ConcoursMustang Forums
1st Generation 1964 1/2 - 1973 - Questions & general discussions that apply to a specific year => 1967 Mustang => Topic started by: 67gta289 on September 18, 2011, 11:31:43 AM
-
What should the finish be on the bracket that mounts the electrical switch shown in the attached picture? Mine has surface rust - other items in that area do not, so would it make sense that it was unfinished? Thanks, John Dec 20, 1966 SJ
-
Phosphate and oil. Marty
-
Ben here is a picture of our 67 GTA convertible W/ tilt and fog light switch. Our car was built 11-4-66 at the SJ plant all though I believe all plants were consistant in location. The picture that Steve posted shows the correct location of the light. I have another car with both but it is not near by. If you need a picture of it I can get one latter. Hope this helps. Marty
-
Marty, I don't believe that I have ever seen the tilt vacuum solenoid mounted anywhere but the steering column. Was that an early San Jose thing?
-
Scott I was not aware that there was another way 67 vacuum solenoid mounted. This car was a very original car when I got it. It had been in storage for 15 years. The reason it did not have the reminder light next to the fog light switch is because it has the convenience light option and the seat belt reminder light is in the console.
-
Thanks so much for the pictures guys! You guys are awesome!
Ben
-
Scott,
Here is a diagram of the 67 tilt wheel from a Ford manual that I have. Have you seen a different arrangement?
Ben,
Here is another car with the seat belt reminder. The 67 owner manual shows the fog light switch to the left of the seat belt reminder.
-
Marty, I don't believe that I have ever seen the tilt vacuum solenoid mounted anywhere but the steering column. Was that an early San Jose thing?
Believe it was more a 67 thing but will look at more examples - though we might need to move or start a new thread ;)
-
Yes Jeff it may be better to split it.
-
Scott,
Here is a diagram of the 67 tilt wheel from a Ford manual that I have. Have you seen a different arrangement?
Ben,
Here is another car with the seat belt reminder. The 67 owner manual shows the fog light switch to the left of the seat belt reminder.
OK, I see what's going on. Marty, it appears that the bracket is mounted backwards, and shouldn't the bracket be on the inside with the bolt head out?
-
You could be right. I can not tell much from the digram in the Assembly manual. It made more sense to be under the panel because there is a 1/4' lip on the top side and the bracket would not sit flat.
-
Something else I discovered when searching through the tilt digrams was the location of the tilt vacuum can. Was it mounted under the battery tray or mounted on the upper RH apron where the AC can would be? You can see both locations in these digrams? Secondly was there to be one or two vacuum line to the can. Once again these digrams show both. In the drawing where the can is mounted under the battery tray it is attached with a small bracket 3F547. Does anyone have one that I could buy or make a pattern from? Marty
-
Marty, the vacuum canister location is yet one more item subject to changes in 67. Could also have been variations due to options also - but probably just a running change thing. The diagrams you mentioned generally are the latest revision, and show where they ended up (possibly in 68) - not where they started. I've seen the early model year cars with the canister located directly below the passenger side hinge in the engine compartment. On cars without, in that area there are two dimples in the sheet metal that line up with the canister bracket. There is also reference to canisters that are mounted under the battery in the fender well (and subject to objects thrown by tires) but I have not seen one like that for 67 - I'm thinking 68 but don't have facts to back that up.
I think there are other posts about this here - including style/location as well as hose type/stripe colors. There are some older posts for sure on the vintage mustang forum if not here.
Some pictures below. The one named 11-10-66 can is the style that I have also (Dec 66). I have a collection of 3 or 4 of this type at this point. Yes I can stop collecting now, I know. But you know how you keep finding deals that you can't pass up? As for connections, this style has two for sure, one to the manifold and the other to the column. There is a separate metal check valve, stamped from a company called "Trico" or "Trinco" - don't recall. I can dig that out and provide some pics if you need it.
The Cougars had a much larger canister for the hide away headlamps, located I think on the driver's side behind the headlight under the fender.
-
Almost forgot - the previous pictures are courtesy of Mr. Speegle IIRC. Who else keeps such copious notes ;)
-
Since the subject of canisters, different versions and mounting locations you might also include the battery tray differences also ;)
Merry Christmas to all -
-
Marty, the vacuum canister location is yet one more item subject to changes in 67. Could also have been variations due to options also - but probably just a running change thing. The diagrams you mentioned generally are the latest revision, and show where they ended up (possibly in 68) - not where they started. I've seen the early model year cars with the canister located directly below the passenger side hinge in the engine compartment. On cars without, in that area there are two dimples in the sheet metal that line up with the canister bracket. There is also reference to canisters that are mounted under the battery in the fender well (and subject to objects thrown by tires) but I have not seen one like that for 67 - I'm thinking 68 but don't have facts to back that up.
I think there are other posts about this here - including style/location as well as hose type/stripe colors. There are some older posts for sure on the vintage mustang forum if not here.
Some pictures below. The one named 11-10-66 can is the style that I have also (Dec 66). I have a collection of 3 or 4 of this type at this point. Yes I can stop collecting now, I know. But you know how you keep finding deals that you can't pass up? As for connections, this style has two for sure, one to the manifold and the other to the column. There is a separate metal check valve, stamped from a company called "Trico" or "Trinco" - don't recall. I can dig that out and provide some pics if you need it.
The Cougars had a much larger canister for the hide away headlamps, located I think on the driver's side behind the headlight under the fender.
I believe that the early 67 tilt vacuum canisters were mounted under the battery tray as shown in the 67 assembly manual. I am attaching a photo of a 67 assembly line battery tray that shows the holes used to mount the bracket that held the tilt canister. I am still looking for the bracket that attached the canister to the battery tray. I do wonder if the car did not have AC if the tilt canister was ever mounted on the RH apron under the hinge were the AC canister was mounted? Am still looking for a drawing or a original car equipped that way. Marty
Trico check valve was used on the large early 67 can. In late 67 and 68 both the AC and tilt canisters were mounted on the wheel side of the apron.
-
I believe that the early 67 tilt vacuum canisters were mounted under the battery tray as shown in the 67 assembly manual...I do wonder if the car did not have AC if the tilt canister was ever mounted on the RH apron under the hinge were the AC canister was mounted
Your comment about AC vs. non-AC is interesting, although the 7R01A130xxx11-10-66Tilt-ACcan.jpg picture from Jeff shows the can below the hinge in an AC application. I guess it depends on how early is early.
In late 67 and 68 both the AC and tilt canisters were mounted on the wheel side of the apron
Pictured below is a wheel side of apron canister location, 1968, courtesy of Dudley, for reference purposes.
Do you think if both options were chosen, the can would be common, or there would be two? I'm thinking common based on research - although it is difficult to find definitive information on this topic. As usual, original cars are the best source.
-
Last week I was researching these canisters for our catalog. It looks like there were no less than three of them used from 1967-69.
From drawings, used examples, and the MPC's, this is what I found.
1967 used a double nippled canister that mounted down low by the battery tray, with an attached bracket. C7ZZ-3E547-A
1968 used a double nippled canister, but it was mounted under the battery tray, behind the apron. C8ZZ-3E547-A
1969 used a single nippled canister, also mounted under the battery tray, and behind the apron. C9ZZ-3E547-A
We do not know if the change under the battery tray happened cleanly for 1968 or not.
-
i was just checking for info on the holes for the AC canister, and i found this thread. i noticed today that there were 3 bumps under the battery tray, i guess that the bumps are there as a template for positioning the tilt canister.
i noticed that the AC can had the bolt holes punched through by hand, and the centre hole was factory pressed.
-
i was just checking for info on the holes for the AC canister, and i found this thread. i noticed today that there were 3 bumps under the battery tray, i guess that the bumps are there as a template for positioning the tilt canister.
i noticed that the AC can had the bolt holes punched through by hand, and the centre hole was factory pressed.
You are correct the three bumps are to position the vacuum canisters both for AC and Tilt
-
I found the holy grail today a 67 Dearborn built March 27th 67 that had the tilt vacuum canister under the battery tray like the assembly manual shows.
Now the find or make a bracket like one in the pictures.
-
Nice find Marty - well at least for the pictures ;)
-
I found the holy grail today a 67 Dearborn built March 27th 67 that had the tilt vacuum canister under the battery tray like the assembly manual shows.
Now the find or make a bracket like one in the pictures.
+1 on a need of the bracket.
I realize this is an old thread and only recently became aware that there SHOULD or could be a separate canister for the Tilt wheel cars. I emphasized the word "should" because in my opinion, it hasn't yet been proven beyond any shadow of doubt, that ALL early 67's came with this canister in this location. Mine isn't there at present and has no signs of being there at a glance, but I do know the hoses were not in original condition when I first got the car back in '78, add that to the possibility of battery boil over plus some signs of minor corrosion on the battery box when I first got it, sure makes it possible the canister may have been removed.
I just bought what is claimed as a NOS canister off flea-bay that looks correct (right hose connections and size, with the stud bracket) but doesn't have the bracket to the battery tray. I would still need that.
Marty, did you ever find a way to duplicate this bracket, I assume yours was also missing by reading this thread. I could use the pictures in this thread as a guide, but if I could find the right one, better yet.
If no response to this here and possibly I will anyways, I may just start another request in "Parts Wanted"
Richard
Richard
-
Gosh, you guys got me thinking on this one. My Metuchen, November 17th 1966 built non AC coupe ,has always had the tilt vacuum canister mounted next to the PS hinge. It's always been there since my family has had the car, since the summer of 1979. The PO was not the mechanic type so I seriously doubt he moved it from under the battery tray (if I'm interpreting this correctly). I have enclosed a pic of how it looks, and I have put it back the same when I restored it in 2000. One other question, my tilt works and then sometimes doesn't? Any known gremlins in this set up? Could the relay be going up?? Oh,, and this was factory option not added in its life..
-
Gosh, you guys got me thinking on this one. My Metuchen, November 17th 1966 built non AC coupe ,has always had the tilt vacuum canister mounted next to the PS hinge. It's always been there since my family has had the car, since the summer of 1979. The PO was not the mechanic type so I seriously doubt he moved it from under the battery tray (if I'm interpreting this correctly). I have enclosed a pic of how it looks, and I have put it back the same when I restored it in 2000. One other question, my tilt works and then sometimes doesn't? Any known gremlins in this set up? Could the relay be going up?? Oh,, and this was factory option not added in its life..
+1, my Metuchen '67, built in Dec. 66, non-A/C, also has it below the PS hinge on the rear fender apron. It doesn't look like it was ever mounted under the battery tray.
Edit: Hipo, I looked at your pictures again, and though I can't be certain (since I'm going off memory here), I don't remember my car having that bracket bolted to the bottom of the dash, where all of the vacuum lines plug in. Mine plug into a valve that's mounted to the steering column.
-
Thanks for the reply drummingrocks. When I saw that the 67's would have had their vacuum canister mounted under the battery tray I was second guessing myself. My brother originally purchased this car in 1979 from the 2nd owner. He wondered if someone had added the tilt wheel set up since this is a very basic - optioned car, but after see the original buck tag with TC, that cleared that up right away. This of course was before Marti reports, and he never knew of Ms. Emminger and her listings of Ford data. Again, I would bet money that this is exactly the way the car left Metuchen. Also, my father, our chief mechanic, had the motto of "if it ain't broke don't fix it" so the tilt set up was never changed, altered or touched..
Lately, I still have the intermittent issue of the tilt-away wheel not working, then working again. Not sure if the relay is bad or if I have a bad vacuum connection somewhere. I guess I shouldn't complain for nearly fifty years of service! I'll add it to my "to do" list. ;)
-
I've never torn into my setup to get it working, but the previous owner said that when he hooked the tilt wheel back up (it had been disconnected), it worked backwards. From what I can tell, the entire system is intact on my car, but the solenoid has been unplugged, as well as a few of the vacuum lines. I'll get to it some day. I like having the tilt option, but I'm not really a fan of the swing-away portion of it, so I don't mind that it's not working. :D
-
... I like having the tilt option, but I'm not really a fan of the swing-away portion of it, so I don't mind that it's not working. :D
Obviously, you've never driven a car daily that has this option. It is a really nice feature and how 1.) It "trips out" your passengers, and (the thing I like most is) 2.) How a vallet parking attendant responds to it...I haven't had a vallet yet that could return my car to me! (they won't even take a tip because they are embarrassed. That part of this feature STILL makes me smile!)
I think my car wouldn't be the same if it didn't work properly. Many options (standard these days on modern cars) are not missed if you never had them before, yet we wouldn't want a "new car" without those options now that we are "spoiled". This "old school" option, as rare as it is, is no doubt part of what makes the high option cars so unique. I'm sure in April 1964 nobody thought anything about having a Boss 429 Mustang or a Shelby Mustang when they first saw a 64-1/2 Mustang...but once you drive or own one of them, (a B-9 or Shelby) I'm fairy sure you wouldn't likely want just a 6-banger, "no frills", 1st generation as your only Mustang anymore. Part of how Mustang fever took over the whole country! Similarly, once you had a Tilt-a-way working correctly, it would be like taking away your "power locks and power windows" on your daily driver of today.
Richard
-
...I haven't had a vallet yet that could return my car to me! (they won't even take a tip because they are embarrassed. That part of this feature STILL makes me smile!)
I haven't met a valet yet that I'd let anywhere near my car! ;D
-
I haven't met a valet yet that I'd let anywhere near my car! ;D
No, I understand as I wouldn't again either let ANY vallet drive my old 'Stang or even our newer '05 GT for that matter.
I was speaking from a "Back in the day..." perspective, back when it wasn't a big deal to leave a then 15 year-old Mustang with a vallet who parks Rolls Royce's, new Vette's, Jaguars & the likes. I never felt my, though extremely sharp looking at the time, still, old Mustang twisted the fancy of those kind of Yuppie vallets. It was kinda fun to get one over on those kinds of brainiacs ;)
-
It was kinda fun to get one over on those kinds of brainiacs ;)
That's what makes me want to get it working--it'll definitely make people do a double-take when they see the wheel move. One thing I worry about with getting it working is that the wheel doesn't "lock" into place when the swing-away feature is active. Though nobody besides my wife and I drive the car, I always worried about somebody inadvertently jerking on the wheel to get in or out of the car, and damaging the system.
-
That's what makes me want to get it working--...I always worried about somebody inadvertently jerking on the wheel to get in or out of the car, and damaging the system.
It will be OK, since the car sits so low anyways, nobody actually "pulls" on it and it is rather durable. Trust me! You want it fixed ;)
-
Sorry about the one pic being upside down. Here's another, I just couldn't stand it any longer... :o
-
+1 on a need of the bracket.
I realize this is an old thread and only recently became aware that there SHOULD or could be a separate canister for the Tilt wheel cars. I emphasized the word "should" because in my opinion, it hasn't yet been proven beyond any shadow of doubt, that ALL early 67's came with this canister in this location. Mine isn't there at present and has no signs of being there at a glance, but I do know the hoses were not in original condition when I first got the car back in '78, add that to the possibility of battery boil over plus some signs of minor corrosion on the battery box when I first got it, sure makes it possible the canister may have been removed.
I just bought what is claimed as a NOS canister off flea-bay that looks correct (right hose connections and size, with the stud bracket) but doesn't have the bracket to the battery tray. I would still need that.
Marty, did you ever find a way to duplicate this bracket, I assume yours was also missing by reading this thread. I could use the pictures in this thread as a guide, but if I could find the right one, better yet.
If no response to this here and possibly I will anyways, I may just start another request in "Parts Wanted"
Richard
Richard
Richard I am restoring a 67 S code fastback for the gentleman who owns the 67 convertible that has the tilt canister that I posted. I will have to ask him if I could remove it and copy it.
Marty
-
tilt canister on ebay. 67 style. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Mustang-Shelby-Tilt-Vacuum-Can-original-OEM-Original-Canister-/221577173195
-
Bob, I believe that canister has the wrong bracket and wrong size hose connection on it.
There is another one that looks correct:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/67-68-ford-mustang-tilt-away-vacuum-reservoir-shelby-cougar-KR-thunderbird-/141437820038?pt=Vintage_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&fits=Year%3A1967%7CModel%3AMustang&hash=item20ee59dc86&vxp=mtr
And Marty, that would be great! I now have several pictures of the bracket now but what REALLY would help is a paper template traced around an original bracket and the holes, then possibly mailing that to me. Pictures of the screw bolts and mounting nuts too if possible, but those I have a good idea from the assembly manual. Any help here would be great.
Richard
-
Bob, I believe that canister has the wrong bracket and wrong size hose connection on it.
Is that not the one that bolts up under the battery apron? If so, that might explain the different bracket.
-
The second eBay listing , the one from 67gtasanjose, is the type of cannister that is on my Nov. 66 Metcheun built coupe. The rear PS firewall has never been altered and the bracket has the two studs closer together near the middle of the bracket. Identical match.
-
The second eBay listing , the one from 67gtasanjose, is the type of cannister that is on my Nov. 66 Metcheun built coupe. The rear PS firewall has never been altered and the bracket has the two studs closer together near the middle of the bracket. Identical match.
If I get time this weekend, I'll pull the vaccumm canister off of my '67. I'm betting it's like the one on your car, since mine was a Dec. 66 Metuchen car.
-
Reply #18 to this thread has some images of the battery tray mounted canister. You can see the bracket and mounting in those images.
Richard
-
Reply #18 to this thread has some images of the battery tray mounted canister. You can see the bracket and mounting in those images.
I took a closer look at it, and you're right--that first eBay one is very different from the battery tray-mounted canister.
-
Bob, I believe that canister has the wrong bracket and wrong size hose connection on it.
There is another one that looks correct:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/67-68-ford-mustang-tilt-away-vacuum-reservoir-shelby-cougar-KR-thunderbird-/141437820038?pt=Vintage_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&fits=Year%3A1967%7CModel%3AMustang&hash=item20ee59dc86&vxp=mtr
And Marty, that would be great! I now have several pictures of the bracket now but what REALLY would help is a paper template traced around an original bracket and the holes, then possibly mailing that to me. Pictures of the screw bolts and mounting nuts too if possible, but those I have a good idea from the assembly manual. Any help here would be great.
Richard
Richard ,the pic in the link you posted would not work on the 67 Mustang battery tray. The battery tray has small holes for use of sheet metal screws to secure the can. The one in the your link picture as threaded stock and held on with a nut. I can't speak to the correct tube or not on the vac can because I have not worked with a 67 tilt before. I can speak to the fact that the correct battery tray has a series of small untapped holes for sheet metal screws. The few 67 vac cans I have seen had a bracket similar to the ebay auction I posted.
-
Richard ,the pic in the link you posted would not work on the 67 Mustang battery tray. The battery tray has small holes for use of sheet metal screws to secure the can. The one in the your link picture as threaded stock and held on with a nut. I can't speak to the correct tube or not on the vac can because I have not worked with a 67 tilt before. I can speak to the fact that the correct battery tray has a series of small untapped holes for sheet metal screws. The few 67 vac cans I have seen had a bracket similar to the ebay auction I posted.
Bob, as a point of clarity in ALL of the information contained within this thread, you may wish to look again at the images Marty uploaded back in reply #18. When you look, there is a bracket that attaches to the canister with two nuts, onto the two studs you speak of. From there, that OTHER bracket NOT pictured in the eBay listing, the bracket is held to the battery tray with two 3/8" socket drive screw bolts.
I NEED ONE OF THOSE 4-hole, double 45 degree bent BRACKETS to restore the canister I have to that location. The information from the engineering standpoint leans to the fact that the tilt wheel canister was intended to be seperate from any other storage canister (such as for the A/C). For that reason alone and since I have a 9 year gap of ownership from new I cannot account for it's existance or removal, I will plan to install the 2nd canister under my battery. That canister (in Marty's pictures and confirmed from Scott's comments @ WCCC, reply #15) does look like the eBay listing I mentioned.
Hopefully, I can get a template from another bracket since it is a simple stamped metal design, it would be rather easy to duplicate with a pattern.
For more images, go to WCCC and scroll down, there are very clear pictures of what should be on these 67 Mustangs there.
http://www2.cougarpartscatalog.com/67tilt.html?attribs=77
Richard
-
Ok, I was able to take some pictures of my '67 this weekend. I can't verify the originality of any of this, since I've only owned the car for about a year, but I will say that to me, everything looks original and undisturbed. This is a Dec. 66 Metuchen car.
(http://i.imgur.com/La9NDYN.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/wmvTGsN.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/VuDd9jg.jpg)
-
Ok, I was able to take some pictures of my '67 this weekend. I can't verify the originality of any of this, since I've only owned the car for about a year, but I will say that to me, everything looks original and undisturbed. This is a Dec. 66 Metuchen car.
(http://i.imgur.com/La9NDYN.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/wmvTGsN.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/VuDd9jg.jpg)
OK...this is "My take-away" on the information shared to date within this thread about these canisters:
As NEW and as RARE of an order of the tilt column option is for the 1967 year, there isn't anything suggesting that many assembly workers didn't "already know where" to install the canisters when the build sheet showed to install the Tilt option. Using the terminology of "the show must go on", workers simply installed them in a quick best-guess location, especially on cars without the AC canisters, and on the cars with AC, threw the extra canister over the shoulder & just tied them in to THAT canister.
(this could explain the A/C examples like mine, that didn't seem to ever have the under battery canister)
This does not mean that many or most were not installed as the assembly manual shows, or the engineering instructions showed them to be. It simply helps as a scenario of "why so many differences" in mounting locations and/or canister design (oblong or round).
As I said earlier, I am at least gathering the items to restore the installation of the 2nd canister under the battery should I decide, or it is decided later that it absolutely MUST be there. I might not install it just yet, true, but I will at least aquire what is needed to install it as properly as I can.
Chalk it up to running changes, differences in workers, different plants, I don't know...but there seems to be no definite answer on what was "correct" at this time. Original examples of all build dates, all plants and all workers are no doubt few and even further between.
Richard
-
This is a duplicate set-up of my car's tilt canister and hose. I too can take a pic of the rear PS firewall for folks, inside and out. (will post later tonight). I would think it is safe to say that at least at Metuchen between the time period of Mid Nov. to Dec. 1966 they (Ford), or one worker, looks to have been installing the tilt set-up this way.. Any other tilt pics during this period would be great help.. :)
-
This is my take on it. I believe that if the car did not have AC the tilt canister was mounted on the RH rear apron where the AC canister went. I have been waiting to confirm that the mounting studs on the larger early AC canister have the same spacing as the tilt canister that mounted under the battery tray on a bracket. If the spacing is the same it would have made it very easy for the workers to change the locations. I have a Ford vacuum service manual that clearly show the tilt canister mounted on the RH rear apron. I also have Ford service instructions that state that no other items may be attached to the vacuum canisters so I find it unlikely that the factory would have ran the AC and tilt on the same can. When I can get access to the car that has the tilt canister mounted under the battery I will confirm whether or not the stud spacing is the same.
Marty
-
... I have been waiting to confirm that the mounting studs on the larger early AC canister have the same spacing as the tilt canister that mounted under the battery tray on a bracket.
... When I can get access to the car that has the tilt canister mounted under the battery I will confirm whether or not the stud spacing is the same.
Marty
I can compare the NOS canister that looks just as the ones recently pictured above and also pictured in your (Marty's) previous posts with my factory oblong canister.
I also have Ford service instructions that state that no other items may be attached to the vacuum canisters so I find it unlikely that the factory would have ran the AC and tilt on the same can.
Marty
This is the one major reason why I figure I need to aquire all the pieces to restore the 2nd canister to my AC equipped car, even if some AC cars may have been built without the two canisters, I believe the AC cars with tilt-away were all intended to have both canisters.
While not at all disputing these "Ford service instruction" reference, is it possible this document was generated as a result of improper installations on the assembly line?
Again...I do not oppose anything previously stated by anyone, I look at this thread (and any other thread about anomalies for that matter) as a means of having a civil debate, for the sole purpose to establish a more in depth understanding any such topic. It intrigues me how many things (especially for the 67 model year) differ from one example to another, more so when some of these examples are so close together in build data.
Richard
-
Two cans costs more in both material and time. Just doesn't make sense. But that doesn't mean it was never done.
The large oblong can required an external inline vacuum check valve. The tilt only coffee can style had a built in check valve. Were there two separate independent vacuum source lines back to the intake manifold? Was there a tee? If a tee, was it on the suction or tank side of the inline check valve? If on the tank side the tilt can would siphon off the oblong can with the engine off.
One can is so much simpler, and at less cost.
Has anyone actually seen the two can (tucan?) version?
-
The 67 that I posted the picture of the canister under the battery also has the AC can under the RH hinge.
-
Has anyone actually seen the two can (tucan?) version?
Are you counting the ones with the can in the passenger side wheel well also?
But yes have seen cars with AC and Tilt with both cans/tanks
-
The 67 that I posted the picture of the canister under the battery also has the AC can under the RH hinge.
Marty, on this "two-can" example, you have posted the picture of, do you recall how the vacuum hoses were all routed?
I ask this while looking at the chassis assembly manual for the steering column as reference. (pages 46 & 47 and also pages 6 thru 8 )
I would assume they connect individually to the manifold, but since both style canister routing's are not on the same pages in the manual, it gets confusing. For example, NOTICE that at the top of page 6,7 or 8 of the assembly manual (choose according to engine size), at the center of the page, there is a "T" 3E563 that seems to show to go to the "TILT SWING COLUMN" and that "T" looks to be INSIDE the cowl, under the dash, on the supply hose coming from the oblong reservoir. :o :-\
This adds to the confusion because the notes on page 46 and 47 (bottom left of page) state what has previously been mentioned, "VACUUM LINES MUST NOT BE TAPPED INTO FOR OTHER USES".
I believe that I should plan on doing this correctly, that is with both cans. It would be nice to set it up correctly the FIRST time and not need to redo it.
Besides the green with white hoses that seem to not be reproduced just yet, it looks like I would need the following:
* one (1) 3E649 bracket
* two (2) 55981-S2 screw bolts (to battery tray) <AMK SELLS these in multi-packs>
* two (2) 34657-S2 nuts, resevoir to bracket <AMK doesn't seem to handle these, LOCATED>
* two (2) 3A762 hose clips (that clip to the right strut support ) <AMK doesn't seem to handle these, HELP WANTED>
* one (1) 378569-S hose clip (that holds hoses to the apron, below battery) <AMK doesn't seem to handle these, HELP WANTED>
* one (1) 19A563 check valve, single port in, single port out
PLEASE, double check the assembly manuals and check my information and part numbers. It might help to get AMK or complete OEM part numbers too if anyone can help. I believe I already have the hose hanger on the cowl, 357064-S and the resevoir 3E547, so the search is ON for these other items.
Previously, my tilt was operated using the oblong AC canister, but I made all the hose connections several years back to get the tilt-away functioning. (it had been disconnected by P.O. for vacuum leaks) At that time, I was only after "function", not seeking the likes of "concours" in presentation. Nothing was as it should be since I had no information on this system or other examples as reference. Hence all these questions. I know how to make it "work", I am after a correct installation for my time period at San Jose, for a car with a 289 engine and has AC.
One more question, Does anybody know if the hose clip at the battery is the same or similar to the clips used for the wiring harness in that same area? A detailed picture of an unmolested might help some here.
Richard
-
""The large oblong can required an external in line vacuum check valve. The tilt only coffee can style had a built in check valve. Were there two separate independent vacuum source lines back to the intake manifold? Was there a tee? If a tee, was it on the suction or tank side of the in line check valve? If on the tank side the tilt can would siphon off the oblong can with the engine off.""
Although not the SJ example your after, my Nov. 66' Metuchen car has a dual port brass fitting off of the back of the intake where as the bottom port has always been blocked off. The top port is what feeds the canister on this car for tilt-away use.
""Are you counting the ones with the can in the passenger side wheel well also?""
I believe this version was for 68' and up?, where the canister was outside in the wheel opening under the fender. Undercoated too.? :o
-
""The large oblong can required an external in line vacuum check valve. The tilt only coffee can style had a built in check valve. .""
Yes, I have the large oblong canister, but my (incorrect as I understand) check valve has 3 connector nipples, not only two as shown in the assembly manual.
"" Were there two separate independent vacuum source lines back to the intake manifold? Was there a tee? If a tee, was it on the suction or tank side of the in line check valve? .""
Yes, I suspect there are supposed to be two sources on AC equipped cars, one to each canister, back to the manifold, but I am looking for verification on this suspicion.
The "T" I see in the assembly manual seems to be under the dash, it claims it to go to the TILT AWAY column on the tank reservoir side.
Although not the SJ example your after, my Nov. 66' Metuchen car has a dual port brass fitting off of the back of the intake where as the bottom port has always been blocked off. The top port is what feeds the canister on this car for tilt-away use.
Yes, I have that fitting too and it has a 2nd source available that presently was not used when I took the car apart. The question might best be answered with a SJ example with tilt AND Air, but I imagine both hoses go direct to the manifold.
""Are you counting the ones with the can in the passenger side wheel well also?""
I believe this version was for 68' and up?, where the canister was outside in the wheel opening under the fender. Undercoated too.? :o
No, I am not entering into discussion about 68 models that have been reported as having them on the underside of the wheel well.
I am hoping a photo or information that matches what Marty's example with the two cans, oblong one for the AC AND has the under battery one too for the Tilt-away option.
I am seeking some of the parts that are mentioned in the assembly manual at this time in the "Parts Wanted" section that I would need to help set up mine as is shows in those manuals. It might help to confirm my shopping list against original examples with similar build sheet options and similar assembly data such as plant and time of build.
Richard
-
This is my take on it. I believe that if the car did not have AC the tilt canister was mounted on the RH rear apron where the AC canister went. I have been waiting to confirm that the mounting studs on the larger early AC canister have the same spacing as the tilt canister that mounted under the battery tray on a bracket. If the spacing is the same it would have made it very easy for the workers to change the locations. I have a Ford vacuum service manual that clearly show the tilt canister mounted on the RH rear apron. I also have Ford service instructions that state that no other items may be attached to the vacuum canisters so I find it unlikely that the factory would have ran the AC and tilt on the same can. When I can get access to the car that has the tilt canister mounted under the battery I will confirm whether or not the stud spacing is the same.
Marty
I just matched up the spacing on the two styles of '67 canisters (oblong and round with built-in valve)...They measure exactly the same, center to center of the studs, though they do have different stud sizes. The studs on the oblong canisters are 5/16" fine pitch, the studs on the other canister with the built-in check valve are 1/4" coarse thread. If anybody wants a picture....ask ;)
Marty is correct in his analysis for the workers to simply change locations on Non-AC cars to over by the hinge.
I have to say, this thread has been very educational!
Richard
-
No, I am not entering into discussion about 68 models that have been reported as having them on the underside of the wheel well.
I've got a couple of 67's built at Dearborn with the can in the wheelwell. Cougars but at the moment don't believe that they used different/special vacuum cans on those and not on the Mustangs being built at the same time.
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/2/6-221014210406.jpeg)
Was mentioned way back in post #14 so apparently we have three versions of the rear vacuum can
Sorry hoses long gone
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/2/6-221014210628.jpeg)
-
I just matched up the spacing on the two styles of '67 canisters (oblong and round with built-in valve)...They measure exactly the same, center to center of the studs, though they do have different stud sizes. The studs on the oblong canisters are 5/16" fine pitch, the studs on the other canister with the built-in check valve are 1/4" coarse thread. If anybody wants a picture....ask ;)
Marty is correct in his analysis for the workers to simply change locations on Non-AC cars to over by the hinge.
I have to say, this thread has been very educational!
Richard
Yah! That is what I hoped we would find. It makes sense.
Marty
-
I've got a couple of 67's built at Dearborn with the can in the wheelwell. Cougars but at the moment don't believe that they used different/special vacuum cans on those and not on the Mustangs being built at the same time.
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/2/6-221014210406.jpeg)
Was mentioned way back in post #14 so apparently we have three versions of the rear vacuum can
Sorry hoses long gone
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/2/6-221014210628.jpeg)
Well, that one under the battery looks like "the right stuff" as used on a 67 Mustang Tilt-away but I'm not sure bringing any Cougar examples into the mix is a great idea. I am not a Cougar specialist, (maybe Scott can chime in here) but I recall that the Cougar headlamp system required a separate canister and if memory serves, it was located in the LH wheel well area. Also, if memory serves, 68 Cougars were somewhat different than 67 Cougars and changeover dates occurred in the Cougar family very similar to the Mustang.
I say what I just wrote to try and stay focused only on 67 MUSTANG Tilt-Away systems. (O.P's title of the thread) Certainly the Cougars vacuum routing, check valve(s) would differ slightly from Mustang because of the headlamp system alone. Add all the running changes going into the 68 model year and the waters would get muddied here easily. The 67 Mustang Assembly manual pictures the Cougar underhood routing of hoses on the engine(s) so that helps filter the waters some.
I believe we have determined much about these systems so far in this thread, yet more needs to be learned, primary in hose routing for the various "correct" installations based on the complete build data of each example. (e.g., with A/C or w/o, SJ, Dearborn, NJ built and assembly date)
The assembly manuals so far seem to be the best guide as a general overview of the hose routing but having the anomalies that have been discussed so far still leaves an unanswered question. edited What is pictured, that looks to be under the dash as a vacuum "T" in the assembly manual for the 67 Mustang? The manual states it goes to the Tilt-Away column, yet nobody seems to have an example or information on this anomaly.
Now we just need the folks like those at NPD or Virginia Classic to help oil the wheels and get some of these long-gone from available parts back into production, parts like the hoses, check valves, canisters. ....please....stop me, I'm dreaming! I forgot how rare this option is! lol!
Richard
-
My next question is when did the change over to the AC canister that mounted through the apron occur and if that car had a tilt how was that canister mounted?
As before on a bracket under the battery or like the 68s under the battery and through the apron?
Marty
-
REPRODUCTION Resevoirs ARE out there.
Here is one I saw on eBay from Mustangs Unlimited: It is the LATE 67, inside the inner fender style.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1967-FORD-MUSTANG-TILT-AWAY-STEERING-VACUUM-CANISTER-/380674125719?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item58a1f22f97&vxp=mtr
I imagine that since it looks to have just one hose nipple, there would have to be a "T" in the system or at least a 3-nipple check valve if the canister doesn't have the check valve built in (as other designs do)
Richard
-
Well, that one under the battery looks like "the right stuff" as used on a 67 Mustang Tilt-away but I'm not sure bringing any Cougar examples into the mix is a great idea. I am not a Cougar specialist, (maybe Scott can chime in here) but I recall that the Cougar headlamp system required a separate canister and if memory serves, it was located in the LH wheel well area. Also, if memory serves, 68 Cougars were somewhat different than 67 Cougars and changeover dates occurred in the Cougar family very similar to the Mustang.
I say what I just wrote to try and stay focused only on 67 MUSTANG Tilt-Away systems. (O.P's title of the thread) Certainly the Cougars vacuum routing, check valve(s) would differ slightly from Mustang because of the headlamp system alone. Add all the running changes going into the 68 model year and the waters would get muddied here easily. The 67 Mustang Assembly manual pictures the Cougar underhood routing of hoses on the engine(s) so that helps filter the waters some.
I believe we have determined much about these systems so far in this thread, yet more needs to be learned, primary in hose routing for the various "correct" installations based on the complete build data of each example. (e.g., with A/C or w/o, SJ, Dearborn, NJ built and assembly date)
The assembly manuals so far seem to be the best guide as a general overview of the hose routing but having the anomalies that have been discussed so far still leaves an unanswered question. edited What is pictured, that looks to be under the dash as a vacuum "T" in the assembly manual for the 67 Mustang? The manual states it goes to the Tilt-Away column, yet nobody seems to have an example or information on this anomaly.
Now we just need the folks like those at NPD or Virginia Classic to help oil the wheels and get some of these long-gone from available parts back into production, parts like the hoses, check valves, canisters. ....please....stop me, I'm dreaming! I forgot how rare this option is! lol!
Richard
Yes, the Cougars used the same configuration as Mustang year for year, with the same changeover dates. (Cougars and Mustangs followed each other down the assembly line). A 1967 Cougar with A/C and tilt would technically have 3 vacuum canisters. Each dedicated to tilt, A/C, and headlights. (headlight vacuum tank is mounter in the forward section of the drivers side fender.)
We have a vendor willing to reproduce all of the tilt/tilt away hoses for each of the years 1967-69, we need samples though. I believe that there would be 4-5 versions? Are there 2 or is it 3 hose kits for the various vacuum canisters, and locations of canisters, on a 1967.
We have been trying to get accurate examples of vacuum hoses for all of the years of tilt swing steering columns.
-
...We have a vendor willing to reproduce all of the tilt/tilt away hoses for each of the years 1967-69, we need samples though. I believe that there would be 4-5 versions? Are there 2 or is it 3 hose kits for the various vacuum canisters, and locations of canisters, on a 1967.
We have been trying to get accurate examples of vacuum hoses for all of the years of tilt swing steering columns.
Scott, first of all, good to hear you chime in on this topic again, new hoses would be a fabulous start to restoring these systems correctly.
I have a few feet of the hose out from under the dash area, has the green stripe & white stripe (I posted a fuzzy picture last week in this thread, I could take another shot) If I see the possibility of getting the correct hoses, I have no problems with sacrificing a section. The colors are faded a bit from age.
If you are looking for lengths to pre-cut, Ill be no help but the assembly manual looks like it gives you most of the lengths to the under battery location.
* Manifold to Reservoir, V-8 engines, 54.0 inches
* Manifold to Reservoir, 6 cyl. engines, 27.0 inches
* Reservoir to Dash Mounted Solenoid, 66.0 inches
* Dash Mounted Solenoid to Steel Tube Elbow MEASUREMENT NEEDED
As for the other years and designs other than the under battery variety, lengths would need to be supplied.
Anybody who can help out here with details of other years and models, now's a good time to jump in!
Another situation touched on in other threads, I HAVE SEEN the solenoid for the vacuum motor mounted low on the steering columns before (I think it was a December '66 built 67 S code Cougar GT, not sure of the plant but I saw the car in So. Calif. back in '79) so that is yet another situation to resolve as far as "correctness" goes.
Maybe we should just buy the hose by the length (foot) with a spare 12 inches?
Richard
-
See attached picture of a Mid December of '66 built mustang at SJ vacuum canister. The car was non AC and had tilt wheel option. Canister was mounted under the right side hood hinge.
John
-
See attached picture of a Mid December of '66 built mustang at SJ vacuum canister. The car was non AC and had tilt wheel option. Canister was mounted under the right side hood hinge.
John
John, are the studs on this canister 5/16 inch or 1/4 inch? They actually look to be 5/16" in the picture.
Richard
-
Just measured them. The are 1/4-20. John
-
Just measured them. The are 1/4-20. John
OK, that is consistant with other ones, I did find the oblong canister having the 5/16-24 studs on them.
-
Another situation touched on in other threads, I HAVE SEEN the solenoid for the vacuum motor mounted low on the steering columns before (I think it was a December '66 built 67 S code Cougar GT, not sure of the plant but I saw the car in So. Calif. back in '79) so that is yet another situation to resolve as far as "correctness" goes.
Richard
Richard, is it unusual to have the solenoid mounted there? I'm going off of memory here, but I'm 99% certain that's where it is on my '67.
-
I believe we should all consider looking at the recent post into this site's Library Section on Cruise Control installations.
Some references to the vacuum systems that relate to this discussion are contained there. (see specifically the canister images, related notes and addendum)
Carefully, I have read through this information and I am now more UNCLEAR as I am clear.
Doesn't the addendum suggest that EARLY style would (or could) have just ONE canister with the tilt AND air conditioning, and that the EARLY canister would need removed and two other canisters installed (one below apron and another below battery).
This might be an explanation why my example DID NOT seem to ever have the battery tray location canister.
I DID "procure the canister & bracket" for the battery tray location already, not the new hoses yet (still hunting the green/white stripe hoses in reproduction)...but clarity would be nice before I actually install them. (I am not at the point of reassembly yet on my example)
More input from others here would be appreciated.
Richard
-
I believe we should all consider looking at the recent post into this site's Library Section on Cruise Control installations.
Some references to the vacuum systems that relate to this discussion are contained there. (see specifically the canister images, related notes and addendum)
I noticed that too after reading through the Cruise Control installations. From what I can tell after reading, those instructions do confirm that the canister location was an early/late variation. It still doesn't answer your question about what the procedure was when a car had both Tilt and A/C.
-
I noticed that too after reading through the Cruise Control installations. From what I can tell after reading, those instructions do confirm that the canister location was an early/late variation. It still doesn't answer your question about what the procedure was when a car had both Tilt and A/C.
Text of the addendum dated March 7, 1967 (partial, as applicable), copied here as a supplement contained with the Cruise Control installation proceedures:
*I.S. (instruction sheet) No. 2627
Note on sheet 7 of 7 should be clarified as follows:
"On early production vehicles with tilt column, procure bracket C7ZZ-3F547-A and relocate tank as shown. On factory air conditioning equipped vehicles, procure tank assembly C7ZZ-19A566-A and install as shown.
On vehicles with both air conditioning and tilt column, procure both tank assemblies C7ZZ-19566-A and C7ZZ-3E547-A and bracket C7ZZ-3F547-A and install as shown. Aso on 390 engine installations, check tank installation under battery tray to ensure clearance to engine."
(*reference page #13 of Library PDF)
I believe it DOES answer the question, but am I reading this incorrectly? PROCURE to me says that it (battery tray mounted canister) is NOT already present on the vehicle UNLESS it came with the cruise option from the factory. This seems to be directed SOLEY at the EARLY STYLE OBLONG CANISTER VEHICLES!!! I realize this may be an "implied fact" but maybe others that are versed well in interpretation of the written form of the English language can redirect my thinking, otherwise, to me, that is how I interpret it as stating. PLEASE! Correct me if I am wrong! I am not trying to be the "expert" on this subject, I simply wish to get it correct!
A few examples of my interpretation of this information (for clarity):
Example #1: John, username "7RO2A" previously on reply # 60 said his NON-A/C with tilt had the smaller canister, exactly like the one that mounts under the battery (without the bracket), so... (for the sake of using John's car as an example of demonstrating...that is, IF JOHN WAS ADDING an original "dealer installation" kit of the Cruise Control System) therefore, if adding the CRUISE system onto his example, he would simply relocate the EXISTING canister to under the battery with the bracket C7ZZ-3F547-A and use the "kit-supplied" hoses. ( did I get this correct????)
Example#2: My 11/2/1966 S.J. w/289 car with factory A/C and Tilt (early design, with the oblong A/C canister) , if the selling dealership were to have install the CRUISE CONTROL option before the initial sale, wouldn't they have "removed the oblong canister and dispose of it", they also would have needed to "procure both tank assemblies C7ZZ-19566-A and C7ZZ-3F547-A and install as shown." ("as shown" is intended to read as in "using the images" that are contained in the article for 67 Mustangs in the Library section of this site)
Example #3: An example with a 390 engine, factory A/C and Tilt-away, would use the same instructions as in example #2 (above) except using the other mounting holes in the battery tray support (as indicated on the instruction sheets, also found in article found in the Library section of this site.)
Is this making sense? It's beginning to blurr some in my head! (read as this is giving me a headache...I have made a few edits, so I hope it reads correctly by now. I will re-read again later and edit <as needed> again)
Richard
-
Glad you guys found and noticed those notes. Was going to point them out but figured that you each would find them on your own as you did :)
I believe it DOES answer the question, but am I reading this incorrectly? PROCURE to me says that it (battery tray mounted canister) is NOT already present on the vehicle UNLESS it came with the cruise option from the factory. I realize this may be an "implied fact" but maybe others that are versed well in interpretation of the written form of the English language can redirect my thinking, that is how I read it as stating.
It could also mean (as we have found out in the assembly manuals) that Ford believed or planned to maybe to not use the prepared battery trays with the holes on cars not needing the holes at the time of printing the pages only to, in practice, to have some end up that way. Also why include the pattern and measurements for converting/adding the holes if they didn't expect that in some cases dealers would need to modify the regular trays out of need or unavailability? Since they were not included in the kit nor to my knowledge carried in the parts department as an individual specific item.
Just a thought
-
Jeff, I have been making a few edits since or while you made your comment, but before I read your comment. I hope I am not "muddying the waters" any with my line(s) of examples mentioned. Hopefully, this discussion might bring about more clarity of "correctness".
As I mentioned earlier (possibly in this thread?), I have always been willing to "restore" any missing or incorrect parts on my example for the Tilt option...but it looks like I may have been on a "witch hunt" without any need, I say this because I do not have & I do not wish to add the "Cruise Control" option to my car.
The more I sort through information about some of these options (using my vehicle's option as the example) the more it seems I never needed to actually "procure" the so-called previously, "Tilt Canister", on the battery tray. It seems more like this was a "Cruise Control" canister also used on the tilt-away column. For some reference, look closely at the hoses in the photographs contained in the PDF file (in the Library). Am I reading them incorrectly or doesn't the hose going to the tilt-away also "T" into the cruise control transducer vacuum feed line?
Richard
-
Jeff, I have been making a few edits since or while you made your comment, but before I read your comment. I hope I am not "muddying the waters" any with my line(s) of examples mentioned. Hopefully, this discussion might bring about more clarity of "correctness".
Don't think so and believe that talking things out can help flush out details and stuff that, with out the exchange, might not get looked from all angles. We, as individuals can only compare what we see and read to our own experiences and have often discovered the value of having an option discussion with other like minded people. Somethings it' s been remarkable how quickly what we think is a "discovery" to turn into nothing or flower and add a missing piece to another persons puzzle. Of course the whole discussion process is made more difficult since we have to use the written word to describe and explain
This only works as long as there are no agendas and all involved are OK with not finding out an answer "right this minute" as well as being OK to continue to explore. Think that's enough of that... on to the meat of the discussion ;)
The more I sort through information about some of these options (using my vehicle's option as the example) the more it seems I never needed to actually "procure" the so-called previously, "Tilt Canister", on the battery tray.
Not sure that is the way I'm reading it - to me it seems that the two tanks need to be added to the car if your addition the cruise option to a car without AC or tilt or a combination of both. That is where the idea of splicing into hoses and T's come into play - when those other options are present
It seems more like this was a "Cruise Control" canister also used on the tilt-away column. For some reference, look closely at the hoses in the photographs contained in the PDF file (in the Library).
Are you looking at page 4 or 12?
Am I reading them incorrectly or doesn't the hose going to the tilt-away also "T" into the cruise control transducer vacuum feed line?
On page 4, I see the control box vacuum lines connecting to the vacuum source at the back of the engine. Possible identified as the vacuum solenoid valve opening identified by a red paint daub.
The second yellow stripped hose connecting to the "bellows" /throttle control.
Will stop there so we can work step by step through this - gaining agreement and a foundation to move to the next point.
-
Jeff, my area of focus is on pages 12-14 of the Library article as it appears in the Library.
Keep in mind, these are INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS FOR SPEED CONTROL that a dealership might have used had a request to add this option onto a car they sold or onto a car that came into the shop for service.
ALSO: I see I have an omission in some of my previous text (and it is relevant) about the items needing "procured" to install the Speed Control onto an EARLY PRODUCTION vehicle with A/C and/or Tilt option. I will edit that previous post with the updates highlighted in BLUE.
Page 12, shows the vacuum hoses, page 4 is mostly electrical and speedo cables (therefore unrelated to the vacuum systems). Page 5 shows a direct connection to the intake manifold for SPEED CONTROL installation onto a car without A/C or Tilt, and a 2ND diagram depicting a "T"'d in source to manifold vacuum for adding the 2ND canister onto a car WITH A/C and/or Tilt. Page 5 basically is the PRIMARY source to manifold vacuum (for all 3 optional equipment options) and page 12 shows more the secondary, or possibly better wording, the "reservoir vacuum" routing
Page 13, shows templates for drilling and mounting of the two canisters and or relocating diagrams/instructions (including NOTES)
Page 14, is the addendum letter to clarify the "NOTE" located bottom center of page 13
After studying this all again, I feel that YES, the battery tray mounted canister is designed to be there for the purpose of supplementing vacuum supply for the Tilt-awy option, but I also feel it was NOT there on all early 67's with the Tilt option...let me explain why.
I cannot yet agree that ON EARLY DESIGN Mustangs with A/C and tilt options, that two (2) tanks were originally installed. Maybe what sits in my craw is the NOTE on page 13, bottom center and how it reads.
"NOTE: ON EARLY PRODUCTION VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH EITHER TILT COLUMN AND/OR FACTORY AIR CONDITIONING A VACUUM TANK WILL BE LOCATED ON THE RIGHT HAND APRON WHERE THE SPEED CONTROL ASSEMBLY IS TO BE INSTALLED. THIS TANK WILL HAVE TO BE REMOVED AND ONE OR TWO NEW TANKS INSTALLED AS SHOWN. ON A/C VEHICLES THE LIQUID LINE WILL ALSO HAVE TO BE ROTATED AS SHOWN."
When I combine the above text with the clarity of the ADDENDUM (page 14), I keep reading these installation instructions the same way I initially did, that is that the ONE oblong tank (early production design) is "REMOVED" and "ONE OR TWO NEW TANKS" installed as shown. My interpretation, supported using John's (username: 7R01A) December SJ example WITHOUT A/C but W/Tilt option, John originally had ONLY the one small canister on the right apron, a canister that is identical to the battery tray mounted canister but without the bracket. Therefore, for the sake of "INSTALLING SPEED CONTROL" onto John's example, the installer would need to "PROCURE BRACKET C7ZZ-3F547-A", relocate that canister to under the battery with the bracket, ALSO "PROCURE CANISTER C7ZZ-19A566-A, drill out the apron according to the instructions and mount this canister from UNDER the fender well.
All of this is to say that in JOHN's example, if the dealership were to add the SPEED CONTROL, the installer would NEED ONLY ONE CANISTER since the car ALREADY HAS THE CANISTER NEEDED FOR THE UNDERSIDE OF THE BATTERY TRAY MOUNTED UP ON THE APRON, SO ALL THAT IS NEEDED IS THE BRACKET, SCREWS AND NUTS TO MOUNT IT UNDER THE BATTERY.
Now, on MY EXAMPLE, (EARLY PRODUCTION with A/C and originally using the oblong canister) If the original purchaser would have requested the addition of SPEED CONTROL onto it, the installer would have found the big-fat oblong canister, so it cannot be left in place and it will not fit under the battery so the installer would NEED TWO (2) NEW CANISTERS AND THE BRACKET TO RELOCATE and make the room on the apron needed to install the SPEED CONTROL.
ON LATER 67 EXAMPLES and on into 1968 FACTORY Air Conditioning examples, the APRON mounted canister is ALREADY BELOW THE APRON, in the fender well area and is already out of the way. If the car ALSO had Tilt-Away, it would already have the battery tray mounted canister as well.
The ONLY reason I can arrive at is if INSTALLING SPEED CONTROL onto an EARLY PRODUCTION 1967 Mustangs and Cougars, the vehicles WOULD NEED BOTH canisters C7ZZ-19566-A AND C7ZZ-3E547-A AND the bracket C7ZZ-3F547-A to achieve enough vacuum storage as the OBLONG canister previously had. I say this because basically the Oblong Canister was double-sized of the other two to begin with! Why else would they be "T'd" together basically downstream, before going into the dash?
This also make sense of the image in the Chassis assembly manual, top and center of page 7, that shows a "T" inside of the dash between the A/C vacuum source and the Tilt-Away column.
~anybody at all following me yet?
It seems VERY REASONABLE TO ASSUME that on the LATER model 67 Mustangs, the oblong canister was abolished completely, if you had only A/C, you got the canister under the fender well. If you had ONLY tilt-away (jury still out on this) you got just one canister (location seems to vary)
If your later 67 or 68 had A/C and Tilt-away, you have a fender well mounted canister AND a battery tray mounted canister as original equipment, therefore... you would NOT NEED TO RELOCATE ANYTHING TO INSTALL SPEED CONTROL.
Summary: The reason for the update in design was for the sole purpose of making space available in this area in the event of installation of the SPEED CONTROL OPTION. Basically, if you had a later 67 version OR a 68, you would NOT NEED TO PROCURE THE ADDITIONAL CANISTER(s) or bracket MENTIONED IN THE ARTICLE because they would already BE THERE!
Looking at the vacuum lines, (page 12) THE LINES ARE CLEARLY TIED TOGETHER WITH THE "T" before going on in under the dash. NOTICE HOW NONE OF THESE LINES ATTACH TO THE SPEED CONTROL UNIT!!!!!!!!!!
THE SPEED CONTROL UNIT IS ATTACHED (very poor idea, by the way) DIRECTLY TO THE INTAKE MANIFOLD (page 5 of the instructions) AND IS NOT TIED INTO ANY OF THE RESEVOIRS (as it ought to be)
PLEASE! Look again closely! I am NOT installing a Speed Control system, but I feel this evidence speaks volumes to the original routing's of both early and later design vacuum reservoir systems for all 67-68 Mustangs that had ANY vacuum related optional equipment...not just my example.
PLEASE! Feedback encouraged and welcome!
Richard
PS: Now I'll go back and correct some omission of text in the previous comment (changes are made in blue )
-
I found 7F01C1219187, Dec 3 scheduled build, which could be classified as early, with only the oblong tank. This was a 289-2V, AC, tilt car that was owned by a Ford engineer and parked in 1987. I've included pictures before - but had a FoMoCo belt for the AC and was largely untouched. There was no tank on the battery tray, and there were no holes where a tank would have been. There was a single vacuum line feed into the dash area, with a tee that split to the AC and tilt loads. To me that is enough evidence that not all cars equipped with tilt had the dedicated canister mounted on the battery tray. As to exact change over dates, variations between plants, etc. that is the hard part to nail down.
-
Jeff, my area of focus is on pages 12-14 of the Library article as it appears in the Library....................
This also make sense of the image in the Chassis assembly manual, top and center of page 7, that shows a "T" inside of the dash between the A/C vacuum source and the Tilt-Away column.
~anybody at all following me yet?
Ok I'm with you. Sorry it took a day or so to get the time to sit and read what you wrote clearly, focusing on what you were describing. Number of twist and turns in the subject related to when - like a good novel ;)
BTW what is the date on the page from the assembly manual? That would give us a point in time related to that practice or at least direction from Ford.
Glad I finally posted those instructions and they have help the research
Did I miss or have you guys already gone over the long oval to tomato can to in the fender well can change over points? Don't want to confuse the subject further - just trying to figure out if I missed something
Will review the rest of your earlier post later - one bite at a time :)
-
BTW what is the date on the page from the assembly manual? That would give us a point in time related to that practice or at least direction from Ford.
I see no date on page 7 (for 289 engines)
(I might also have included pages 6-8 for the different engines, all 3 pages have the "T" located inside of the dash area. Page 6 is for 200 6 cylinders, 7 for 289 engines and page 8 is for the 390 engines)
ALL 3 pages (read as all 3 engine displacement options) have sketches of the OBLONG canister (which we know became abolished in later production) so it would look as these images were of the EARLY design.
Richard
-
I found 7F01C1219187, Dec 3 scheduled build, which could be classified as early, with only the oblong tank. This was a 289-2V, AC, tilt car that was owned by a Ford engineer and parked in 1987. I've included pictures before - but had a FoMoCo belt for the AC and was largely untouched. There was no tank on the battery tray, and there were no holes where a tank would have been. There was a single vacuum line feed into the dash area, with a tee that split to the AC and tilt loads. To me that is enough evidence that not all cars equipped with tilt had the dedicated canister mounted on the battery tray. As to exact change over dates, variations between plants, etc. that is the hard part to nail down.
I woke this thread up to do two things. FIRST: John, when you get a chance, I would like to see a close up with measurements provided of this factory "T" if you have it.
2nd, to link readers that may be working on their 67 Tilt column to another recent thread I began with restoration work of the column itself. http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/index.php?topic=15852.msg99411#msg99411
-
I woke this thread up to do two things. FIRST: John, when you get a chance, I would like to see a close up with measurements provided of this factory "T" if you have it.
2nd, to link readers that may be working on their 67 Tilt column to another recent thread I began with restoration work of the column itself. http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/index.php?topic=15852.msg99411#msg99411
bump
-
Yikes, I missed it by three years! Sorry about that chief.
These are hard buggers to find.
-
For bonus points, I do have some observations on the original hoses.
1. The exterior is smooth in appearance and touch
2. I do see that there was a green stripe, you should be able to see evidence in the pics.
3. There is a hunk of tape, or label on one end of the hose. Actually both hoses, including the shorty between the solenoid and vacuum motor. Both of mine are discolored.
4. In my tilt/AC application, the large diameter (ID and OD) hose is attached to the TEE in the previous post. From here it attaches to the source, from the in line check valve under the hood, and continuing to the A/C-heater control panel. The two smaller diameter lines are black (no stripe). For A/C applications the green stripe served another purpose.
-
Yikes, I missed it by three years! Sorry about that chief.
These are hard buggers to find.
Thank you MUCH for your pictures of the T itself (with dimensions). I know you are a busy guy so I didn't want to seem impatient but I finally caved in and decided I needed to "bump" the thread. ;)
I would like to re-visit the evidence that some EARLY AC cars indeed had a "T" inside the car for the Tilt-Away column, (as the Osborn Assembly Manuals indicated). I did have another member years ago confirm this, he also had a Dearborn, early December build like you found.
Since the example you found (7F01C1219187) is a Dearborn example and the one other member who reported to me privately in 2014 also was Dearborn, we cannot rule in that other plants followed the same practice nor that they (all) switched over to the "Below the Battery, attached to the battery tray" practice on/around the same (estimated) December date. We can see a pattern that at least in Dearborn, the switch-over occurred after the middle of December. Maybe other AC cars with Tilt Column examples will surface, hopefully with December, January or February build dates and with that information, we can narrow the transition to the extra reservoir down. If we have examples built during the Sringtime months with the reservoir mounted to the battery tray, yet another bonus. I believe it would be safe to say that eventually, Ford punched holes into the battery tray support bracket (at least for a while), to accommodate the battery tray reservoir so even pictures that include those "holes" would be useful, if accompanied by build dates.
For now, I feel it would safe to ESTIMATE that AC cars w/tilt-away built before Mid-December SHOULD NOT likely have the reservoir under the battery UNLESS they have a Dealer-Installed or Factory Installed Cruise Control. If they have Cruise or the reservoir added, the holes in the brace would have been DRILLED by an installer (not punched out by the metal-stamping plant).
I would say the under-the-battery reservoir would likely have been use from on or around the beginning of the year, through about April of 67 (estimated dates) whenever the latest version of reservoir(s) were introduced that mounted inside/under the fender well (under the apron-mounted reservoirs). It would also be a curious detail to check any original battery tray supports for any holes found to secure such a reservoir. (were those holes "drilled" or were the holes "punched"?)
I will look into the Assembly Manuals for dates on the pages and try to trim down the time-frames of the change-over dates. I hope other input can be collected for data on this detail. I really hope the results of these many pages can be assembled, sorted and confirmed to draw up perhaps a conclusive document, maybe an article that we can use to assist others who wish to return their example to the best-knowledge available to date.
Please, if you have more data points to add to the thread, or even if you wish to remain anonymous...submit any data points to me in private messaging. Photos are a bonus. Photos of ORIGINAL hoses still in place, EXTRA bonus points! (Thanks again John!) Also, If you need my email address or if easier to send via smart-phone, PM me and I will give contact info to you.
Thanks everyone who has contributed. I feel we have made "Marked Progress" so far on the hose routing and reservoirs at least. I am hoping to address yet another detail to these 67 Tilt Columns too (some examples have been found to have the actuator solenoid mounted to the column, not to a bracket near the ignition switch) but for now, I'd like to try and nail down just the Reservoir variances, Hoses, "T's" and check valves used on these 67 cars. Hopefully, more to come!
-
I have been working on installing factory Speed control on my early build 67 (December 66) with factory air and tilt. The car has the big, oblong tank and a check valve with a single fitting, there is no can under the battery. The solenoid for the tilt was mounted under the dash in the same place as the pictures in the previous posts. The car is also a GTA, so it had the fog light switch next to the solenoid.
However, since I'm installing Speed control, I am adding the tank to the battery tray per the installation instructions. The instructions show that the Curtis Wright servo unit mounts to the firewall between the braces, so the factory wouldn't have either moved the oblong tank or used the smaller tank in the fender well.
I was thinking that I would have to use a check valve with two outlets, but a previous poster indicated that the tilt accessory tank has a check valve built into it? The installation instructions aren't really clear on which check valve to use. I reasoned that there should be a check valve for each reserve tank, so it makes sense to use the one with the double outlets.
I am also installing tilt on my brother's mid year 67 that has AC. He has the small can mounted in the fender well. Since it is mid year, I am installing a can under the battery tray for the tilt, per the vacuum guide. I'm also now wondering if we should use the two outlet check valve.
I have several of (what I believe are) the correct tilt cans. How would you verify that they have a check valve in them? Would it hurt to have both the double outlet check valve AND a can with the check valve?
-
So, I did a little research last night....
I bought a bleeder tool for brakes and hooked it up to my cans and check valves so I could test the vacuum. I found that my double nozzle check valve leaked!! I plugged the two outlets and put the vacuum on the inlet and it leaked out VERY quickly. That bugs me, I'm wondering if I can flush the check valve or maybe add some solder around the edges to seal it. I don't know what the inside of the valve looks like, so I may just tear mine apart to see what may be affecting it.
Then I went on to the Tilt can that would install under the battery. It held a good vacuum (14lbs over night!), but the two nozzles acted differently. When I put suction on the center one and my finger on the outer one, it would slowly release when I took my finger off. When I did the opposite and released the pressure on the center one, it quickly discharged. That makes me think that the center one would lead to the tilt solenoid and that the outer one would lead to the manifold.
But, I'm thinking that the one from the manifold (that leaks slowly) should not leak at all. That's the whole point of a check valve, right?
-
Oh, and one more thing...
I have one stock bracket to mount the can to the battery tray strut, but... I need two since I'm doing my brother's car as well. I had an extra accessory bracket--the one for all the relays. I used that bracket to make a VERY close copy of the stock one. It is the same gauge metal and about the perfect size. I did have to add a bend to it, but it is so close! There is a dimple on the stock one at the bends that I couldn't reproduce, but you can't tell the difference.
Just sayin'.
-
So, I did a little research last night....
I bought a bleeder tool for brakes and hooked it up to my cans and check valves so I could test the vacuum. I found that my double nozzle check valve leaked!! I plugged the two outlets and put the vacuum on the inlet and it leaked out VERY quickly. That bugs me, I'm wondering if I can flush the check valve or maybe add some solder around the edges to seal it. I don't know what the inside of the valve looks like, so I may just tear mine apart to see what may be affecting it.
Then I went on to the Tilt can that would install under the battery. It held a good vacuum (14lbs over night!), but the two nozzles acted differently. When I put suction on the center one and my finger on the outer one, it would slowly release when I took my finger off. When I did the opposite and released the pressure on the center one, it quickly discharged. That makes me think that the center one would lead to the tilt solenoid and that the outer one would lead to the manifold.
But, I'm thinking that the one from the manifold (that leaks slowly) should not leak at all. That's the whole point of a check valve, right?
Yes, at times you can save a check valve by flushing them. I've used water and air. Other times, this will not help, get another and try again.
Regarding the can under the battery installation, I believe once you research, considering you are adding the speed control, the build date you are doing the work for and so on, that the under battery canister mounted to the battery brace would have only TWO hoses going to it. Later, 68 systems using the two hoses, mounted under the battery but on the tire-side of the apron.
*edited errors
-
I have a 67 coupe with air that is pretty original with the exception of a white vinyl top that is not on the build sheet. I am adding a tilt/tilt away to make it more drivable for my wife as it was her 50th birthday present. The car was built in NJ on 13 July 67. From what I am reading here, I should be adding a second canister to the battery tray. I see WCCC has the brackets to mount the canister, but am I correct in the searches I have done that the side mount canisters are very rare and nobody reproduces them? I could make a bracket, but my sheet metal skills don't equal my machining skills. Does anyone know of a source for the crimped bracket that goes on the canister or if someone reproduces these? I think I know the answer, but then again I am really just getting started and could be missing the obvious. (which I'm quite skilled at some times.). And while I'm here, I would like to express my appreciation to those that take the time to add to these discussions, as they are an invaluable resource for us newbies who are just getting started.
-
The 1967 tilt system does not use a canister by the battery. That is the 1968 system.
-
The 1967 tilt system does not use a canister by the battery. That is the 1968 system.
The 67 tilt system has a hole pattern on the 67 unique battery tray to mount the tilt vacuum canister there. I believe you are thinking of the 68 canister mounted in the apron under the battery tray .
-
Yes, at times you can save a check valve by flushing them. I've used water and air. Other times, this will not help, get another and try again.
Regarding the can under the battery installation, I believe once you research, considering you are adding the speed control, the build date you are doing the work for and so on, that the under battery canister mounted to the battery brace would have only ONE hose going to it, not 2. Later 67 systems using the two hoses, mounted under the battery but on the tire-side of the apron, would use the two hose canister.
As I posted earlier today, I am installing a tilt in my 13 July 67 coupe, which I would assume would be one of the later 67 systems? I have factory air with the two hose through apron canister under the hinge. You mention that the later 67's used a canister under the battery but on the tire side of the apron. Is that only applicable to air, tilt, AND speed control, with the speed control using the lower canister?
-
The 1967 tilt system does not use a canister by the battery. That is the 1968 system.
Here is the 67 tilt can under the battery that Bob was referring to.
-
Here is the 67 tilt can under the battery that Bob was referring to.
Thank you for that. I found an original canister like that a week or so ago, but now I can't seem to find it. It was probably on EBay and sold. I see above that there was a change around April of 67 but I'm not sure that it would be applicable to my situation since I will have the a/c and the tilt setup.
-
I believe that if a 1967 car had both Factory A/C and Tilt, it only used one Vacuum Cannister ; the large oblong one that mounted on the rear inner Fender Apron. If not mentioned in this thread previously, I believe that there are others on just the Vacuum Reservoirs that support this.
Bob
-
As I posted earlier today, I am installing a tilt in my 13 July 67 coupe, which I would assume would be one of the later 67 systems? I have factory air with the two hose through apron canister under the hinge. You mention that the later 67's used a canister under the battery but on the tire side of the apron. Is that only applicable to air, tilt, AND speed control, with the speed control using the lower canister?
I corrected my earlier reply.. This whole canister ordeal certainly has many of us boggled but there is a certain pattern of results that indicate a few running changes. Very early cars tend to use the oblong canister alone unless speed control is present. without AC has different patterns so we will not include those patterns. Earlier, I said only one hose on the battery tray brace mounted canister used later in the year. That was incorrect, it would have two hoses.
I believe that if a 1967 car had both Factory A/C and Tilt, it only used one Vacuum Cannister ; the large oblong one that mounted on the rear inner Fender Apron. If not mentioned in this thread previously, I believe that there are others on just the Vacuum Reservoirs that support this.
Bob
Bob, this is true at least early in the year and through at least December 66 by findings. I think the added canister mounted under the battery tray (attached to the brace as Marty has pictured) began early in 67 like January to March time frame but I do not have the time frame pinned down yet.
We find early cars had no holes pre-punched in the battery tray brace but later cars do.
-
The 67 tilt system has a hole pattern on the 67 unique battery tray to mount the tilt vacuum canister there. I believe you are thinking of the 68 canister mounted in the apron under the battery tray .
Agree that the 68's were in the apron but do not agree that ALL 67's had holes pre-punched in the battery tray brace for the 67-unique battery brace mounted canister. Research indicates a running change on those pre-punched holes.
-
Here is the 67 tilt can under the battery that Bob was referring to.
Marty, what is the build date or build dates of the example(s) you have found the unique-67 battery tray-mounted canisters. What other options do these examples have?
-
It is March 27 1967.
I do not believe that the early cars used this can under the battery tray un less they were modified by a dealer to install a speed control. Some time back we found instructions that illustrate the movement of the vacuum can to under the battery tray.
To answer the question asked I would say if you have a 67 with tilt, AC and speed control the tilt can should be under the batter tray.
IMHO there were no customer cars in 67 with a factory installed speed control.
-
IMHO there were no customer cars in 67 with a factory installed speed control.
Although, Kevin Marti's book "Mustangs by the Numbers", shows that a "whopping" 55 were "Factory Optioned" in 1967 with the Speed Control. Yet, I suppose that the Factory could have sent the parts along with the car when shipped to the Dealer for the Dealer to install ?
Bob
-
Bob what I meant was the cars that got speed control were demonstrators. There were no customer ordered cars with S.C. There were dealer option kits to install the S.C..
-
So the 1967 tilt vacuum can is under the battery tray? I was under the assumption it was mounted under the hood hinge on the passenger side.....
-
So the 1967 tilt vacuum can is under the battery tray? I was under the assumption it was mounted under the hood hinge on the passenger side.....
Depends on the build date. IMO early = under hinge late = battery tray. Not a lot of examples so we don’t have the transition dates nailed down.
-
Im smarter now
:o