I did the painless system on my 67. It was ok, but I am in electronics. The
painless system uses the same color codes as the original harness and many
features of the new micro-fuse blocks in current production cars and trucks.
It comes down to a few questions like Brad said. What do you want such as 14
circuits? Do you think you can pigtail and splice the harness back in?
I was doing mine one evening and a skunk scampered by the garage door. We had
a few tense moments.
mike
--- On Thu, 7/10/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [Chevelle-list] 66 rewired
> To: chevelle-list@chevelles.net
> Date: Thursday, July 10, 2008, 9:29 AM
> I haven't completely rewired my car....but I've done
> a fair share of work on it. If you want to just rewire
> everything stock, I HIGHLY recommend M&H Wire
> Harness's. I used one of their harness's in my 66,
> and it was perfect. Colors the same as original, came with
> all the new clips/connectors, correct lengths, etc. I know
> that True-Connections, www.true-connections.com stocks and
> sells M&H harness's. I've never used or seen
> Painless wiring harness's, so I don't know about
> them....the only thing I've heard about them is that
> they are more of a generic type harness.
>
> As far as wiring...it's pretty involved. There is a
> forward lamp harness, engine harness, dash harness,
> intermediate wiring, and the rear lamp harness. Not
> impossible....but requires a decent amount of work.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peebles, Lorne (Services)
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: chevelle-list@chevelles.net
> Sent: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 7:02 am
> Subject: [Chevelle-list] 66 rewired
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Has anyone rewired a 66 Chevelle? I have a 66 Chevelle
> originally a 6 now an 8. I was wondering if you could shed
> some light on the different
> products out there for a complete redo of the wiring. Are
> there any ones I
> should seek out or avoid. How long a process is this, it
> seems to be a straight
> forward swap. Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
