mounts to give way and the result is the car in the water. I really think this should be looked into rather than this being a murder. It sounds to me like the perfect storm of events for these kids to end up in the lake.

Hi, this is my first post here and I'd have to respectfully disagree in regard to the motor mounts. The Williams kid camaro looks to be an extreme bare bones, no frills coupe. As in, I doubt it was even a v8 car (more likely an in line 250 cubic inch six cylinder), which would make sense considering his meager wage at a supermarket. However, after removing/installing my share of chevrolet small and big-block engines, I can assure you that those mounts (regardless of that obscure safety alert) were more than adequate. I can see possible failure due to an impact, such as I believe was the case when the car impacted the water (the damage to the clutch fan also supported that)

Keep in mind also, that as early as 1967, factory mounts were being used at the NHRA winternationals in fairly stock camaros such as that run by Bill "Grumpy" Jenkins. Jenkins actually won the '67 winternationals in a '67 camaro that went undefeated along with the factory mounts. Some of those v8 engines put out an incredible amount of torque using the factory mounts, (a lot of twisting force distributed to the right rear of the cars) if they had been that prone to failure en-mass, it would have been a disaster for General Motors at the time. I also seen mention of Ralph Nadar's name in that alert, Nadar at the time was a severe critic of safety back then, he wrote a book entitled "unsafe at any speed" which essentially killed the chevrolet corvair. Point is, many of the complaints issued by Nadar were unfounded because that was his agenda then, which may explain the recall/alert.

I also read somewhere back about seat belts in another thread in relation to this. Seat belts were pretty much standard issue by then. What you had was a simple lap belt, and up above tucked into the headliner was an optional shoulder belt you could use in conjunction creating a three point harness. Regardless, the majority of drivers did not belt up back then. In my own personal opinion in both cases, it was more so a dangerous stretch of road unfamiliar to the drivers that contributed to the cars entering the lake. Truly a sad story though no matter how you look at it.

 

[wfgodot]

Hi toddr and welcome to WS.

 

[killarney rose]

Hi, this is my first post here and I'd have to respectfully disagree in regard to the motor mounts. The Williams kid camaro looks to be an extreme bare bones, no frills coupe. As in, I doubt it was even a v8 car (more likely an in line 250 cubic inch six cylinder), which would make sense considering his meager wage at a supermarket. However, after removing/installing my share of chevrolet small and big-block engines, I can assure you that those mounts (regardless of that obscure safety alert) were more than adequate. I can see possible failure due to an impact, such as I believe was the case when the car impacted the water (the damage to the clutch fan also supported that)

Keep in mind also, that as early as 1967, factory mounts were being used at the NHRA winternationals in fairly stock camaros such as that run by Bill "Grumpy" Jenkins. Jenkins actually won the '67 winternationals in a '67 camaro that went undefeated along with the factory mounts. Some of those v8 engines put out an incredible amount of torque using the factory mounts, (a lot of twisting force distributed to the right rear of the cars) if they had been that prone to failure en-mass, it would have been a disaster for General Motors at the time. I also seen mention of Ralph Nadar's name in that alert, Nadar at the time was a severe critic of safety back then, he wrote a book entitled "unsafe at any speed" which essentially killed the chevrolet corvair. Point is, many of the complaints issued by Nadar were unfounded because that was his agenda then, which may explain the recall/alert.

I also read somewhere back about seat belts in another thread in relation to this. Seat belts were pretty much standard issue by then. What you had was a simple lap belt, and up above tucked into the headliner was an optional shoulder belt you could use in conjunction creating a three point harness. Regardless, the majority of drivers did not belt up back then. In my own personal opinion in both cases, it was more so a dangerous stretch of road unfamiliar to the drivers that contributed to the cars entering the lake. Truly a sad story though no matter how you look at it.

I too, respectfully disagree. Just because a probable defect exists, doesn't mean the mount will break. I had several friends when I was in HS who owned 69 camaros which by then were 4-5 years old, and they never had problems with their motor mounts. So it stands to reason that the cars you worked on didnt neccesarily have broken motor mounts.

I have loved and read and dreamed of Camaros since I owned my very first one back in 73. You can tell a lot about one just by looking at it. But just because that car came out of the lake looking bare bones doesn't mean that you know what it had under the hood. I've seen too many that looked bare bones just like that but it had a powerful v-8 under the hood. The owner was more interested in how fast it would run, not so much with h ow it looked.

 

[toddr]

I actually had a defective mount in a '77 chevy short wheel base truck that was lowered. You could visually see it affect the stance of the truck (and feel it give to the forces put upon it while driving) I was barely out of my teens then and instantly had it replaced (it was passenger side) I had heard stories that in severe cases the engine could jump into the radiator under failure of the mount, which I'm sure is plausible. I'm not sure why the mount on the truck failed, but I received it on it's last legs pretty well and had no idea the amount of abuse it had been through prior. Generally though, those are some pretty thick/sturdy bolts per mount even in factory applications. There's not much unbolting involved to remove one of those older chevy engines (under ten bolts total)

 

[dotr]

Welcome to Ws.toddr and thanks for the info.
Ah, high school , back in the day misspent my youth dashing about in my then boyfriend's white Camaro with orange racing stripes, wish now that I had paid closer attention to the CAR!! lol.

 

[toddr]

But just because that car came out of the lake looking bare bones doesn't mean that you know what it had under the hood. I've seen too many that looked bare bones just like that but it had a powerful v-8 under the hood. The owner was more interested in how fast it would run, not so much with how it looked.

we can solve that mystery just by the vin (vehicle idetification) on the Doe network, breaks down as follows --

VIN 124379L517123

'69 camaro v8 coupe (if I'm deciphering it correctly) out of the Van Nuys (California) assembly plant. Most likely the 327 or 350. I say that because of the base looking grille on the car. The COPO camaros featured the same grille, but considering the rarity and four-thousand dollar price tag in 1970 dollars, I think those were a tad out of reach for Jimmy. What's interesting is that nose stripe however, I don't recall ever seeing one quite like it in fact.

 

[killarney rose]

So it had a factory V-8. It's pretty safe to assume that it wasnt changed out to a v-6.

This s a copy of the recall I came across. Tried to post it earlier, but photobucket has been down for maintenance this afternoon.

Not sure if this is the actual letter or more of a memo. Came across it on a Camaro forum. I could get lost there.......

 

[toddr]

As far as that memo goes, I'm pretty sure that's just a matter of form to cover GM from liability. The motor mounts in all of those cars were pretty much similar (olds/buick/pontiac/gmc) I don't even recall stories of that from the 50s era cars...

As far as the engine in the car, it was in fact a V8 according to the vin. Which type, you'd need access to the numbers on the engine block, the body tag wouldn't divulge that, what was known as the 'protecto' plate and build sheet I'm sure are long gone. Then again, I've seen the build sheets sealed in plastic and wedged in between the gas tank and body before (but that was somewhat of a rare practice)

The car itself is interesting. Honestly, it looks like that grille could be cleaned up and reused (I'm not entirely sure on that of course, I'm sure it'd be next impossible to secure in place after that), but it does look that way. Also, even though that body style is regarded as a 1969 model, they produced those into 1970, so some are technically regarded as 1970 camaros.

I believe Jimmy's was a trade in (early to mid 1969 car), you can see the raised white letter tires from the factory are gone, having been replaced by some 'off-brand' white walls. Today if it was in the same condition it was in Nov of 1970, easily approaching the forty-thousand dollar mark regardless of which v8, just due to the originality of it and unmolested body.

I read up on this subject across the net (how the car accident might have unfolded), and somebody on another forum provided google earth shots of the approach to that boat landing, and it was to where you just hit a rise without any indicator of the lake on the short descent once you breasted it on the other side. easily from that you can see at night, with a fairly new driver who had just received his license, maybe some excessive speed and lack of adequate lighting, he didn't see the water until it was just too late. If I can dig those gps pics up, I'll repost them here.

 

[toddr]

okay, as promised...Keep in mind of course, although the general area layout would be the same, the photos are recent as opposed to an accurate depiction of 40 years before.

Here's an aerial shot of the lake and ramp, green arrow indicates both cars presumed approach (click each image for full size resolution) --



In the next two follow up shots we have the approach itself (notice even by todays standards how barren the roadside is) lack of any street fluorescents even today and if you ascended that crest at night at excessive speed unfamiliar to that area, I could even see how today you could come close to the threshold of the lake in not paying full attention.





Lastly is the view of the downgrade approach/run up to the ramp.



Getting a visual really cleared up any lingering doubts I had. Similar to the Elisa Lam tragedy earlier this year, I believe it was merely the case of tragic misadventure. The added tragedy was the mother of Thomas Rios not finding out, then again perhaps that too played out for the best, because I'm sure however dim, she carried a small spark of hope within her that was never fully extinguished.

 

[Markybug]

Very interesting re the engine mounts ,picture yourself , new muscle car , friends onboard , out cruising about... Maybe speeding to show off and a mount breaks forcing the accelarator open and disaster?

If that turns out to be what happened could the families claim against GM?

 

[vulture]

Defective parts sound like a possibility. I can say from experience that a hard shake can also cause a shift lever to go into neutral when you don't want it to, though I have no experience with that particular type of car.

When I was in college, I was on my way to a caving trip with some fellow students and the driver was going way too fast on a rural road and came up suddenly to a T intersection. It was dark and no one else was around. We were planning on camping in a barn for two nights and going caving during the day. This was before cell phones so no one would have known if something happened to us for about three days. We skidded right into a field. No damage to the car or us. If we had hit something we could have been killed, if there had been a body of water there (we were near the Missississippi River but not right next to it) we could have been killed and still missing to this day. It's easy to see how it could happen.

 

[toddr]

Very interesting re the engine mounts ,picture yourself , new muscle car , friends onboard , out cruising about... Maybe speeding to show off and a mount breaks forcing the accelarator open and disaster?

If that turns out to be what happened could the families claim against GM?

actually, no...you'd have to impact something pretty hard to bust a mount loose (I'm just being realistic)...Now if the weld cracked that secures the mount to the frame? The engine may tilt, but the gas pedal is secured to the carb with a tension cable (it would have to tilt an insane amount to disconnect and snap the linkage)...In effect, you'd have to impact something pretty hard. I'm not saying it's impossible, but a stuck throttle would more likely result from a spring or linkage failure than it would be a motor mount from excessive speed. Hope that helps...

 

[Markybug]

actually, no...you'd have to impact something pretty hard to bust a mount loose (I'm just being realistic)...Now if the weld cracked that secures the mount to the frame? The engine may tilt, but the gas pedal is secured to the carb with a tension cable (it would have to tilt an insane amount to disconnect and snap the linkage)...In effect, you'd have to impact something pretty hard. I'm not saying it's impossible, but a stuck throttle would more likely result from a spring or linkage failure than it would be a motor mount from excessive speed. Hope that helps...

Ah thank you , i assumed it could open the throttle if the mounts broke.

Do we know if there was damage to the rear of car from a fast entry into the water? ( the back has severe damage but I'm sure that was from pulling it out ?)

 

[December]

I thought the way Jimmy's car looked was kind of different. I also thought I'd seen such a car before, but when i looked at Camaros of that era, nothing looked exactly like his.

So, I wonder if it was a dealer special paint job/package. This could also explain why the tires were changed. However, I was under the impression that it wasn't too good of an idea to change tires on performance cars. You need to keep the same type of tires on them or they may not drive as well. but, I could be wrong about that.

At this late date, if it was murder (and I do not think it is, so IF IF IF) the only way they'd know is if they found some sign that the victims had been harmed or killed before they went into the water (I have not heard of any such evidence being found) or signs that the car had been severely tampered with (I have not heard of any such evidence being found) or someone would have to give a detailed confession of pushing/chasing them into the lake (no such thing has happened... this seems to be the only option left).

But, realistically, it seems all of the damage to their bodies and (perhaps) all of the damage to the car can be attributed to driving into the lake. Someone said the lake was particularly high during the time period the older Chevy with the three adults found its way into the lake and those people unfortunately died. Perhaps the lake was still high when Jimmy encountered it.

I think the murder theory is left over from the red Camaro with California plates found burned nearby. And that does seem to be a weird thing that happened. But, when that theory was born, no one knew where Jimmy's car even was. Now that it has been found in the lake... it is harder to see any connection between the two cars except for them both being Camaros.

I do sort of think there is something about Jimmy's car that is significant, but I am not sure what it could be.

However, the fact he'd only gotten it six days before. He wasn't an experienced driver let alone used to this car. I had a 350 Chevy V-8 in a heavier car than Jimmy's and that car could MOVE. I could drive along at 90 mph, no problem and this was NOT a recent model car when I had it (I kind of miss it sometimes). Chevy wasn't kidding around with those V-8 engines. In a car like Jimmy's (unless there was something wrong with it) he could have been going really fast when he realized he was about to run out of road. That is so sad to me.. these friends out having fun and then poof! it's all over.

More confusing, I still think, is the older car with the three adults. That car was known to have mechanical problems. So, there is no indication they were driving all that fast. Sure, anyone can make a mistake and the water was high, etc. But, the if the car malfunctioned and just rolled in.. it seems someone would have gotten out of it or tried to do so because they would be less likely to be knocked out due to force caused by speed of impact.

 

[toddr]

I thought the way Jimmy's car looked was kind of different. I also thought I'd seen such a car before, but when i looked at Camaros of that era, nothing looked exactly like his.

So, I wonder if it was a dealer special paint job/package. This could also explain why the tires were changed. However, I was under the impression that it wasn't too good of an idea to change tires on performance cars. You need to keep the same type of tires on them or they may not drive as well. but, I could be wrong about that.

There was a number of ways you could option a 1969 camaro, including 'hideaway' headlights (all sorts of dealer optioned stripe/cosmetic packages) -- what was known as the hockey stripe down the side, 'sport' stripes down the hood & trunk, the 'mustache' stripe over the nose...The stripe on Jimmy's car was somewhat rare (not many checked that particular option box off on the order sheet), the rest of the car was fairly common. I see no evidence that the car featured any sort of the performance packages of the day -- ss/rs (super-sport/rally-sport), or a z/28, the bowtie on the grille pretty well indicates no frills, 'bare bones' camaro...

As far as the tires, tires of the day were deplorable bias-plys, even on the extreme performance/muscle cars of that era. Random example: the '68 chevelle with the top tier 396 of the day would only run into the 14s with the factory bias-plys -- simply replacing the rear tires with a set of cassler 'slicks' would take over a second or more off of the trap speed (to gain over a second by bolting on a set of tires is significant in 1/4 mile times) -- 1/4 mile: 1320 feet...

The factory 17 inch radials on my girlfriends tame little 2010 dodge caliber have way more grab than the bias-plys that came on the quickest of the muscle cars. Speaking of which, muscle cars were designed to be quick as opposed to fast. Meaning, all of the impressive ones of the day were geared to top out at under 120 mph (emphasis was to get up to speed quick as opposed to perform at a top speed). As far as the older car, again if you consider the road -- it's pretty well a blind rise, meaning even at 45 mph an elderly driver might not have enough road left to react in time to avoid the water. And the '53 chevy is long before any sort of safety implements such as padded dashes, power steering/brakes, and seat belts. Safety really was an after thought altogether until Robert McNamara became the president of Ford motor company in the early sixties, prior to his appointment of secretary of defense under Kennedy.

 

[toddr]

Do we know if there was damage to the rear of car from a fast entry into the water? ( the back has severe damage but I'm sure that was from pulling it out ?)

Yeah, the car literally pulled apart (almost in half) during the recovery. 40 years in a lake is going to make the sheet metal as brittle as an egg shell. If you remember the Tulsa Plymouth that was recovered from an underground, concrete vault (time capsule) in 2007 (the vault was compromised and took on water) -- that car looked similar after 20 some years submerged in water (the vault was likely to have cracked in the early eighties during construction at street level above it) -- you could literally poke your pinky finger through the body panels. Tulsa Plymouth --

link: [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miss_Belvedere"]Miss Belvedere - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

 

[stillwatersc]

The factory 17 inch radials on my girlfriends tame little 2010 dodge caliber have way more grab than the bias-plys that came on the quickest of the muscle cars. Speaking of which, muscle cars were designed to be quick as opposed to fast. Meaning, all of the impressive ones of the day were geared to top out at under 120 mph (emphasis was to get up to speed quick as opposed to perform at a top speed). As far as the older car, again if you consider the road -- it's pretty well a blind rise, meaning even at 45 mph an elderly driver might not have enough road left to react in time to avoid the water. And the '53 chevy is long before any sort of safety implements such as padded dashes, power steering/brakes, and seat belts. Safety really was an after thought altogether until Robert McNamara became the president of Ford motor company in the early sixties, prior to his appointment of secretary of defense under Kennedy.

Wow thanks. You are contributing so much to this discussion. Appreciate it.

 

[kline]

Yeah, the car literally pulled apart (almost in half) during the recovery. 40 years in a lake is going to make the sheet metal as brittle as an egg shell. If you remember the Tulsa Plymouth that was recovered from an underground, concrete vault (time capsule) in 2007 (the vault was compromised and took on water) -- that car looked similar after 20 some years submerged in water (the vault was likely to have cracked in the early eighties during construction at street level above it) -- you could literally poke your pinky finger through the body panels. Tulsa Plymouth --

link: Miss Belvedere - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I remember that Time Capsule story...what a heartbreaker!
Kind of Ironic that was also Oklahoma.