Author Topic: Spring Shackle Differences  (Read 4809 times)

Offline J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24232
Re: Spring Shackle Differences
« Reply #15 on: October 25, 2018, 04:31:34 PM »
Are you talking about a 1/4" thickness of the steel?  ........

+1  Will measure a half a dozen or more originals here at home
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline Bob Gaines

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 8998
Re: Spring Shackle Differences
« Reply #16 on: October 25, 2018, 06:27:06 PM »
Yes, thickness of the steel.    I have several known aftermarket ones, all shaped differently than this one, and all measure 1/4".   I'm anxious
to know what you find.  Thanks.

edit:  .226, measured with calipers, to be more precise.   .156 is the measurement of the NPD piece
1/4 thick is way too thick for assemblyline shackles. The service replacement shackles were a lot thicker then the assemblyline ones and even they were much less then 1/4 inch thick steel. My Calipers has dead batteries so I will have to rely on someone else until I get it functional .
Bob Gaines,Shelby enthusiast, Shelby collector , Shelby concours judge SAAC,MCA,Mid America Shelby

Offline 67gta289

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3025
Re: Spring Shackle Differences
« Reply #17 on: October 25, 2018, 08:37:15 PM »
I measured some original C6 stamped parts - thickness ~0.158
John
67 289 GTA Dec 20 1966 San Jose
7R02C156xxx
MCA 74660

Offline Bob Gaines

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 8998
Re: Spring Shackle Differences
« Reply #18 on: October 25, 2018, 08:59:50 PM »
I measured some original C6 stamped parts - thickness ~0.158
If that is how thick the C6 shackle is that should represent the assemblyline thickness. I never went by my calipers (which are off line at the moment )but visually. I have only seen the C6 shackle plate one thickness and it was the one representing a assemblyline version.
Bob Gaines,Shelby enthusiast, Shelby collector , Shelby concours judge SAAC,MCA,Mid America Shelby

Offline 67gta289

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3025
Re: Spring Shackle Differences
« Reply #19 on: October 25, 2018, 09:01:37 PM »
Bob - agreed.  I have a few sets, known originals.  The NPD version appears to be correct from this perspective.
John
67 289 GTA Dec 20 1966 San Jose
7R02C156xxx
MCA 74660

Offline gjz30075

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 209
Re: Spring Shackle Differences
« Reply #20 on: October 25, 2018, 09:03:40 PM »
Good to know!   Thanks guys!
Greg Z

Offline J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24232
Re: Spring Shackle Differences
« Reply #21 on: October 25, 2018, 10:12:22 PM »
I measured some original C6 stamped parts - thickness ~0.158

I got 0.17-0.18 for from the four I measured. All in the same neighborhood.

Just for comparison, visually and in measurement, the factory tie down brackets came in at about 1/4" thick and the rear leaf spring (long one) around 0.35-0.38
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline kammertime

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 73
Re: Spring Shackle Differences
« Reply #22 on: December 25, 2018, 01:26:33 PM »
Are the NPD 1/2" shackles fine or coarse thread ?

Offline 67350#1242

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 305
Re: Spring Shackle Differences
« Reply #23 on: December 25, 2018, 08:03:17 PM »
The NPD description says fine thread.
Quote
SHACKLE KIT, Leaf Spring, rear, 1/2 inch stud, fine threads, used on LH side of dual exhaust cars as a normal shackle was difficult to install in the tight space, Current information shows that these were not always used as intended and are not seen much beyond 1967, Zinc plates, zinc studs, fine thread, C6DZ-5630-B
« Last Edit: December 25, 2018, 08:05:19 PM by 67350#1242 »
67 Coupe SJ 11/16/66
67 GT350 SJ 2/01/67