Topic: '65-'66 Rear Quarter Extensions

[C5ZZKGT]

Thanks again guys!!! great info!! so now does anyone have a Left side extension with either a "C5" or "C6" part number on it that I could try?? I understand about the general feeling that the gap/tolerences were NOT what they are today back in 1965 but I firmly believe that we have the resources and working knoledge to line these car's panels up better than when they were new-it just takes a bit of time and patience.

[CharlesTurner]

Guess my observations have been a little different.  Whenever I've been lucky enough to find a car with mostly original sheet metal, the fit of the body has been excellent. 

I have a March '65 San Jose convertible I'm working on now, it has original quarters and I believe the quarter extensions are original, they are the non-gasket type with the LH cast: C4ZB-6528073-A and the RH: C4ZB-6528072-A.

I also have a Jan '66 Metuchen GT fastback that I will be assembling soon, the quarter extensions from that car are the gasket type, LH cast:C5ZB-6528073-B and the RH: C5ZB-6528072-B.

The single year '65 and '66 MPC's call out the same number for all cars, C5ZZ-6527703-A and C5ZZ-6527702-A.  Interestingly, the '75 version has the same information, no differentiation between 65 & 66.  Guess it was a crap-shoot what you might get in one of those boxes... depending on when it was packaged.  I would imagine most anything in a Ford oval box would be the gasket-style extension.

I suppose it's possible there were only 2 common types of extensions.  If anyone has any extensions with differing engineering numbers, please share.


Edit: I have an NOS red-oxide RH 65-66 convertible quarter panel in the garage, mint with paper covering still on it.  I put the C4 and C5 extensions up to it.  The C4 extension did not go all the way to the inner edge (that would be parallel to trunk lid), was short maybe 1/8".  The C5 extension fit perfectly.  I also put the C5 extension on the SJ convertible I mentioned previously.  The extension fit was too far off the inner edge, pretty much the opposite of how the C4 fit on the service quarter panel.

I'm sure there might have been variances in the quarter panels that Ford serviced, but this could be something to consider when there is a problem with quarter extension fit.

[J_Speegle]

Believe that the excuse that "they never fit that well"  has been over used in the past. Its hard to accept that our fathers and uncles that worked at the plants wanted anything less than what they would today.

The vast majority of original cars I've seen have fit and gaps as good as most of the nice restored cars of today.

Just my observations

[JKWilson]

Sorry to get O/T, Charles is there any chance you'll do a blog on the rebuild of the GT fastback? Pleaseeeeee......

[CharlesTurner]

Sorry to get O/T, Charles is there any chance you'll do a blog on the rebuild of the GT fastback? Pleaseeeeee......

I'm sure we can arrange that... assuming the owner is cool with it.  Hope to start assembly by early spring or thereabouts.

[C5ZZKGT]

Charles & All, Hey, Thanks for the great info and observations!! I wholeheartedly agree with the statement that the cars were not fit very well from the factory-even if they wern't I would think that a professional restorer would elect to make body panels (and quarter extensions/headlight doors) fit better than when the car was originally produced.

[CharlesTurner]

Rick, I think you might have misunderstood mine and Jeff's opinion on factory body fit.  We both have observed that the fit was much better than folks give Ford credit for.  I think you will be surprised with how well the K convertible that I restored fits together.  There are absolutely no Ford service parts used, only factory sheet metal, it has absolutely gorgeous body lines.

[C5ZZKGT]

Charles, My apologies!! I went back and read my last post and thought what an idiot I was in not proof-reading it before I posted:I meant to say that I AGREE with YOU and JEFF on the statement that Jeff made about the over-use of the terms "they wern't all that good when new" YOU, JEFF and countless others have WAY more experiance than I do when it comes to these cars and certainly have seen more of these cars than I have-I went to the Daytona Turkey Run here last weekend and made it a point to look at every '65-'66 Mustang and 90% of them had much better fitting body panels than my car does in places-& these were for the most part daily driver type cars.
I still haven't found anyone that I would trust to try & adjust the passengers side door on my car that you found on the low side and this past January in Ocala we had weather in the teens and the darn right door wouldn't stay latched it was so cold......

[CharlesTurner]

No apologies needed, I figured it was a typo or something.  Just wanted other folks that might read the thread know what was being said.