Topic: 60's convertible weatherstripping

[bryancobb]

I'm fitting the convertible weatherstripping to my frame now.  Question:  Did the joints in the rubber pieces fall at the same places as the joints of the steel frame, or did they stagger a little to help make the rubber ends line up?  If the same, some of my pieces will need to be trimmed at the ends to make that happen.

[CharlesTurner]

They usually cross over the edge of the frame a little at each joint.  Do some test fitting to get the best seal.

[bryancobb]

Thanks Charles,
I took my old OEM ones and melted off the rubber.  I separated the new repop jobs at the longitudinal seam that was super-glued at mfg.
Then I replaced the flimsy aluminum angle pieces with Ford OEM steel and glued them back tother with C/A glue.  I'm sure it will be much better than the aluminum.

[Oz390]

Shop manual and FAM's both note some trimming required to get good seals, so the joins vary a bit. As Charles notes, they generally do not line up to the rails.  Side to front then rear to side.  Trim one or both as required to get a good seal with a bit of compression on closing.  Use a new razor blade. 

[bryancobb]

Thanks Richard,
I asked on here because I figured they would have seen some unrestored assembly-line cars with their own eyes.

Bry

[bryancobb]

Another question.  With no weatherstripping installed at all, and the top frame in the up-and-latched position, the quarter glasses do not follow the curvature of the rear edge of the quarter glass frame.  The red line is the glass frame.  The blue line is the steel top frame.  It takes a 1/8"+ thick washer on the middle threaded stud before putting the weatherstrip on, to make the rubber contact the quarter glass correctly.

I am sure the glass and the frame pieces are 1966 parts.  The same problem is present on both sides.

[CharlesTurner]

Do you have an original piece of weather-stripping to check and make sure the repro piece isn't made wrong?

Best to compare things like this with original parts just to be sure you don't waste time trying to figure out something that might never have originally been a problem.

[bryancobb]

Yeah Charles,

The steel "spine" I melted the rubber off of fits the frame perfectly.  Like it was MADE to go there!  HaHa.  But the windows are a LITTLE different.   I doubt very many people have went about this like I am doing -- adjusting the windows and frame to the dimensions in the Osbourne manual drawings without weatherstrip in place -- but I just felt this was the best way to get a near perfect seal all around.  My guess is...the factory didn't even worry about this. 

Even where the rubber is farthest from the glass, it still seals but the little thin, outer-flap of the weatherstripping doesn't "hang over" the outer corner of the stainless frame like it does everywhere else.
There's a 1/8" - 3/16" gap.  The inside fold of the rubber has to do all the sealing.  I'd really like for that flap to hang over outside.

When I put one of the thick steel washers in there on the middle stud, it pushes the middle of weatherstrip toward the glass frame and corrects the problem.  I can conceal the washer with the strip-caulk and it will look fine.  I just don't understand why Ford didn't make that ONE piece of the frame follow the glass EXACTLY like all the rest do.

The drawing on the left is what I desire.  The drawing on the right is what I get at the center threaded stud.

[Oz390]

Bryan.  Man, you do reallly nice drawings.  I'm going to have to lift my game for the sketches I've done for the book! ;-)  I went more schematic, than detail.

I have 4 or so frames and stack of OEM weatherstrip.  I'll compare the rear rails to see if any curvature differences exist.  If you are 100% sure they are OEM, than that's how they'd ift... odd but the only result one can come to.  Or, nlikely, the OEM weather strip was "bulged in the middle, and the repro is a straight single section extrusion.  Unlikely, just throwing it out.

Or maybe the rear glass is coupe and '66... I beilieve that are different, but have never compared side by side to see if maybe the differnce is this minor or they jsut would even come close... a long shot...

[bryancobb]

Thanks for the praise Richard.  It IS my day-job so I'm sort-of cheating! 

This car of mine has not experienced most of the things the majority of these cars have.  When bought it in 79, it was from a friend of my Dad's who owned a used car lot who had taken it as a trade-in from the original owners.  Other than having a non Ford A/C unit installed in 67, and having a recent 25 cent paint job, it was in VERY good shape.

It had its' first replacement convertible top and was basically unmolested everywhere else.  As I have gotten deeper in this restoration, I realize just how good of shape it was in.

The guy I sold it to in 1980 kept it in a garage for 31 years until I bought it back in 2009.  He only put 15000 miles on it in 3 decades and when I bought it back it was basically just like it was when I sold it to him, 31 years ago.

The quarter windows are both dated appropriate for the MAR 66 assembly.  I'm pretty sure these are the ones that have always been in the car.  The weatherstrip I removed, by all indications, are the OEM ones that were put on at assembly in Metuchen.

The only thing I can think of is maybe the 2 aft pieces of my frame are later revisions that are curved for 1967 quarter windows?

[Oz390]

Bryan.  I looked at a few of the parts I have lying about.  I have a couple sets of old OEM weatherstipping I hung onto for some odd reason, and it actually came in handy (10 years later!)!  It fits nicely to to the curve of the rear rails.  I tested on a 65, 67 and 68, all fit the same.  So it does not appear that the curvature of the rear rail changes 65-68, based on a miniscule sample of parts.

I then looked at the quarter window.  I do have a disassembled '68 coupe I am working on and the trim (windows completely disassembled for restoration) does exactly what you show.  I could only hold the trim up against my convertible but tight top and bottom and a 1/8"-ish gap in the middle.  What that means, I do not know as I am unsure how it may relate to a 65-66.  But as I had the parts handy....

As for the frame-to-weatherstrip gaps, the intermediate rail weatherstrip, on my samples (years as above), extended long over both ends.  A small amount at the front and a bit more at the rear, obviously variable due to the oval holes.   

[Oz390]

Forgot to add..

I did compare section and sizes to a set of Drake repro weatherstrip. 

For the side and rear rails (did not check the header carefully) the cross section was very similar and the length and curvatures were very, very close.  Nothing extree enough to cause waht you are describing.   They are obvioulsy molded over a very solid core, as stout as the originals, and could not be removed and put on old cores as you note. 

Not sure what brand you may have used, but sound way different to the repro set I have...

[bryancobb]

Thanks for the effort.  I'm convinced the condition I have with the 1/8" gap at the center of the quarter glass is the "NORM."

I'm not sure if my repops are Drake ones, but I'm guessing they are.  They came from NPD about a year ago.

My new rear and intermediate weatherstripping pieces have a "SEAM" in the rubber that goes the full length and in line with the threaded studs.  It's obvious that at manufacture, the rubber was wrapped around the aluminum angle, and then glued along the seam with C/A Glue.

To remove the rubber and put it on the OEM steel angle I simply had to take a small screwdriver and run it along the seam, which easily split the seam apart.

The biggest difference in my OEM's and repops is...The rubber of the OEM's were individually heat molded around the steel "BONE" and the rubber is solidly attached to the metal angle.  On the repops, the rubber part was EXTRUDED in long lengths and then slit and wrapped around the aluminum angle bone.  The rubber is not even attached to the aluminum.  It is just held in place by the shape of the inside of the rubber--not very stable--.

[Oz390]

Sound very different to the Drake's I have.  I bought them from NPD for comparison for "the book", think it was at least a year or more ago. 

But they are hard molded to the spine, very similar to the originals I have.  Sound very different to yours, no way I can see to get the rubber off the steel frame in once piece that I can see...

[bryancobb]

Thanks,

I'll get the Drake ones.  If the Drake door and trunk rubbers are an indicator, I'll NOT be disappointed.

DISREGARD---  THE GREAT DOOR WEATHERSTRIPPING I HAVE IS DANIEL CARPENTER

BC