ConcoursMustang Forums

Restoring - General discussions that span across many different groups of years and models => Suspension => Topic started by: bryancobb on November 29, 2012, 04:42:56 PM

Title: Perches
Post by: bryancobb on November 29, 2012, 04:42:56 PM
I think I didn't do so well on this purchase.

The perches were advertised as "NEW NOS" and for 67 to 70.

I didn't do my homework!  What is the difference in what I need for my MAR 66 Metuchen  C-Code, and these.

These appear to be genuine Ford but they look like they have been glass-beaded and the bushings don't look like the new
ones I bought from the Ford dealer in the early 90's.  The nuts have wrench marks like they have been installed on a
car and then removed.

I paid $150 for them.  That's OK if they are not "refurbished originals."

(http://i950.photobucket.com/albums/ad350/bryancobb/MVC-008F.jpg)
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: J_Speegle on November 29, 2012, 05:08:02 PM
Lokks like they are maybe later service replacements gthat have been rebuilt

Bushing and that area are different. Coil spring ear or finger is shaped differently

Here are a couple of shots of the originals from one of Mike Murry's cars (very low mileage car) to illustrate

(http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f49/firetrainer/Indiviual%20Parts/Suspension/5F07A2706xxspringperch-1-1.jpg)


(http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f49/firetrainer/Indiviual%20Parts/Suspension/5F07A2706xxspringperch-1.jpg)
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: bryancobb on November 29, 2012, 06:01:55 PM
Thanks Jeff,

Here's the wrench-marks on the nuts.  The seller, who goes by anglemyer123 on Ebay, "implies" that they have not been glass beaded by saying  "If you will check that Concurs Spring Perches have no paint on them.  There is a clear metal coating on these Spring Perches from keeping them from rusting."

He admits to doing "refurbishment" on them by saying "The rubber was replaced because it was almost 50 years old and unuseable."

These omitted details were revealed ONLY AFTER I RECEIVED THEM AND QUESTIONED HIM.

I'm contemplating stating in the feedback that the items WERE NOT AS DESCRIBED, since I willingly paid a premium for them to be as described.  Would that be fair?
They ARE nice and I intend to use them, but I would not have paid $150 for them if I had been told they had been refurbed ahead of time.

(http://i950.photobucket.com/albums/ad350/bryancobb/MVC-010F.jpg)
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: CharlesTurner on November 29, 2012, 09:00:35 PM
I'd send them back for a refund.  Look like repro's that have been refinished in my opinion.  Those are wrong fastening nuts for 65-66 also.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: CharlesTurner on November 29, 2012, 11:52:03 PM
Pics of some original perches I restored
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: bryancobb on November 30, 2012, 06:32:29 AM
Thanks guys! 

Charles.  They are FORD oval stamped and the stamp is on the curve of the part so it couldn't have been done except at manufacture.
Thanks for the pictures of the REAL ones for a 65.

My worn out ones are just like yours with the correct nuts, but they do not have the FORD oval stamp?  Where did you get the correct rubber bushings to restore them?  You have helped me decide to sen them back for refund.

I hope the seller is easy to work with on the return.

Title: Re: Perches
Post by: CharlesTurner on November 30, 2012, 09:29:46 AM
Those are original bushings.  Some later service parts had the Ford stamp, but the originals didn't
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: bryancobb on November 30, 2012, 11:50:15 AM
Here's my originals that I removed.  They are really nice but I splashed soapy water on them and they surface rusted very quickly.

They didn't have the FORD oval so I incorrectly thought they were not OEM.  Now Charles has convinced me they are.
I didn't know the OEM didn't have the oval.

Charles, how much to restore these for me like you did yours? 

(http://i950.photobucket.com/albums/ad350/bryancobb/MVC-001F.jpg)
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: bryancobb on November 30, 2012, 07:54:46 PM
One of Mine has the Rockford Grade 8 Bolts like the ones Charles posted.  One has some kind of headless stud which seems to be swedged in?
All four of the nuts are the correct ones.

(http://i950.photobucket.com/albums/ad350/bryancobb/MVC-012F.jpg)
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: ruppstang on December 01, 2012, 12:33:14 AM
If I remember correctly the bolts had a splined shank. The one looks like the head snapped off.
Marty
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Ivygreen65 on December 01, 2012, 10:52:16 AM
If I remember correctly the bolts had a splined shank.

+1
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: 67gta289 on December 01, 2012, 02:26:37 PM
Here are pics of mine, showing the splines
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: bryancobb on December 01, 2012, 03:04:29 PM
I can tell the 2 Rockford bolts have splines.

The two with no head are a big QUESTION-MARK??
The surface of both of them are perfectly level, and are within 0,002" of being the exact amount below the
surface of the shaft,   not like a head popped off.  The shanks have splines.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: J_Speegle on December 01, 2012, 07:24:29 PM
The two with no head are a big QUESTION-MARK??
The surface of both of them are perfectly level, and are within 0,002" of being the exact amount below the
surface of the shaft,   not like a head popped off.  The shanks have splines.

I vote - part of the bushing assembly - replacement
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Bob Gaines on December 03, 2012, 12:30:46 AM
I vote - part of the bushing assembly - replacement
Likely scenario  ;) .Good call.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: bryancobb on December 03, 2012, 07:21:19 AM
I'm having trouble understanding?  (I'm slow)

 Are you saying the two missing bolt heads came that way but that bushing has been replaced so no Ford bushings came that way...
"I vote - part of the bushing assembly - (was a) replacement"

OR Are you saying I should deluxe both of these two perches and just replace both bushings?
"I vote - part of the bushing assembly - (needs) replacement"

I'm pretty sure the perches are OEM and I want to replace the bushings and shafts If I can find some that look OEM.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: J_Speegle on December 03, 2012, 05:28:11 PM
Are you saying the two missing bolt heads came that way but that bushing has been replaced so no Ford bushings came that way...
"I vote - part of the bushing assembly - (was a) replacement"


+1
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: jwc66k on December 03, 2012, 08:29:50 PM
I just looked at the pair of perches I removed from my "K" car and cannot see how the bushing could have been pressed in (or removed) with the two studs in place, eg the studs (or bolts) went in after the bushing was in. Adding that to the mix, if the studs had the serrations, they were pressed in from what would have been the head end but I would think they would pull thru with too much torque on the nuts. Not a good design (what an understatement  :-X ).
Jim
 
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: CharlesTurner on December 03, 2012, 11:17:43 PM
Should definitely be bolts installed with the serrated tops.  As long as they're not tack welded to the bushing ends, they come out easy using a bench vise.  The original ones I have seen were cad plated.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: rockhouse66 on December 04, 2012, 08:23:46 AM
The original ones I have seen were cad plated.

I did not know that.  I thought they were phosphate.  Another detail to work on  ::)
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: jwc66k on December 04, 2012, 08:20:11 PM
I did not know that.  I thought they were phosphate.  Another detail to work on  ::)
The bolt/studs are phosphated or almost natural. The nuts are clear zinc.
Jim
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: CharlesTurner on December 04, 2012, 10:57:49 PM
The bolt/studs are phosphated or almost natural. The nuts are clear zinc.
Jim

I disagree, I have cleaned many originals and found the bolts to be cad plated.  There may have been a couple versions though.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: rockhouse66 on December 05, 2012, 09:30:57 AM
I guess I have too many cars, because I looked at my '66 again and I did replate the perch bolts (zinc, not cadmium, but for convenience or maybe ignorance) when I detailed the front suspension.  They must have had signs of originally being plated.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: CharlesTurner on December 05, 2012, 10:26:59 AM
The image of the perches, page 1 of this thread, from Mike Murray's 4,500 original mile coupe show they are cad/zinc plated.  I went back and looked through my pics and all I could find was originals with silvery plating.  The San Jose 65-66 examples that I have are Rockford stamping on top and fine threads.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Bob Gaines on December 05, 2012, 10:36:49 AM
Most likely Jim was thinking of the 67-70 perchs which had  zinc phosphate bolts.Been there done that.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: jwc66k on December 05, 2012, 01:51:42 PM
Most likely Jim was thinking of the 67-70 perchs which had  zinc phosphate bolts.Been there done that.
I recently removed two sets of the spring perch bolts, one set from my 66 "K" car and the other from 6S19xx. Both cars are San Jose built and the perches were factory. Both cars have been garaged almost from day one, eg minimum road damage. When I dissassemble anything, I look at the condition including finish (credit Jeff). Neither of the two sets' bolts had a trace of cad or zinc, especially the underside of the bolts heads' and the serrations. The only part number I could find for 1964-66 perches was on Ford Car Parts ILL 30 page 04 identifing them as 373134-S, discontinued (aka, not serviced). I measured mine and they are 3/8-24X7/8 hex head grade 8 marked "Rockford". I have no other documentation on this bolt. For 1967, and on including service, Ford used a 3/8-16X1.0 hex head grade 8 marked "C" and "M" (I have two sets on the shelf) identified as 381792-S2 (see AMK Ford Fasteners page 121 and Ford Car Parts Sec 30 pg 24). When I replace the spring perchs on 64-66 Mustangs, I replace the 3/8-16 bolts with 3/8-24 bolts.
Those are my observations.
Jim
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: CharlesTurner on December 05, 2012, 02:30:17 PM
Think it's safe to say that both finishes were possible.  Probably related to time of production and/or assembly plant.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: bryancobb on January 25, 2013, 08:50:30 AM
MAR 1966 C-Code Metuchen.  Did the OEM perches have pads for the spring to sit on at the bottom, or was it metal-to-metal?

I bought a new set from the Ford dealer parts counter around 1984 and I remember they had thick rubber rectangular pads glued on there.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: CharlesTurner on January 25, 2013, 09:35:32 AM
MAR 1966 C-Code Metuchen.  Did the OEM perches have pads for the spring to sit on at the bottom, or was it metal-to-metal?

I bought a new set from the Ford dealer parts counter around 1984 and I remember they had thick rubber rectangular pads glued on there.

No pads, that was a later thing and later service replacement thing.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: app01 on January 25, 2013, 02:36:45 PM
Do you know what year the rubber pads were part of the production perches? (69, 70, later....)
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: J_Speegle on January 25, 2013, 02:44:10 PM
Do you know what year the rubber pads were part of the production perches? (69, 70, later....)

Maybe 1982 - or around there. The rubber pans and little holes that retain them were on later service replacement perches. Think all of the judges deduct for these on a regular basis since many figure NOS is like original :(
Title: Resurrection
Post by: bryancobb on January 31, 2013, 09:22:22 AM
Hello,

I have made some progress.  I decided my 2 were OEM and I wanted to keep them.  The bushings were shot though.
I bought the NOS ones and will be removing their bushings and turning the ENDS of  the outside sleeves on the lathe so they look
exactly like the originals.

Something I learned when pressing the no-good bushings out...It's of course and interference fit.  The bushing O.D. is probably 0.001" larger than the I.D. of the
perch.  There is a big hole and a small hole in the perch, and a big end and small end of the bushing.  The bushing MUST be pressed out in the correct direction and
the new ones must be installed in the right orientation.

The big end of the bushing is   1.393"  and the little end is   1.375"

(http://i950.photobucket.com/albums/ad350/bryancobb/perch.jpg)

(http://i950.photobucket.com/albums/ad350/bryancobb/MVC-002F.jpg)
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: bryancobb on January 31, 2013, 09:23:19 AM
I need (2) of the "ROCKFORD" head bolts.  Can anyone help?

And Charles, how much $$ to make the 2 perches (WITHOUT BUSHINGS IN THEM) look as much like the picture you posed in # 4 ?  I realize mine are not as nice as yours were, to start with, but they are not as bad as they look in my last picture either.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: CharlesTurner on January 31, 2013, 10:12:34 AM
I need (2) of the "ROCKFORD" head bolts.  Can anyone help?

And Charles, how much $$ to make the 2 perches (WITHOUT BUSHINGS IN THEM) look as much like the picture you posed in # 4 ?  I realize mine are not as nice as yours were, to start with, but they are not as bad as they look in my last picture either.

Send me a PM to discuss...
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: bryancobb on March 10, 2013, 09:57:55 AM
I've got the parts smoothed pretty well with the die-grinder and Roloc discs.  Now I need to buy a vib-tumbler or send them to Charles for "deluxe-ing."
First picture = before, Second = Charles', Third = before tumbling, bolt plating, and yellow paint on rubber.

(http://i950.photobucket.com/albums/ad350/bryancobb/MVC-001F.jpg)
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=5575.0;attach=5950;image)
(http://i950.photobucket.com/albums/ad350/bryancobb/DSCN4048_zpsfb78e41c.jpg)
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Anghelrestorations on July 01, 2016, 07:32:58 PM

This is a great thread here related to what I am working on right now.  I am restoring a complete suspension for an early 64 1/4 K-Code convertible.  In taking the spring perches apart I see that the bolts are tack welded to the bushing assembly.  And I see in one of the first posts here Jeff showing the same.  Has anyone else seen this in 65 or 66 or is this only an early detail?  Pictures here of what I am working on in the shop now:

(http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z213/azscj/IMG_9026_zpsyzgk51oa.jpg)

(http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z213/azscj/IMG_9027_zpsr0vszvrr.jpg)
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: carlite65 on July 01, 2016, 07:50:23 PM
all the ones i have seen/worked on did not have any welds. the bolts were splined.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Anghelrestorations on July 01, 2016, 07:57:07 PM
On all the spring perches I have taken apart, the bolts are always splined - these are too.  But in addition, they tack welded these which I have almost never seen. 
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Brian Conway on July 01, 2016, 10:24:04 PM
May of 65 San Jose and no welds.  Brian
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: CharlesTurner on July 01, 2016, 11:12:34 PM
I have only ever seen one pair of saddles with the bolt heads welded like that.  Funny thing is, it was one of my very first restorations and I re-bushed the spring saddles and had a friend 'put back the welds', lol.

Personally, I would not replicate it at this point, unless I saw a pattern of other cars built around the same time, same plant.

On the pace car I restored, the bolts were different than the later style, but I'm pretty sure they were splined also.  They were not welded either.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Anghelrestorations on July 02, 2016, 12:13:30 AM
Ok. 
And reading thru this thread seems the most common finish for the bolts and the nuts (on the spring perches from 64 1/2 to 66) is a silver finish that most likely is zinc or cadmium.  Could have been other finishes...but thats the most common. 

And notice there is no head markings on these bolts at all. 
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: CharlesTurner on July 02, 2016, 01:42:59 AM
Yes, early ones with no head markings, later ones with 'ROCKFORD'

The finish was either zinc or cad.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: J_Speegle on July 05, 2016, 01:27:44 AM
This is a great thread here related to what I am working on right now.  I................  Has anyone else seen this in 65 or 66 or is this only an early detail?  Pictures here of what I am working on in the shop now:

have seen this a number of times and (admittedly)   ::) have done it once myself when the bolts strip out in the perch. Makes it easier than holding the upper bolt with a wrench
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Anghelrestorations on July 16, 2016, 10:17:11 PM
Figured I would post some pictures here of the final result and what I did to duplicate exactly the way it was. 

I already had NOS spring perch bushings (the two on the left), so copied the same finish on the new bushings on the right:
(http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z213/azscj/IMG_9343_zpspxodeb8g.jpg)


Here the spring perches are all assembled.
(http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z213/azscj/IMG_0044_zpsh2knc78a.jpg)


And added the welds back on there exactly the way they were originally.  Figured may as well if we have gone this far.  Was able to save the original bolts too. 
(http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z213/azscj/IMG_0050_zpszm0fpmjs.jpg)


Title: Re: Perches
Post by: ruppstang on July 16, 2016, 11:24:00 PM
Very nice work Marcus.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: jwc66k on July 17, 2016, 12:50:10 AM
As far as I know, 64 thru 68 spring perch bolts were not welded, they all had splines as retainers, both 3/8-16 and 3/8-24 bolts. The MPC indicates these bolt part numbers, 373134-S(2), 380042-S(2) and 381792-S2.
I have been told that the bushing was tack welded to the perch on the inside for all HP Mustangs including Shelby. That I have not seen or been able to verify.
Jim
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Anghelrestorations on July 17, 2016, 01:27:40 AM
Yes, I agree its not typical to see the bolts welded to the spring perches.  But for this particular car we know these are the originals and these were welded....check one of my previous posts in this thread where you can see that before I took them apart.  Not common but I have no reason to believe its not original.  First set I have rebuilt like this. 
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Bob Gaines on July 17, 2016, 02:25:23 AM
Yes, I agree its not typical to see the bolts welded to the spring perches.  But for this particular car we know these are the originals and these were welded....check one of my previous posts in this thread where you can see that before I took them apart.  Not common but I have no reason to believe its not original.  First set I have rebuilt like this.
I was looking through my parts and found enough of the welded type to change my point of view.  I believe they are a seldom seen (relatively speaking) Mustang factory variety that was only used very early in production . Unfortunately I do not know which plant my samples came from. I also believe that the more common type and the welded type were being used simultaneously until the welded type was phased out sometime during early 65 production.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Anghelrestorations on July 17, 2016, 02:52:06 AM
Makes sense as this is for a 64 1/2 K code convertible.  I also think it was unusual...
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: CharlesTurner on July 17, 2016, 11:18:15 PM
Also consider it could have been a dealer fix.  Hard to say for sure if it was a factory practice or not.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Bob Gaines on July 17, 2016, 11:39:42 PM
Also consider it could have been a dealer fix.  Hard to say for sure if it was a factory practice or not.
I am not sure what everyone else found but all of the bolts that I found with weld reminents had the splines but all were plain head with no makers mark.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Anghelrestorations on July 18, 2016, 04:28:00 PM
Im thinking it could be a vendor difference since not all of these spring perches were made by the same vendor.  I will nee3d to look if I can find a few more like that on the next trip to the junkyard. 
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: FXguy on July 23, 2016, 01:22:42 AM
Wonder if this was an early K code only practice... ???
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Maksim27 on October 18, 2022, 04:40:11 AM
I was wondering did all 1965-1966 perches have the M-S stamp or did some perches not have them.  I have early perches without the welds on the bushing and the bolts are RockFord.  The perches that I bought were painted black don't know from the previous owner or perhaps NOS but didn't have the M-S stamp.  No stamping of anything.  The RockFord bolts appear to be cad or zinc. 

I started removing the paint but can't find the M-S stamp.  I have dozens of varies 1965-1966  perches and all have M-S stamp.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Maksim27 on October 18, 2022, 05:55:02 AM
This is the second perch which I haven't started removing the black paint...Not sure if the paint is from the last owner or NOS paint to keep the part from rusting.  I just never seen a early style perch being NOS, and only seen the 1967 versions being NOS.  So the black paint is questionable.  This black painted perch also doesn't seem to have the  M-S stamp.  Could the Perch possibly been a earlier style before the vendor used the M-S stamp or a later early production before the vendor started using welds for the shaft.   

As you can see the bolts look to be cad or zinc plated...  There is some remnants of yellow paint in the rubber.  The rubber has cracking on the edges but still is intact.

In the last picture I show my other early style OEM perch that has the M-S stamp.  I have dozens of M-S perches, but the recent perches that I bought without the M-S are the cleanest set.

Definitely confused as another possibility could be that not all perches got the M-S stamp just like other parts in the car.  Some did get stamps and others didn't as part of the assembly line process.  :-\ ??? ???   
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: 67gtasanjose on October 18, 2022, 09:13:55 AM
Original ones were not painted though Service Parts often were. I believe you might have Service Replacements (or aftermarket).
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Bob Gaines on October 18, 2022, 10:41:07 AM
Original ones were not painted though Service Parts often were. I believe you might have Service Replacements (or aftermarket).
+1 . One or the other . ;)
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Maksim27 on October 18, 2022, 07:09:13 PM
Not aftermarket as aftermarket uses a 1967 style rubber shaft.  The 1965-1966 uses a rubber shaft just for those years.  Mine is the earlier style without the welds on the shaft.  I don't believe that aftermarket would have "RockFord" bolts and correct castle nuts. 
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Bob Gaines on October 19, 2022, 12:48:11 AM
Not aftermarket as aftermarket uses a 1967 style rubber shaft.  The 1965-1966 uses a rubber shaft just for those years.  Mine is the earlier style without the welds on the shaft.  I don't believe that aftermarket would have "RockFord" bolts and correct castle nuts.
I would not be so quick to make a definitive call on if not aftermarket. You are assuming that there is no aftermarket perch versions made prior to the 67 style bushing change. ;)  If a OEM mfg selling a after market version of what they supplied to Ford they would most likely use the same Rockford marked bolts. Hex nuts could have been re used when the perch was replaced for whatever reason. Replacement is assumed given the painted appearance and plated bolts vs. the accepted bare metal appearance that has been observed for decades by enthusiasts on dare I say thousands of survivor type Mustangs. A prior owner painting the perch would most likely not gone to the trouble of removing the bolts prior to painting. Of course it could be a rarely seen Ford anomaly. Typically when someone argues that "factory exception" point without definitive proof they just come off sounding like someone making up a story to justify a un expected /out of the ordinary item as original compared to what is expected as stock. Given the evidence or lack there of it is hard to say for sure if factory Ford or after market until more definitive proof IMO. It is not typically a deduction issue in concours unless in MCA thoroughbred class in which case a out of the ordinary thing like no trademark would need to be supported by back up documentation. If for your own piece of mind on your own car rather then trying to convince others of your point of view on a anomalous detail better to weigh the evidence and make a decision that makes the most sense for you IMO.   
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: 67gtasanjose on October 19, 2022, 10:07:37 AM
Attached is a picture of my RESTORED, ORIGINAL early-67 Upper arm with the spring perch pivots attached. Early-67 seems to have used the "welded-in" perch bushing like you described that is typical for a 66 Mustang. It also has the Rockford Bolts and Castle-type nut you showed earlier.

My perches are both original yet the bushing kit and shaft are both aftermarket.

My reply supports a different possibility along the line of what Mr. Gaines is trying to say.

By the way Bob, nicely and kindly worded for future readers.
*I (personally) have failed Diplomacy 101 in real life but I knows it when I sees it!
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Maksim27 on October 19, 2022, 11:49:04 PM
Other evidence is the yellow paint on one of the rubber side...Paint is barely noticeable.  Charles Turner is telling me that not all perches had the M-S markings stamped on them.  Did the vendor start selling the aftermarket of the early Perch in the late 60s.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Maksim27 on October 20, 2022, 12:10:40 AM
Yes I can tell that your bushing is aftermarket.  The hex bolts appear to be almost correct dark shade..Probably should be darker like phosphate.  But if your perches are still early then you would need to put Cadmium bolts.  In a rare occasion phosphate could have been used depending on the month of transference. The redesign of the bushing in 1967 would use phosphate/manganese bolts.  My bolts will need to be Cadmium plated but I still don't know how to put perma-blue on the bushing.  Does the bushing need to be taken out or blue it the way it is installed.

Being an early 67 Mustang you have 2 welds holding the bushing for extra protection. 

My early bushing has Factory markings even through the ends have cracking as is expected.  Also the rubber ends had black paint and that deteriorated the rubber more.  I did find some remnants of yellow paint on the rubber. 

Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Maksim27 on October 27, 2022, 08:35:09 PM
Guys I was wondering which is the correct shade in which the Perch should be.

I'm just using simple tools and don't have any blasters to make a 100% correct finish.

Title: Re: Perches
Post by: J_Speegle on October 28, 2022, 05:40:29 PM
Guys I was wondering which is the correct shade in which the Perch should be.

I'm just using simple tools and don't have any blasters to make a 100% correct finish.

Don't need a blaster to do the job just makes part of the process, for some, quicker and easier. Blaster will not IMHO produce a correct or final finish your looking for. The look pretty nice to start with though the surface still see use and age. Have a couple of pictures from the underside since that will be the surface most visible once installed?
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Maksim27 on October 28, 2022, 07:49:14 PM
These do have pitting where the holes are.  I have another perch that has no pitting and has the M-S stamp.   These 2 perches don't have the M-S stamp.  I'll also need to put perma-blue on the bushing shaft... Also remove the serated bolts and have them Cadmium plated. 
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Maksim27 on November 26, 2022, 03:03:53 AM
Here's some progress on the underside with perma-blue.  Definitely ain't that easy to perma-blue while the bushing is installed.  What do you guys think should it be lighter or that's good enough.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Maksim27 on November 29, 2022, 03:02:27 AM
Just finished my perches and RPM'd them...  I know they aren't 100% concours but I tried my best with the minimum restoration tools that I have.

Jan 66 C4 200 San Jose
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: CharlesTurner on November 29, 2022, 12:07:42 PM
Just finished my perches and RPM'd them...  I know they aren't 100% concours but I tried my best with the minimum restoration tools that I have.

Jan 66 C4 200 San Jose


Look fine to me, the shafts might be a little too dark, but close enough.  Try some automatic trans fluid on the ends of the bushings, sometimes it will help swell up the rubber enough to close up the cracks.  Wintergreen/alcohol mix also can do the same, but have to be very careful with it as it might swell it up too much.
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: Maksim27 on November 29, 2022, 03:48:46 PM
I was first thinking of slicing off the cracked rubber ends and have a smooth look like I seen other perches including yours on this thread.  Yeah I'll try some Type-F trans fluid on the cracked rubber ends.

I also tried the Mothers compound cream that you told me to use and in fact it did remove the cadmium bluing from the bolts... The bolts are now shiny silver look as in the pictures.  Does the cadmium bolts need to be shiny or the matte look is more correct?
Title: Re: Perches
Post by: CharlesTurner on November 29, 2022, 04:35:20 PM
Cadmium is usually a soft silver appearance, not shiny like zinc.