ConcoursMustang Forums
1st Generation 1964 1/2 - 1973 - Questions & general discussions that apply to a specific year => 1969 Mustang => Topic started by: G Wood on June 16, 2015, 11:25:19 PM
-
On original cars, there seems to be a bracket or tab attached to the wire harness that is bolted into the hood as the harness exits the hood scope and runs toward the driver side apron area. On the reproduction harness that I bought this mounting tab is missing. Can anyone provide information if the tab or bracket is available to purchase or am I missing something with my understanding of the correct way to attach the harness
thanks
-
Yes, there is a plastic tab, and I don't know of a source for one like the original. Here is a NOS harness and you can see the tab.
(http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d184/rockhouse66/DSC05595.jpg) (http://s35.photobucket.com/user/rockhouse66/media/DSC05595.jpg.html)
-
Thanks Jim, that is what I am looking for. This is a good picture that provides good detail. I am curious where I could find this mounting bracket.
-
Looks like two ( might be black) loops holding the wire between the two rear hood openings where the wires exit then one retainer at hood towards the drivers side
Impossible (well pretty much) to see on a Mach with the hood pad still in place
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/4/6-170615151414.jpeg)
Interesting that, looking at pictures, NJ wires may have retained the wire differently. Changed the title to reflect the specific plant your looking for
The opaque "T" attachment is the same as used for the wiper motor wire feed.
Found allot of nice (not effected by the heat) in the trunk of mid to late Ford and Merc products holding the taillight wiring to the car. Also in power window wiring of same period.
-
Jeff - so it appears the Dearborn car had the circular fasteners and the retainer that you refererence but not the black fastener in the first photo that gets bolted into the hood?
-
Jeff - so it appears the Dearborn car had the circular fasteners and the retainer that you refererence but not the black fastener in the first photo that gets bolted into the hood?
The problem is the clarity or lack there of in the pictures I have. Looking at all three plants I found some with the eyelet attachment (black t sort of thing) with the mounting screw towards the front of the hood (eyelet bracket behind) which makes it easier to make out. While others its hard to say - you can make out the section of the clip opaque or black with the small holes and slots at each edge but if the eyelet is to the rear end of the hood its hard with what I've got to tell what kind of bracket that is
The first picture (above) is from a very early car and that one is clearly the opaque style with the push post. If date makes a difference in what they were using. Additional pictures of 69 Dearborn cars follow. Allot of my examples (not posted) have aftermarket loops and retainers added over the year or the wires are simply hanging.
9F02M178xxx
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/4/6-170615221158.jpeg)
9F02M193xxx
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/4/6-170615221214.jpeg)
9F02M216xxx
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/4/6-170615221231.jpeg)
Just what I've got at the time
-
All of the hardware and their attachment points are well illustrated in the Electrical Assembly Manual, FYI. It shows the "T" shaped piece and the two loop style wiring clips and their locations.
-
All of the hardware and their attachment points are well illustrated in the Electrical Assembly Manual, FYI. It shows the "T" shaped piece and the two loop style wiring clips and their locations.
What is the date of change on that page. Might not reflect earlier versions or what was actually done at the plants. Just saying there are allot of examples of where there is a difference
-
Jeff - no date and no revision number on this page.
-
Jeff - no date and no revision number on this page.
Thanks - wish we knew where those pages came from (Jim assembled these manuals using a page from here and a page from there often) and what no notations (date or revisions) met. Were they possibilities (not instrumented) of what