ConcoursMustang Forums
1st Generation 1964 1/2 - 1973 - Questions & general discussions that apply to a specific year => 1967 Mustang => Topic started by: 67gta289 on May 30, 2017, 06:23:42 PM
-
I've looked through my NPD catalog as well as the AMK site for oval rubber plugs like shown smack dab in the middle of the attached picture I ripped from one of Marty's posts, but can't find a source.
This is one of those things that I might just be glossing over. Help? Thanks, John
-
I've looked through my NPD catalog as well as the AMK site for oval rubber plugs like shown smack dab in the middle of the attached picture I ripped from one of Marty's posts, but can't find a source.
This is one of those things that I might just be glossing over. Help? Thanks, John
No one makes that one as far as I know. You have to get them off of junk cars. If there is a easier way I would like to hear about it.They are very hard to find when you need one. It is missing 99 % of the time on restored cars I judge.
-
Bob, thanks for the confirmation of what I've found. My next junkyard trip I'll grab a handful or two...or three.
-
John,
I cannot find documentation for that plug. Can you measure the width and height. From that a part number may be determined.
Jim
-
It looks like the same style plug used on a 65-66 on the inner part of the front frame rails where they turn up from the floor pan.
-
It looks like the same style plug used on a 65-66 on the inner part of the front frame rails where they turn up from the floor pan.
Same style but think the size is possibly different
-
Same style but think the size is possibly different
It is a different size. I have not found the same size and shape plug on other years 65-70. :'(
-
Same style but think the size is possibly different
It is a different size. I have not found the same size and shape plug on other years 65-70. :'(
So far all I see here is "it's different". Will someone take the time and measure the hole. There may be alternatives.
Jim
-
So far all I see here is "it's different". Will someone take the time and measure the hole. There may be alternatives.
Jim
Jim, I've got the measurements done, just need a little more time to make it presentable. John
-
OK I put together the attached PDF since there are quite a few items going on here. A synopsis for those that don't want the gory details of the attached file.
1. There are two sizes of oval holes that were potentially plugged - a quantity of four on the radiator front apron, and a quantity of two on the inner frame rails near the idler arm and steering gear box.
2. For the front apron, there appears to be a running change at all three assembly plants from oval holes to square holes.
3. I did a quick survey of some unrestored cars, and there are some reasonable conclusions to make, although more examples would be nice to have to pin things down a bit more. I have more data myself that that will take time that I don't have for the next week or two.
Of course I'm still looking for sources of both size plugs. As Bob mentioned donor cars, eBay, and the like are probably the only way around this.
Also I did not have time to look in the assembly manuals, but with the attached pictures and dimensions that should be a relatively easy search. But the better half is dragging me out shopping. Yeah, I know.
-
Yes the oval verses square holes was a running change in 67. Square holes being the later version that carried into 68 production. Believe used for the mounting of the Cougar front end parts
-
OK I put together the attached PDF since there are quite a few items going on here.
A well done presentation.
Jim
-
I pulled both of my rubber plugs off of my Jan 31, 1967 Dearborn Conv today. Both had the number "377841-S" on what I'll call the "top" of the oval, and "SI" on the bottom of the oval. On the left on one was the number "31", and on the other, "132". I am assuming that the 377841-S number is an Engineering Number as opposed to a Part Number as I didn't find it in either my 1965 nor my 1969 Standard and Utility Parts Catalogs. John noted that he had the dimensions and would Post them soon.
I've attached a picture of each of my plugs.
Bob
-
My understanding is the holes in discussion, were used for Cougar builds. Cougar guys could confirn.
-
My understanding is the holes in discussion, were used for Cougar builds. Cougar guys could confirn.
+1 ;)
Guess we need to figure out what the round plug that was used for the square holes while we're at it.
Also it appears that the direction of installation was a plant thing like many other details. So far San Jose are all installed from the engine side of the radiator support while Dearborn cars are installed from the front of the car towards the engine. Could only find one example from 67 NJ and they were installed like what I found on dozens of 67 Dearborn examples
-
Of course, when I started my Reply, John hadn't Posted his info, nor had the two other Replies been Posted. I went to Post mine and got the infamous "This Page cannot be displayed". I got everything ready again, and got the message that there had been a Post since I started mine, but didn't want to take the chance of losing it all again, so I Posted my Reply anyway.
That being said, about the only thing I can add is that on my '67, the lower radiator support oval holes (which are the same size as the uppers) do not have, nor is there any evidence that they ever did, any plugs.
Bob
-
+1 ;)
Guess we need to figure out what the round plug that was used for the square holes while we're at it.
Jeff : I think this might be one for the Psychiatrist, Psychologist, or maybe the Therapist.
+1 ;)
... while Dearborn cars are installed from the front of the car towards the engine.
+1 on mine.
Bob
-
Some examples of my findings
7F01C1291xx with oval hole
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/7/6-020617201805.jpeg)
7F02C1373xx with oval hole
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/7/6-020617201853.jpeg)
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/7/6-020617202000.jpeg)
7F02C1380xx
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/7/6-020617202016.jpeg)
7F02S2137xx with square hole
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/7/6-020617202139.jpeg)
7F03C2264xx with square hole
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/7/6-020617202241.jpeg)
7R01C1680xx with oval hole
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/7/6-020617202307.jpeg)
7R03C1883xx with oval hole
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/7/6-020617202439.jpeg)
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/7/6-020617202515.jpeg)
7R02C2297xx with square hole
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/7/6-020617202409.jpeg)
-
The body assy manual shows square holes (as I would expect due to latest revision). Shows one plug 376196-s only on drivers side for the radiator support.
For the idled arm and steering gear box it calls for one per side of 378770-S.
The term used is "plug button"
-
The body assy manual shows square holes (as I would expect due to latest revision). Shows one plug 376196-s only on drivers side for the radiator support.
Another example of a page with details different than what was done ;)
Of course there could have been another revision the next day that we don't know of nor have copies of the page
What is the revision date of that page? If you would
-
I've been searching for some of these plugs also and called West Coast Cougars (not knowing the hole was utilized on Cougars)... they confirmed that the hole was utilized for the Cougar headlight bucket mount.
-
I looked at a June built radiator support today (SJ) and it's square hole had the same plug installed from the engine side as other pictures posted.
-
Is there any consensus on where/when the oval shaped plug versus the round plug was used? In my non-scientific research at a couple of junkyards it seems that maybe the oval plug was a 67 item and the round plug was used in 68 but I'm only speculating.
-
Is there any consensus on where/when the oval shaped plug versus the round plug was used? In my non-scientific research at a couple of junkyards it seems that maybe the oval plug was a 67 item and the round plug was used in 68 but I'm only speculating.
You would have to specify (narrow down) what plant your interested in for a good guess or time period when the change over took place
-
Yes, for a 1967-68 Mercury Cougar that hole is used for installing a captured stud for mounting the headlight bucket.
(http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w115/CougarCJ/th_IMG_08561_zpsmismwbnd.jpg) (http://s174.photobucket.com/user/CougarCJ/media/IMG_08561_zpsmismwbnd.jpg.html)
(http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w115/CougarCJ/th_IMG_08601_zpsnte6biuf.jpg) (http://s174.photobucket.com/user/CougarCJ/media/IMG_08601_zpsnte6biuf.jpg.html)
Cougars built in Dearborn 1967-73. Cougars built in San Jose all of 1968, and 1969's up until about the 4th week of November 1968. No 1967 Cougars built in San Jose.
-
Another example of a page with details different than what was done ;)
Of course there could have been another revision the next day that we don't know of nor have copies of the page
What is the revision date of that page? If you would
I went back to look and found no revision history. I checked a few other drawings in the body manual and struck out across the board. Quite different that what I've noticed on drawings from the other categories which are dated. So I need to back track my statement that this particular drawing was the latest or later revision. The evidence of square holes does though tend to validate the assumption.
-
Is there any consensus on where/when the oval shaped plug versus the round plug was used? In my non-scientific research at a couple of junkyards it seems that maybe the oval plug was a 67 item and the round plug was used in 68 but I'm only speculating.
Like most things 1967 and really best practice we need to look at unrestored cars to make a determination of an approximate change over. That needs to be done at all three assembly plants. If you look at my attached report from an earlier post you will see that I found both oval and square instances for 1967 model year cars from all three plants. The VIN numbers help start to hone in on the changes but we would need more data to reach a consensus. Jeff provided a few more data points as well. I'm not taking it further myself but if you are wondering about a specific car provide a partial VIN and I'm sure you will get to the answer. It is safe to say though that the change was not commensurate with the new model year.
-
.................. you are wondering about a specific car provide a partial VIN and I'm sure you will get to the answer. ........
+1
-
I went back to look and found no revision history. I checked a few other drawings in the body manual and struck out across the board. Quite different that what I've noticed on drawings from the other categories which are dated. So I need to back track my statement that this particular drawing was the latest or later revision. The evidence of square holes does though tend to validate the assumption.
John : I assume (?) that we're talking about page N7-8105- of the Body Assembly Manual, correct ? Well, here is a wrench I'll throw in. My page is Dated 12/15/66, and has the note "Supersedes 11/10/66", and shows the "square hole ". Yours was built 5 days after that Revision at San Jose, and mine a month and a half later in Dearborn, yet both of ours have the oval holes ??
So "Who do you trust" (sounds like a good name for a game show for those who might remember).
I guess it's just another '67 oddity, or another instance where it's just an Illustration.
Bob
-
Like most things 1967 and really best practice we need to look at unrestored cars to make a determination of an approximate change over. That needs to be done at all three assembly plants. If you look at my attached report from an earlier post you will see that I found both oval and square instances for 1967 model year cars from all three plants. The VIN numbers help start to hone in on the changes but we would need more data to reach a consensus. Jeff provided a few more data points as well. I'm not taking it further myself but if you are wondering about a specific car provide a partial VIN and I'm sure you will get to the answer. It is safe to say though that the change was not commensurate with the new model year.
I am confused. Is the reference about oval and square hole or the rubber plug ?If talking about the metal hole the transition from the oval hole to the square hole in the radiator support transitioned in the middle of 67 production to the square hole from what I have seen. I am sure it happened at various times within weeks of each other or less depending on plant. The 68's with original radiator supports will have the square hole which is actually made from the oval hole with oval top and bottom edge still evident and squared off sides. From what I have seen the same oval rubber plug is used whether installed in the oval hole or squared off hole in the radiator support.
-
You would have to specify (narrow down) what plant your interested in for a good guess or time period when the change over took place
Jeff- my interest would be for a January 68 New Jersey car.
-
John : I assume (?) that we're talking about page N7-8105- of the Body Assembly Manual, correct ? Well, here is a wrench I'll throw in. My page is Dated 12/15/66, and has the note "Supersedes 11/10/66", and shows the "square hole ". Yours was built 5 days after that Revision at San Jose, and mine a month and a half later in Dearborn, yet both of ours have the oval holes ??
Since the drawings only have (well in most cases) when they were submitted they are not implemention dates ;)
-
I am confused. Is the reference about oval and square hole or the rubber plug ?
I hardly see how one could talk about the rubber plugs without talking about the holes that they go into, particularly when talking about the ones in the front radiator support. While a round plug can fit into an oval or square hole, the oval plug cannot fit into the square hole.
From what I have seen the same oval rubber plug is used whether installed in the oval hole or squared off hole in the radiator support.
Based on the pictures that both Jeff and John Posted, in particular John's with the duct tape behind the square hole, it appears to me, at least for '67's, that the square hole is a completely different stamping, not a modified oval hole. The width of the square hole does not appear adequate to accept the oval plug in question.
Additionally, the question was raised as to when the change from the oval hole (and plug) changed to the square hole (and round plug). As you noted, and Jeff's and John's pictures seem to support, the hole change appears to have occurred approximately mid-year. Yet how does one explain the square hole being shown in the 1966 copy from the Body Assembly Manual ? That was my point.
Bob
-
OK, so my experience in restoring the cars that had these plugs is the following. Yes oval plug in square hole. Don't know why but that is the way it was done! Early 67's with oval slot in radiator support did not have a plug installed. When Ford changed the radiator support to the square hole ( for the Cougar headlight assembly mounting, I have also restored a few cougars and this is what the holes are for) they installed the oval plugs but only for a certain length of time. I guess the decided to save money and delete the plug since it really did not do anything. Very late 67's did not have the plug and I have never seen a 68 with the plugs.
As far as I know this plug has not been reproduced however Daniel carpenter states to use plug number 376966 in the radiator support as a substitute as the 378770 oval plug is too large to fit the hole. Now with that being said......99% of the 67's that I have seen with this plug have all been San Jose cars (as most cars I work on are since the San Jose /Milpitas plant is only 10 miles away) so I don't know if that makes a difference. I hope this helps a little and does not confuse it more!!
-
Well, obviously, this is one of those items that, at least so far, we cannot draw conclusions about, as there seems to be no rhyme or reason.
Therefore, all I can attest to is that my January 31, 1967, Dearborn built 1967 Convertible has both the oval holes (pictures attached) and the oval plugs in the top oval holes (pictures of the plugs previously Posted), installed from the front, towards the back.
It appears that we are going to find many, many variations of this.
Bob
-
John : I assume (?) that we're talking about page N7-8105- of the Body Assembly Manual, correct ? Well, here is a wrench I'll throw in. My page is Dated 12/15/66, and has the note "Supersedes 11/10/66", and shows the "square hole ". Yours was built 5 days after that Revision at San Jose, and mine a month and a half later in Dearborn, yet both of ours have the oval holes ??
So "Who do you trust" (sounds like a good name for a game show for those who might remember).
I guess it's just another '67 oddity, or another instance where it's just an Illustration.
Bob
Bob M - I'll have to look again. I looked twice but did not see it any date. And as Jeff replied later, and I'm sure you know this with your engineering background, but the time between the drawing approval and the change in production can take weeks or months.
I am confused. Is the reference about oval and square hole or the rubber plug ?If talking about the metal hole the transition from the oval hole to the square hole in the radiator support transitioned in the middle of 67 production to the square hole from what I have seen. I am sure it happened at various times within weeks of each other or less depending on plant. The 68's with original radiator supports will have the square hole which is actually made from the oval hole with oval top and bottom edge still evident and squared off sides. From what I have seen the same oval rubber plug is used whether installed in the oval hole or squared off hole in the radiator support.
Bob G - sorry if I confused the matter. It started out as a "where can I find these oval rubber plugs" and morphed into something a bit more. Some of my pictures though look like round plugs in the square hole, but admittedly it would be hard to distinguish the exact plug type from the pics.
-
I hardly see how one could talk about the rubber plugs without talking about the holes that they go into, particularly when talking about the ones in the front radiator support. While a round plug can fit into an oval or square hole, the oval plug cannot fit into the square hole.
Based on the pictures that both Jeff and John Posted, in particular John's with the duct tape behind the square hole, it appears to me, at least for '67's, that the square hole is a completely different stamping, not a modified oval hole. The width of the square hole does not appear adequate to accept the oval plug in question.
Additionally, the question was raised as to when the change from the oval hole (and plug) changed to the square hole (and round plug). As you noted, and Jeff's and John's pictures seem to support, the hole change appears to have occurred approximately mid-year. Yet how does one explain the square hole being shown in the 1966 copy from the Body Assembly Manual ? That was my point.
Bob
I wasn't sure if you were referring to the hole or the plug in the previous post which is why i asked and not whether which was more relevant. Maybe you have never seen the modified square hole in 67 doesn't mean it doesn't happen :D. I have seen it numerous times. It was fresh in my mind after looking at 67 GT500 3167 un restored survivor car (Carlisle all Ford June 3/2017 ) which had the modified square hole (seen that numerous times even though you haven't) with the oval plug installed. The oval plug fits easily. I just took out one for a picture that you see posted and reinstalled after. Why they continued using the oval plug even after the transition to the modified hole is still a question. I don't have a extensive picture library like Jeff S but took this picture of a 67 GT500 # 2745 in my garage finished at SJ on 5/24/67. Also a picture of the survivor car. You can see the top curved edge of the oval hole in the hole without the plug. Now you have seen what I and many others have seen for years .
-
Thanks for sharing. Wasn't questioning or doubting you at all
-
Picture of the other two versions of the hole in the radiator support being discussed. These are not to scale
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/7/6-060617221628.jpeg)
-
Sorry to be the "fly in the ointment", but I do question or doubt that it was "standard practice" that the oval holes were modified, That is not to say that some oval hole "left over" inventory may not have been (although if there were left over oval plugs, why would the holes have been modified ?). The reason I say this is because of several things. In the pictures that Bob G just Posted, as well as the one that John posted with the duct tape "background" in his summary, note the axis of the supposedly remaining portion of the oval holes; it is vertical (this is also what is shown in the Illustration in the Body Assembly Manual, page N7-8105-1, for the square holes). The oval holes in the radiator support had a horizontal major axis. And finally, the rubber plug (Part # 376966-S) shown in Bob G's most recent Post is not an oval plug, but a 5/8" diameter round button plug according to the Ford Standard and Utility Parts Catalog.
I truly feel that the square hole was a totally new stamping. The square part of it used for the Cougar headlight applications, and the two rounded (segments of a circle) portions in order to facilitate the use of a round, button plug. The oval plug (Part # 377841-S) is totally different than the button plug.
Based on the Body Assembly Manual revisions, along with all of the pictures that have been furnished, I think we are dealing once again with another Production Change. Oval holes with oval plugs early in the year, and square holes with button plugs from about mid-year on.
Bob
-
Purpose for the holes (one each side)
To hang the headlight assy from the radiator support
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/7/6-060617222147.jpeg)
And the stud used for the square (with horizontal bumps) hole. Looks to me like its slipped down in the hole or been struck/unseated
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/7/6-060617222200.jpeg)
-
Sorry to be the "fly in the ointment", but I do question or doubt that it was "standard practice" that the oval holes were modified, That is not to say that some oval hole "left over" inventory may not have been (although if there were left over oval plugs, why would the holes have been modified ?). The reason I say this is because of several things. In the pictures that Bob G just Posted, as well as the one that John posted with the duct tape "background" in his summary, note the axis of the supposedly remaining portion of the oval holes; it is vertical (this is also what is shown in the Illustration in the Body Assembly Manual, page N7-8105-1, for the square holes). The oval holes in the radiator support had a horizontal major axis. And finally, the rubber plug (Part # 376966-S) shown in Bob G's most recent Post is not an oval plug, but a 5/8" diameter round button plug according to the Ford Standard and Utility Parts Catalog.
I truly feel that the square hole was a totally new stamping. The square part of it used for the Cougar headlight applications, and the two rounded (segments of a circle) portions in order to facilitate the use of a round, button plug. The oval plug (Part # 377841-S) is totally different than the button plug.
Based on the Body Assembly Manual revisions, along with all of the pictures that have been furnished, I think we are dealing once again with another Production Change. Oval holes with oval plugs early in the year, and square holes with button plugs from about mid-year on.
Bob
When I say modified it is most likely that the die that stamped the hole was modified and not a existing stamped oval hole that was later modified to a square shape. The shape was stamped at one time. This squared shape is typical in later 67 . I have two 1968 Metuchen Shelby Mustangs ,one early Dec 67 build and the other a June built 68 that have the EXACT same shaped hole which would nullify your "left over inventory" theory . Finally you need to get your reading glasses or magnifying glass out because the center of the plug in the picture is OVAL and not round. I am not sure about 68 plugs being oval or round but I have a high confidence level for the oval plugs being used in 1967 regardless of oval or squared hole based on my experience and observations. I suppose that there is something to be said for the credibility of getting out in the real world to find evidence on the cars vs. apparently arm chair speculation based on what you find in books. If you haven't seen these squared holes with the oval edges in radiator supports what with that shape being so prevalent in 67 and 68 then the most obvious conclusion is that you must not be getting out much.
-
And the stud used for the square (with horizontal bumps) hole. Looks to me like its slipped down in the hole or been struck/unseated
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/7/6-060617222200.jpeg)
It also looks like it's installed backwards.
Jim
-
The early oval hole, used a different stud for mounting the headlight bucket on a Cougar. Stove bolt type with a round flat nut or keeper holding it to the panel.
(http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w115/CougarCJ/IMG_08811_zpsbcryzgvp.jpg) (http://s174.photobucket.com/user/CougarCJ/media/IMG_08811_zpsbcryzgvp.jpg.html)
(http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w115/CougarCJ/th_IMG_08801_zpsds005mia.jpg) (http://s174.photobucket.com/user/CougarCJ/media/IMG_08801_zpsds005mia.jpg.html)
-
The early oval hole, used a different stud for mounting the headlight bucket on a Cougar. Stove bolt type with a round flat nut or keeper holding it to the panel.
(http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w115/CougarCJ/IMG_08811_zpsbcryzgvp.jpg) (http://s174.photobucket.com/user/CougarCJ/media/IMG_08811_zpsbcryzgvp.jpg.html)
(http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w115/CougarCJ/th_IMG_08801_zpsds005mia.jpg) (http://s174.photobucket.com/user/CougarCJ/media/IMG_08801_zpsds005mia.jpg.html)
I would be inclined to believe this is a prime example of an owner induced modification, function unknown.
Jim
-
I would be inclined to believe this is a prime example of an owner induced modification, function unknown.
Jim
I would be inclined to disagree. These examples pictured are COUGARS. (again, for mounting of the headlamp assemblies) The later 67 or 68 version basically matches this early 67 version example for function-ability, excepting the differences accounted for in the radiator support changes. Obviously, the design would have issues when attempting to unbolt the headlamp assembly. Rusty fasteners would no doubt spin the carriage bolt (early design) so Lincoln Mercury updated the design and the radiator supports accordingly.
We sure have chased this rabbit far from the OP's question of "source" for the oval plugs!
-
I would be inclined to disagree. These examples pictured are COUGARS.
We sure have chased this rabbit far from the OP's question of "source" for the oval plugs!
I agree on both points (now). I would like to see a Cougar's headlight installation, just for reference.
Jim
-
My findings show the change for Dearborn cars between 4th week of February 1967 and first week of March 1967.
-
Like most things 1967 and really best practice we need to look at unrestored cars to make a determination of an approximate change over. That needs to be done at all three assembly plants...
Here's another data point for you John...
1967 390 Convertible, Built on Sept. 22, 1966 at San Jose.
Oval holes...
-
One thing that bothers me about Forums, not just ours, but others also, is that when a thread is started with a question, and that question, or questions, don’t get answered; it’s just like an Old Western, they “fade off into the Sunset”.
In order to answer the questions, and help straighten out the issue of the Rubber Plugs that John (the OP) inquired about, I believe that we need to get several things clarified.
NOTE : Due to the size of the Text and Attachments, this “clarification” will include Part I and Part II. I will Post Part II first in order that Part I can be read first.
Bob G :
a) In your Reply of June 3, you noted “…and it's square hole had the same plug installed from the engine side as other pictures posted.” The “other pictures posted” include John’s, Jeff’s and mine. In both John and Jeff’s pictures, there are 2 distinctly different rubber plugs shown. To which are you referring ? Both of their pictures, as well as mine, show the oval one that John was originally referring to; the other shown is a round plug in the square hole application ; pictures showing this show the round plug’s front and back, depending on whether it was inserted from the “engine side” or the “front of the car side”.
b) In your Reply of June 5, you noted that “…68's with original radiator supports will have the square hole which is actually made from the oval hole with oval top and bottom edge still evident and squared off sides”. Here you describe a modification (“made from”) to the oval hole, which I do not believe took place. All of the square holes with oval top and bottom edge that I have seen, have the axis of the oval top and bottom, vertical, so they couldn’t have been “…actually made from the oval hole.” I believe that a totally new die was used for the square hole, and not a modification of the existing oval hole, nor a modification of the oval hole die. A “modification” is considered an “altering of something existing to amend its form or shape”. I believe that the oval hole to square hole is considered more of a production change”.
c) In your Reply of June 6, you once again refer to the hole as a “modified square hole”. As noted above, I do not believe this to be the case. And yes, I have seen many of the square holes, and they are not modified oval holes (other than obviously “owner butchered ones).
You also note that the “oval plug”, of which you’ve seen many, fits easily into the square hole. Well, first, the “oval plug” that you describe and show a picture of, is not the “oval plug” in question. If you look at the dimensions furnished by John, you’ll see this. The “oval plug” you show also has a different Part # molded into it (376966-S) than the one in question (no, that’s not an 8 in the first digit, it is a “3”; there were no 6 digit Standard or Utility Part #’s that began with 8 in 1967). Finally, the “oval plug” you show in the picture is not an oval plug at all; it is a round plug that has been slightly distorted as the result of putting a round plug in a square hole.
d) In your June 7 Reply, you finally “change your tune” about the oval hole being modified, and note that “most likely” the die was modified. However, in looking at the oval stamped hole versus the square stamped hole, I don’t believe that this would have been feasible.
A closer look at the two different stampings shows that while they have parts that are similar (the overall length from “oval to oval” in particular), they are not identical. The oval, horizontal axis hole exhibits the rounded ends having a radius of 0.1695”, and thus a height of 0.339”. On the other hand, the square hole is 19/32” (0.59375”) on a side, with the top and bottom ovals having a radius of 0.15625”. While it would of course be possible to modify the horizontal axis oval hole die into a die for the square hole, IMHO, the cost to modify would probably exceed the cost of a new die (not to mention the fact that the horizontal oval hole die would be “lost”, prohibiting its use in other applications).
As far as my “left over inventory theory”, the only reason I interjected that was to give you some credence for your “modified hole theory”.
Here you again bring up the “oval plug” which you pictured, and as noted above, this is not the same oval plug in question, and also as noted, the one you pictured just appears oval. And, if you hadn’t noticed, the zoom feature works better than reading glasses or a magnifying glass.
Finally, while maybe not as many as you, nor definitely not as many documented as you, between car shows, swap meets, and junkyards, I have seen my share of Mustangs since 1976. Putting “real world” observations together with Ford documentation, makes a pretty powerful set of tools. Thus, my most obvious conclusion is that you haven’t dug deep enough into what you’ve seen on the surface.
To help slow down the “rabbit chase”, as Richard put it, I am going to summarize my take from the 4 pages of the “chase”
1) Early 1967 Mustangs had 4 oval holes stamped in the radiator support, their main axes being horizontal ; two on the right and two on the left, each pair located below and inboard of the front hood bumper support brackets. There is no apparent use for these holes on Mustangs. (Pictures 1 & 2)
2) For some reason, on Mustangs, the upper two holes received rubber plugs. On the early production Mustangs, these distinctly oval plugs had Part # 377841-S molded into them. Currently, there is no known source for these rubber plugs, other than from other 1967 “donor” Mustangs. (Pictures 3 & 4)
3) Sometime between the fourth week in February and the first week of March, 1967, the stamping of the horizontal oval holes was changed to a square hole stamping. The square hole stamping included a rounded portion on the top and bottom of the square. The reason for the square hole was to allow insertion of a captive nut (nut and retainer assembly) that was to be used for part of the headlight assembly for Cougars (the same radiator support was used for both Mustangs and Cougars). (Picture 5)
4) The rounded portion on the top and bottom of the square hole, was apparently to allow insertion of a round rubber button plug when this same radiator support was used on Mustangs.
5) Once again, the rubber plug was only used in the top two holes on Mustangs. These round rubber plugs had Part # 376966-S molded into them. These plugs can still be found both NOS as well as at your Ford Dealer. At the time of this Post, at least 15 Ford Dealers had these in stock; at others, they can be ordered. (Interestingly, this same button plug, Pictures 6 & 7, was used in the rear inner fender aprons, 3 on each side).
6) Based on observations by others, rubber plugs installed in the Radiator Support on Mustangs at the San Jose Plant were installed from the Engine Compartment toward the front of the car. Cars built at the Dearborn Plant appear to have had the plugs installed from the front toward the rear. While the sample size is small, cars built at the Metuchen Plant appear to have had the plugs installed the same as the Dearborn, from the front toward the rear.
While we haven’t really answered John’s original question as to a source (other than from donor ‘67’s) for the oval plug in question for the Radiator Support, this will hopefully help explain any confusion of the oval and square hole applications, as well as the rubber plugs used for them. (Pictures 8 & 9 - side by side Plug comparison).
As far as the “second part” to John’s original question, the rubber plugs for the inner frame rails near the idler arm and steering box mountings, this plug is Part # 378770-S. I am not aware if they are being reproduced, but they can be found NOS. (Picture 10)
Hopefully, this has provided at least some clarification and partial answers to John’s original questions.
-
Attachments 5-10 for Part I
-
Great summary!
Still the issue on OP's question..."but can't find a source"
May someone lives in the near of a junkyard to collect some "originals" (if still usable) if there is really no company reproducing it seems like.
I would be interested to get one of these.
-
One thing that bothers me about Forums, not just ours, but others also, is that when a thread is started with a question, and that question, or questions, don’t get answered; it’s just like an Old Western, they “fade off into the Sunset”.
In order to answer the questions, and help straighten out the issue of the Rubber Plugs that John (the OP) inquired about, I believe that we need to get several things clarified.
NOTE : Due to the size of the Text and Attachments, this “clarification” will include Part I and Part II. I will Post Part II first in order that Part I can be read first.
Bob G :
a) In your Reply of June 3, you noted “…and it's square hole had the same plug installed from the engine side as other pictures posted.” The “other pictures posted” include John’s, Jeff’s and mine. In both John and Jeff’s pictures, there are 2 distinctly different rubber plugs shown. To which are you referring ? Both of their pictures, as well as mine, show the oval one that John was originally referring to; the other shown is a round plug in the square hole application ; pictures showing this show the round plug’s front and back, depending on whether it was inserted from the “engine side” or the “front of the car side”.
b) In your Reply of June 5, you noted that “…68's with original radiator supports will have the square hole which is actually made from the oval hole with oval top and bottom edge still evident and squared off sides”. Here you describe a modification (“made from”) to the oval hole, which I do not believe took place. All of the square holes with oval top and bottom edge that I have seen, have the axis of the oval top and bottom, vertical, so they couldn’t have been “…actually made from the oval hole.” I believe that a totally new die was used for the square hole, and not a modification of the existing oval hole, nor a modification of the oval hole die. A “modification” is considered an “altering of something existing to amend its form or shape”. I believe that the oval hole to square hole is considered more of a production change”.
c) In your Reply of June 6, you once again refer to the hole as a “modified square hole”. As noted above, I do not believe this to be the case. And yes, I have seen many of the square holes, and they are not modified oval holes (other than obviously “owner butchered ones).
You also note that the “oval plug”, of which you’ve seen many, fits easily into the square hole. Well, first, the “oval plug” that you describe and show a picture of, is not the “oval plug” in question. If you look at the dimensions furnished by John, you’ll see this. The “oval plug” you show also has a different Part # molded into it (376966-S) than the one in question (no, that’s not an 8 in the first digit, it is a “3”; there were no 6 digit Standard or Utility Part #’s that began with 8 in 1967). Finally, the “oval plug” you show in the picture is not an oval plug at all; it is a round plug that has been slightly distorted as the result of putting a round plug in a square hole.
d) In your June 7 Reply, you finally “change your tune” about the oval hole being modified, and note that “most likely” the die was modified. However, in looking at the oval stamped hole versus the square stamped hole, I don’t believe that this would have been feasible.
A closer look at the two different stampings shows that while they have parts that are similar (the overall length from “oval to oval” in particular), they are not identical. The oval, horizontal axis hole exhibits the rounded ends having a radius of 0.1695”, and thus a height of 0.339”. On the other hand, the square hole is 19/32” (0.59375”) on a side, with the top and bottom ovals having a radius of 0.15625”. While it would of course be possible to modify the horizontal axis oval hole die into a die for the square hole, IMHO, the cost to modify would probably exceed the cost of a new die (not to mention the fact that the horizontal oval hole die would be “lost”, prohibiting its use in other applications).
As far as my “left over inventory theory”, the only reason I interjected that was to give you some credence for your “modified hole theory”.
Here you again bring up the “oval plug” which you pictured, and as noted above, this is not the same oval plug in question, and also as noted, the one you pictured just appears oval. And, if you hadn’t noticed, the zoom feature works better than reading glasses or a magnifying glass.
Finally, while maybe not as many as you, nor definitely not as many documented as you, between car shows, swap meets, and junkyards, I have seen my share of Mustangs since 1976. Putting “real world” observations together with Ford documentation, makes a pretty powerful set of tools. Thus, my most obvious conclusion is that you haven’t dug deep enough into what you’ve seen on the surface.
To help slow down the “rabbit chase”, as Richard put it, I am going to summarize my take from the 4 pages of the “chase”
1) Early 1967 Mustangs had 4 oval holes stamped in the radiator support, their main axes being horizontal ; two on the right and two on the left, each pair located below and inboard of the front hood bumper support brackets. There is no apparent use for these holes on Mustangs. (Pictures 1 & 2)
2) For some reason, on Mustangs, the upper two holes received rubber plugs. On the early production Mustangs, these distinctly oval plugs had Part # 377841-S molded into them. Currently, there is no known source for these rubber plugs, other than from other 1967 “donor” Mustangs. (Pictures 3 & 4)
3) Sometime between the fourth week in February and the first week of March, 1967, the stamping of the horizontal oval holes was changed to a square hole stamping. The square hole stamping included a rounded portion on the top and bottom of the square. The reason for the square hole was to allow insertion of a captive nut (nut and retainer assembly) that was to be used for part of the headlight assembly for Cougars (the same radiator support was used for both Mustangs and Cougars). (Picture 5)
4) The rounded portion on the top and bottom of the square hole, was apparently to allow insertion of a round rubber button plug when this same radiator support was used on Mustangs.
5) Once again, the rubber plug was only used in the top two holes on Mustangs. These round rubber plugs had Part # 376966-S molded into them. These plugs can still be found both NOS as well as at your Ford Dealer. At the time of this Post, at least 15 Ford Dealers had these in stock; at others, they can be ordered. (Interestingly, this same button plug, Pictures 6 & 7, was used in the rear inner fender aprons, 3 on each side).
6) Based on observations by others, rubber plugs installed in the Radiator Support on Mustangs at the San Jose Plant were installed from the Engine Compartment toward the front of the car. Cars built at the Dearborn Plant appear to have had the plugs installed from the front toward the rear. While the sample size is small, cars built at the Metuchen Plant appear to have had the plugs installed the same as the Dearborn, from the front toward the rear.
While we haven’t really answered John’s original question as to a source (other than from donor ‘67’s) for the oval plug in question for the Radiator Support, this will hopefully help explain any confusion of the oval and square hole applications, as well as the rubber plugs used for them. (Pictures 8 & 9 - side by side Plug comparison).
As far as the “second part” to John’s original question, the rubber plugs for the inner frame rails near the idler arm and steering box mountings, this plug is Part # 378770-S. I am not aware if they are being reproduced, but they can be found NOS. (Picture 10)
Hopefully, this has provided at least some clarification and partial answers to John’s original questions.
It seems that there are many things that bother you not the least of which is my use of the word modified . "The lady doth protest too much, methinks." is the quote that comes to mind what with your long winded post. A-C points are your "spin" . Fake News ;D I have a suspicion that your long winded post is to take the focus off the theories that you were shown to be incorrect on (Shape of hole,round plug only in square with oval parts hole etc.) by trying to de legitimize my statements with your long winded double talk. At least from my perspective. Others may think differently.
-
FYI the use of the plug on only the left side (regulator side) is just as typical if not more IMO then plugs on both sides from original examples (SJ and Metuchen) I have observed. I suppose the plug was needed to block water from the regulator opposed to the need to block water from the side of the battery on the other side. The one on the regulator side is the most important one to have IMO.
-
It seems that there are many things that bother you not the least of which is my use of the word modified . "The lady doth protest too much, methinks." is the quote that comes to mind what with your long winded post. A-C points are your "spin" . Fake News ;D I have a suspicion that your long winded post is to take the focus off the theories that you were shown to be incorrect on (Shape of hole,round plug only in square with oval parts hole etc.) by trying to de legitimize my statements with your long winded double talk. At least from my perspective. Others may think differently.
Bob : There have been several times that I have used an "incorrect" word in some of my Posts, and have, in most every case, apologized for that, and corrected my wording. Your use of the word "modification" is no different ; it is absolutely the incorrect word to be used where you used it. As the "hole/plug issue" is the crux of this Topic, I think that getting the terminology correct is important here (as opposed to your consistent use of "then" when it should be "than", which, while incorrect, they are conjunction/adverb respectively, and don't change the meaning like a noun such as "modification" does).
As far as my "long winded" post (almost half of which was reiteration of your posts), the reason was to provide documentation for my findings, and no other reason. This documentation is based on facts, not supposition, and shows that what I said was correct. I was not shown to be incorrect as you note. Facts are not theories, nor are they "double talk".
-
Bob : There have been several times that I have used an "incorrect" word in some of my Posts, and have, in most every case, apologized for that, and corrected my wording. Your use of the word "modification" is no different ; it is absolutely the incorrect word to be used where you used it. As the "hole/plug issue" is the crux of this Topic, I think that getting the terminology correct is important here (as opposed to your consistent use of "then" when it should be "than", which, while incorrect, they are conjunction/adverb respectively, and don't change the meaning like a noun such as "modification" does).
As far as my "long winded" post (almost half of which was reiteration of your posts), the reason was to provide documentation for my findings, and no other reason. This documentation is based on facts, not supposition, and shows that what I said was correct. I was not shown to be incorrect as you note. Facts are not theories, nor are they "double talk".
Even though my meaning I thought was clear if I had only known you would take such exception to the word "modified" I would have certainly been more descriptive. As far as your documentation for your findings, I agree to disagree. This is a dead horse IMO and suggest we move on each knowing their position. Anything else should be taken off line .Please. Thank you.
-
Agree. Just trying to provide the best documented information available, and more importantly, answer the OP's original questions.
Bob
-
As a temporary solution it is not too bad to cut a sector about 30 degrees of a 376966-s plug and glue the ends together .
The less you cut off the better is the result . Worked for me.
Ralf
-
SJ car in the lower 180Ks; Ford delivery date of early March with 4 oval holes.
More interesting, I thought, was the stamping date (left side of radiator support near hood adjustment standoff) of 1 26 C2.
Many of the sheet metal parts on my chassis are very close to this date.
A picture of the radiator support before disassembly shows no plug or marks where one might have been. The front of this car is unmolested (I believe).
Note the red oxide under the hood adjustment support in this disassembly shot:
[click to go to Flicker. Click again to zoom]
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4393/36923292782_b7c6d2ffde.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/YfMwyf) (https://flic.kr/p/YfMwyf)
-
SJ car in the lower 180Ks; Ford delivery date of early March with 4 oval holes.
More interesting, I thought, was the stamping date (left side of radiator support near hood adjustment standoff) of 1 26 C2.
Many of the sheet metal parts on my chassis are very close to this date.
A picture of the radiator support before disassembly shows no plug or marks where one might have been. The front of this car is unmolested (I believe).
Note the red oxide under the hood adjustment support in this disassembly shot:
rubber plugs would not in all cases leave any evidence. The bare steel/light red oxide is not unusual on an original car since getting in that spot would have required some extra effort :) but rarely seen on a restored car
-
SJ car in the lower 180Ks; Ford delivery date of early March with 4 oval holes.
More interesting, I thought, was the stamping date (left side of radiator support near hood adjustment standoff) of 1 26 C2.
Many of the sheet metal parts on my chassis are very close to this date.
A picture of the radiator support before disassembly shows no plug or marks where one might have been. The front of this car is unmolested (I believe).
Note the red oxide under the hood adjustment support in this disassembly shot:
[click to go to Flicker. Click again to zoom]
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4393/36923292782_b7c6d2ffde.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/YfMwyf) (https://flic.kr/p/YfMwyf)
FYI the hole that is slightly above the regulator is the one most typically plugged. It is reasonable to assume to keep water from getting on the regulator. The battery side that you show is less typically plugged.
-
Again a useful piece of info ; I thought that both upper holes were always plugged. That maybe explains why there only was one correct
plug with my "project in boxes" SJ early 67. Is by the way the horn wire routing and strap correct?
Ralf
-
Ralf - it's an inboard headlight Shelby. I would not use the front wiring harness as an example for other cars. I'm left scratching my head as to why the high beams are wired the way they are. Four intrusions into the harness when two would have sufficed. The Ford home office was not consulted.
Here is the regulator side. Yes, I have properly fixed the very apparent modification. It's hot down south.
[Add Flicker notes here]
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4336/36952153861_ca3c4b4634.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/YikrX4) (https://flic.kr/p/YikrX4)
Like Jeff says, you can't make out if the plugs were there or not. Only illustrating what I found on this mostly unmolested car.
Getting back to the when the change was made from round/oblong/square, it might be better to drill down on the stamp date of the radiator support. Different plants probably had different supply levels of this part. Without knowing their initial supply and how many cars were cranked out at any time you are solving for 'x' when the y' variable is also unknown.
Do we even know if only Cleveland made a radiator support (like mine?). If others did you now have another variable in the mix.
My back hurts so I'm on the couch reading through a bunch of posts. Just in case you wonder why is Bill going through old posts dating back months and months and months.
-
Mine:
https://picload.org/view/drrdldci/meinhornbeifahrer.jpg.html (https://picload.org/view/drrdldci/meinhornbeifahrer.jpg.html)
(https://picload.org/thumbnail/drrdldci/meinhornbeifahrer.jpg)
Still interested to get such a rubber plug.
Thx Ralf