Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
My Paint OK stamp has on the second line  #3 -- 6

It's on the cowl of a  '65 Metuchen, June 11 built fastback.

Possibly a fill-in inspector for someone off or sick that day
2
My Paint OK stamp has on the second line  #3 -- 6

It's on the cowl of a  '65 Metuchen, June 11 built fastback. 
3
1967 - 1968 / Re: Unrestored March 67 San Jose Convertible Pictures
« Last post by J_Speegle on Today at 05:49:42 PM »
So since I'm here fixing things here are some additional pictures that help illustrate what we have discussed in other threads

Ext 1- Passenger front pinch weld under front fender



Ext 2- Pinch weld black-out on rear quarter on passenger side. At the rear on this one the pinch weld black goes right to the rear valance edge not sure if  any over spray has been removed over the year, it had none, it just stopped there or it went under



Ext 3- Pinch weld black-out on rear quarter. On this side the painter or jet was adjusted higher than usual/typical since some gets on the outwardly facing surface. Got so close that it almost looks brushed on but its not as we've seen this along the rocker before with spraying. On this side you can make out possibly just a little black on the edge of the rear valance
http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view;id=8976


Ext 4- Appears (possibly since its a later car) that the worker assigned to at least one shift moved the started to move the location of the rear second rotation number to this location rather than placing it where it had been typically, earlier in the year.



Int 1- Just a shot of the inside rear view mirror



Under 1- Shot forward of the front wheel well showing the dirty but original back sides of the front panels, wiring and other details



Under 2- Just one of the dolly locations to show diameter and location



Under 3- Considering this car was just used and driven its always nice to find the bare surfaces (in this case the edge of the pinion retainer) still fairly rust free after all these years. Possibly covered and protected from the elements with grease and grime



Under 4- And lastly (for now) it was interesting to see at least the remains of the rear axle identification label still in place



As always I hope these examples help others and expand our knowledge, promote discussion as well as the understanding of how our cars were originally built
4
1967 - 1968 / Re: Unrestored March 67 San Jose Convertible Pictures
« Last post by J_Speegle on Today at 05:17:04 PM »
Don't have photo bucket and missing a lot of photos. But still cool stuff from what photos I can see.

Yep - more PhotoBucket boxes of dead link. All better now. Added some some new pictures, clarified some wording and will add some new selections from this nice example. This was from an inspection I did - what I refer to as a "Feel Good" inspection. Owner had a few cars and was going through the process of deciding what cars to keep, restorer or get rid of so he asked for some facts to work help him in his choices.

5
1967 - 1968 / Re: 67 p/s pump stampings
« Last post by 22mafeja on Today at 04:52:46 PM »
And now I am sure it is a Trw. I happened to see a picture of a reman on Ebay where the marks on my pump were clearly
visible and where the Trw was also visible.
Ralf
6
1967 - 1968 / Re: 67 p/s pump stampings
« Last post by 22mafeja on Today at 04:33:04 PM »
If it is a Trw pump if it hasn`t Fomoco on then we have a winner. I will go for semi gloss black colour then. 

Ralf
7
1967 - 1968 / Re: Clarification on repop dash pads
« Last post by J_Speegle on Today at 04:24:09 PM »
.................... I would strongly suggest looking past the "too hard "route and finding a good used one.

True achievements rarely come without  any challenges or difficulties.  Most often I've found the greater challenge the greater the personal achievement and satisfaction with the finished product. But as always it is a choice one makes for themselves
8
1967 - 1968 / Re: 67 p/s pump stampings
« Last post by J_Speegle on Today at 04:15:54 PM »
No , nothing more .

Not done yet .........

Since it visually lacks that marking then it's likely TRW - Bob is seeing that trademark in your pictures apparently so I think you have two votes  :)
9
1967 - 1968 / Re: Clarification on repop dash pads
« Last post by Bob Gaines on Today at 03:45:49 PM »
Thanks. Just want to get some answers on the actual fitment issues with the good grain repop. A lot of posts on the web where all you hear is " They suck!, They don't fit!"  I get that, but don't fit how? Can they be made to fit and look good with some effort? Just looking for stories of real world experiences. Brian
Where there is smoke there is fire. All the negative things you have heard have a basis in fact. Can you get one installed yes . Is that what you wanted to hear? Getting it to fit is a matter of opinion. Having it appear correct on the outside is a matter of opinion too.   Does it look as good , fit as good as original all other things being equal no. Some require heat gun message ,some require cutting excess foam etc. They can be different even within the same MFG. I havn't seen one yet that you couldn't tell immediately the difference between the grain texture on the repro compared to the original.  It is up to you to decide if you want to go to the extra effort to find a good usable original or if it is "too hard". If you don't have high expectations , are selling the car ,no time to look  etc.then that is different. Everybody is different which is OK. You have to decide what makes the best sense for you.  I would strongly suggest looking past the "too hard "route and finding a good used one.
10
1967 - 1968 / Re: 67 p/s pump stampings
« Last post by Bob Gaines on Today at 03:27:13 PM »
My pump is a reman without tag. The question is as always ford or trw pump . It has some signs stamped on the cast surface close
to the pump shaft. These are clearly P.40.PSO.14 and beneath not so clear AF 3 where the A and F are touching each other.
Is this telling you anything?

Ralf
The TRW casting is identified with a "W" and the Ford Thompson with the FOMOCO trademark. With that said  I see in picture 2 what appears to be a poor looking "W" identification mark. 
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10