ConcoursMustang Forums
1st Generation 1964 1/2 - 1973 - Questions & general discussions that apply to a specific year => 1967 Mustang => Topic started by: 67gta289 on February 14, 2023, 08:31:56 PM
-
I searched but did not find - looking for correct factory finishes for:
1. Dip stick - exposed handle/loop end
2. Dip stick - length inside tube
3. Dip stick tube - all of my examples are painted black, just looking to confirm
I did look at some of the unrestored car pictures, but nothing stands out to me one way or the other.
If the dip stick exposed parts are plated, what do we do about the rubber seal to replace it?
-
I searched but did not find - looking for correct factory finishes for:
1. Dip stick - exposed handle/loop end
2. Dip stick - length inside tube
3. Dip stick tube - all of my examples are painted black, just looking to confirm
I did look at some of the unrestored car pictures, but nothing stands out to me one way or the other.
If the dip stick exposed parts are plated, what do we do about the rubber seal to replace it?
I have only seen the tube black. I typically see the dipstick and thumb pull what looks like unpainted steel. Just my observations.
-
Agree that for 67 and a C4 only have seen black used.
As for the dipstick itself often the exposed section has rust of some form. Will look for some examples that don't have surface rust
-
That lines up with the one on my car and from a donor car - black painted tube, bare steel (with rust) stick.
-
That lines up with the one on my car and from a donor car - black painted tube, bare steel (with rust) stick.
*likewise on my November '66 SJ car, excepting the rust. Mine has (had) no rust, just a bit of oxidation on the bare steel.
I used a fine Scotchbrite pad to clean up the oxidation that was present on the exposed dipstick end to help it closer match the portion of the dipstick that was protected from the elements better.
If you need a sample-tone of what it should look like, go pull a dipstick from any newer car that uses a flat style dipstick and look at it.
Yes. That is what the natural steel portions should look like.
-
A few pictures from pretty decent examples (given the years of use).
Spanning 7R13xxxx-7R19xxxx
Please ignore the black zip tye ::)
(https://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/18/6-160223185436-183841436.jpeg)
(https://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/18/6-160223185437-18385430.jpeg)
(https://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/18/6-160223185031-183812037.jpeg)
(https://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/18/6-160223185031-183821272.jpeg)
As a side note a few very nice 68 examples appear to have some sort of plating though I think they are the same part number
And while we were on the subject and others will likely view this thread when it comes up in a search of "C4" details, here is a few shots showing what the end of the handle looks like.
(https://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/18/6-160223185032-18383170.jpeg)
-
Looks very familiar. Thanks!
-
To me there appears to be some light plating of some form
Example on the top one there is a spot at 6 o'clock that appears to have been rubbing on the edge of the base cap where that created some surface rust while the rest of the cap shows nothing. Not sure what the plating would be but it appears to be lightly applied and didn't hold up as well as some other plating on parts in the general area
Just an observation
-
Other year automatic dipsticks I have observed had a zinc phosphate coating/finish on the top and finger pull. I strongly suspect that is what is used in this case.
-
Other year automatic dipsticks I have observed had a zinc phosphate coating/finish on the top and finger pull. I strongly suspect that is what is used in this case.
I would agree that zinc phosphate coating was used. It quickly deteriorated and rusted.
-
Adding photos here of the 12,000 mile unrestored 68 Mustang I have here. Tubes are black. You can see what this dipstick looks like and its been preserved really well. I also have an original 1967 C6 transmission that unrestored here and the finish for that looks the same. Looks natural. Take a look.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52695129333_b8d3489035_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2ohuj5D)20230217_105915 (https://flic.kr/p/2ohuj5D) by Marcus Anghel (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154714213@N02/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52695129313_18488487bb_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2ohuj5i)20230217_105923 (https://flic.kr/p/2ohuj5i) by Marcus Anghel (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154714213@N02/), on Flickr
-
Adding photos here of the 12,000 mile unrestored 68 Mustang I have here. Tubes are black. You can see what this dipstick looks like and its been preserved really well. I also have an original 1967 C6 transmission that unrestored here and the finish for that looks the same. Looks natural. Take a look.
Wish we could get a handful and test the unexposed area under the seal to confirm one way or the other. To me that particular example looked like it was plated with something though it was a weak plating when I looked at it Just what I came away with when I've looked at it and in other pictures. Realize it is from a different year but the part should be standard between 67-68 unless Ford changed something in 68 and if we could document that.
For the discussion, if we look back and consider all of the parts that make up or cars there seems to be very few parts that were not treated in someway to hold up against the elements
Did come up with some NOS ones but as we know service replacements were often coated differently to hold up to the elements and time while waiting on the shelves. Think I do have an early blue and white labeled one that may reflect the finish of a period, not later time. Will find and post for the discussion.
-
A few things to add to round this discussion out:
1. The service part number is C6OZ-7A020-A (to help with future search hits). It is interesting that the MPC calls out "Nickel plate (on cap)". Refer to the attached picture.
2. The overall length is about 22-1/2"
3. The straight section riveted on to the top section is 15-15/16" long
4. FoMoCo is stamped onto the "cap" (finger pull)
-
A few things to add to round this discussion out:
1. The service part number is C6OZ-7A020-A (to help with future search hits). It is interesting that the MPC calls out "Nickel plate (on cap)". Refer to the attached picture.
2. The overall length is about 22-1/2"
3. The straight section riveted on to the top section is 15-15/16" long
4. FoMoCo is stamped onto the "cap" (finger pull)
Yes it is interesting that the MPC would call out "Nickel plate". Are you implying that it should be Nickel plated based on what the MPC has printed or just commenting that it was interesting because that doesn't seem to be the case?
-
Wonder if they (Ford) was referring to the lower section of the dipstick since it often looks very silver as if it were bright zinc or something similar. In some cases it appears to be smoother finish than zinc when I've viewed these sections
-
A few things to add to round this discussion out:
1. The service part number is C6OZ-7A020-A (to help with future search hits).
Slightly off topic, but thank you for including a service part number. Many posters seem to have a fear of using a part's identification number.
Jim
-
Yes it is interesting that the MPC would call out "Nickel plate". Are you implying that it should be Nickel plated based on what the MPC has printed or just commenting that it was interesting because that doesn't seem to be the case?
No implication or agenda. It is uncommon for a plating type of finish to be called out in the MPC, and I found it ironic that it happens to be on the piece that I'm asking about. I agree that it does not seem to be the case - at least for assembly line parts. Perhaps the service part received a different treatment to keep it looking new since it might be on the shelf for a while?
Wonder if they (Ford) was referring to the lower section of the dipstick since it often looks very silver as if it were bright zinc or something similar. In some cases it appears to be smoother finish than zinc when I've viewed these sections
But the use of the term "cap" to me would mean the upper part, like a cap on a head. It is confusing.
Slightly off topic, but thank you for including a service part number. Many posters seem to have a fear of using a part's identification number.
Jim
SOP for me, as you know.
-
Ok here are the results after a Rust911 soak.
There appears to be the remains of a (now) gray color plating on the "cap" portion only. It might look a bit like corrosion, so I scraped a small area clean, and there is no corrosion underneath.
-
Ok here are the results after a Rust911 soak.
There appears to be the remains of a (now) gray color plating on the "cap" portion only. It might look a bit like corrosion, so I scraped a small area clean, and there is no corrosion underneath.
Sure doesn't look like nickel but does look like a coating/plating of some other type. Thanks for taking the time and sharing
Looks like some of the areas in some of the examples I posted on page 1 of this discussion
I held back from posting the examples below since we all realize that service replacements can have different finishes and look (as well as the whole picture/monitor things) but here are three examples. The upper left is a blue and white early label NOS/service example from likely 65-67 and the other three are later service parts from the late 80's or much later. To me it appears that a phosphate or similar treatment would likely reproduce a similar look depending on the lighting. In some it appears zinc phosphate while in other pictures magnesium phosphate would be a better choice
(https://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/18/6-240223231447-184012128.jpeg)
-
One "quirk" that seems to have been overlooked is that many service parts have a different finish than what was initially installed on the assembly line. I'm not saying that this is the case here, but it must be considered.
Jim
-
One "quirk" that seems to have been overlooked is that many service parts have a different finish than what was initially installed on the assembly line. I'm not saying that this is the case here, but it must be considered.
Jim
Think that is what I wrote in my reply #18 ;)
Of course when the car were being made a portion of the parts were directed to the service line to supply the dealerships and their needs at the same time the cars were being built. The reason the upper right example was interesting and a nice IMHO find to include in the picture set since it was likely one of those types of parts
Maybe we need, for entertainment and discussion another thread that just provides how far off of the original design some service replacements were from the original design. I've got a drivers side thermactor tube from a FE that was made out of a dozen or so individual sections all soldered together. What a odd looking assembly that is . Well back to the dip stick discussion :)