Topic: Paint markings/daubs for 1967 rear springs

[RocketScientist]

I am looking for any information on rear spring markings relating to 1967 Mustangs. I am particularly interested in C-Code fastbacks but am curious as to markings for the other models.

Mine were long gone by the time I came to restore my car and there aren't many other Mustangs where I live, to compare with. Any help would be much appreciated.
Brad.

[67gta289]

You would need to supply the following for most questions like this (1) model, (2) transmission, (3) GT or competition handling package, (4) build date - scheduled OK, (5) assembly plant.  In the case of front springs A/C or not often makes a difference in spring rates.  I recommend that you add this to your profile so that you don't have to remember each time

Now that that is out of the way, I too have been looking for the same info for my Dec 66 SJ C code GTA fastback.  I was able to recover the front spring color stripes, but not the rear springs, driveshaft, nor shocks.  I've looked for the build sheet, and have asked for others to share, but it appears that SJ cars are rarely found.  I seem to recall way back in 1980 when I bought the car and pulled up the wet carpet behind the driver's seat I found remnants of a build sheet.  The guys with Dearborn or NJ cars have better luck with the build sheets, but often trade that for more rust due to the DSO.

The recommendation that you will hear is that if you don't know for sure what your car had, leave the stripes at the door.  You can add them later if you find them.  Also if you do find a car that you compare to, you would need a trifecta to be assured that it is correct for your car: (1) similar options, (2) same assembly plant with close build date, and the most difficult (3) original unrestored car or one that is restored based on original condition.

Good luck, John

[J_Speegle]

IMHO you need to supply the engineering numbers from the rear springs to assure that your getting the right colors. Just removes any guessing on our part. Sometimes we only find marked springs off of cars and this is one way we can apply what we find there

John should/may be able to help with your search if you PM you numbers from your rear springs.

[RocketScientist]

The spring numbers are: C7ZA-5556-Y 61-7E. The car was built in SJ on 12 July 1967 and was a normal Code, C4 (Plane Jane) fastback. It has a complete '68 power-steering unit but I'm guessing that this was a later addition and so was originally manual steering.
Thank's for the help,
Brad.

[gtamustang]

Without having immediate access to a parts manual to compare the engineering number to, I will suggest that your leaf spring markings were single silver striped towards the front of the leaf springs.  I have found that quite a few 67s & 68s (all plants) that came with a c-code/auto and few options had the silver striped leaf springs.

Regards,
Pete Morgan

[J_Speegle]

Since its a bare bones automatic car I would agree that they were very likely marked with a single silver stripe on the short leaf approx 4 inches behind the rear end mounting pad location once installed

Remember that the stripe does not go all the way around - the important surface was just what would become the bottom of the group

[Sunlitgold68]

Here are some I did for my 68.

[RocketScientist]

Thanks to everyone who has helped, its been much appreciated.
Brad.

[thefordshow]

I think it would be safe to say the stripe or stripes could be found as gtamustang pointed out in front of the spring as well.   I have an example of a '65 dearborn c-code car and a '68 san jose fastback that was Hubert platts race car.

[J_Speegle]

I think it would be safe to say the stripe or stripes could be found as gtamustang pointed out in front of the spring as well.   I have an example of a '65 dearborn c-code car and a '68 san jose fastback that was Hubert platts race car.

I can not agree across the board. Two examples (and one IMHO that can't be trusted to be original would not give me enough examples (when compared to thousands or tens of thousands the other way) to accept that the backwards marking of the rear springs were anything other than an oddity.

It's easy to see that the springs of the Platt car have been off (and growing up with drag racing in the 50-80's) and likely played with. Would not surprise me that they reversed the direction of the short leaf since no one would have paid attention to that detail at the time)

And the Dearborn example is applied to the second shortest leaf. I think this might suggest that you had someone new that messed up in a couple of ways who was likely corrected by another


As always we often except the odd ones for judging when they are accompanied with documentation that the car in question was one of those cars rather than suggesting that a restorer would have the option of choosing either way.

With that said there are examples installed during certain production runs, years and plants that could be established with enough examples.
 
Just my 2 cents

[thefordshow]

It was common for the winter national cars to have the front of the springs shaved. this was done along with rolling the wheel lips for larger tires. Given the time frame of when the race cars rolled off the line and when they had to be ready, there would be No need or time to mess with taking individual springs apart and reclamping them with assembly line type clamps?, this task would have gone to eaton spring with the load ranges needed. Also, both the '65 Dearborn and '68 San Jose springs are both maked on the second leaf.

[J_Speegle]

Guess we have some differing options on the subject but the discussion is good and helps develop understanding. From the racers I've talked to (especially in the Stock classes of the time) it was not unusual to do many things in house to gain a little advantage.

Not sure how far after production these pictures (the one you provided ) were shot but it appears in the pictures that the rear spring had been removed (notice the front bushing as been pushed off center to gain room for the big rear tires as well as the longer leaves have been ground away so they didn't contact the frame rail as they were moved outward. Surely the rear shackles were modified to make up the difference also.

In addition its odd (maybe the car had been repainted by the time the picture was taken or something else was going on but the picture seems to lack the dolly marks on the rear frame rail section in the picture as well as the pinch weld black out and overspray we so often see on regular production cars.

Just a few quick observation.

As mentioned if I saw rear springs marked as these show on an untouched original car that was being restored I would suggest to the owner that they document and reproduce the marks as they were found but would not suggest that an owner with no found marks copy these as shown based on the very limited examples

Thanks for the pictures Do we know anything more (when the car was built for example) of the 65 Dearborn example you showed?

[thefordshow]

The race cars came off the line in Dec 67 and had to be race ready and prepped for Feb 2nd, didn't leave much time at all to do all the modifcations. The photo was taken at Bill Stroppes' shop before the race. Platt go's on to say in the artical how they are trying to get 10 factory cars race ready for the nationals. In reality, between H&M and stroppes shop only 6 factory cars got done. A lot of the testing was done with Dyno Don's car, so it would make sense that it would have been the mule car for the rest.  Sorry for the poor quality photo, but the dolly mark is there. As for the black out,..well the person doing the task was more interested in spraying the lower rocker, under or below the rocker trim, than the pinch weld. over spray is evident on the floor pan tho.  I'll look into the date of the Dearborn car. Jeff,.I do agree that most springs have markings on the rear side of the leaves, and it may come down to some thing as simple as some one in charge of that function may have done a run or more backwards to the norm. I personaly just find it hard to ignore examples of something different as a possiblity.

[J_Speegle]

The race cars came off the line in Dec 67 and had to be race ready and prepped for Feb 2nd, didn't leave much time at all to do all the modifications.

Two months for those shops was never enough time but still enough time to do allot. They pulled the engines and took them apart, lightened the cars, reworked the rear suspension as well as adding a new (for Ford) traction system as well as many more details.  Just suggesting that any race car has to be taken with a grain of salt if not much more

...... Jeff,.I do agree that most springs have markings on the rear side of the leaves, and it may come down to some thing as simple as some one in charge of that function may have done a run or more backwards to the norm. I personally just find it hard to ignore examples of something different as a possibility.

Not ignoring as we have both seen allot of oddities and as for possibilities we know that that can be misused by owners and restorers. Standards are set by the norms and as stated earlier exceptions are typically dealt with case by case until we can document a pattern or a practice by a specific period of time. To close the discussion I think its not a good practice for restorers, lacking a specific detail for their restoration, to follow the handful out of the usual than the of thousands or in this case possibly millions of Mustangs built

Have a safe and enjoyable Christmas

[thefordshow]

Another example of stripes on the front half of the springs from forum member Dan Green on his 67 SJ 's' code, found on second spring towards the front.