ConcoursMustang Forums
1st Generation 1964 1/2 - 1973 - Questions & general discussions that apply to a specific year => 1968 Mustang => Topic started by: pnsy56shop on July 26, 2014, 01:08:49 PM
-
What color were the V.I.N.. plate rivets for March of 1968 San Jose built GT/CS.
I've search the forum here and didn't find any theads on the subject. It' been suggested that they should be a rosette color per federal regulations but did ford use them?
-
You're talking about the windshield VIN plate?
-
Yes, windshield
-
Hope these help
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/2/6-260714170807.jpeg)
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/2/6-260714170847.jpeg)
-
"Rosette" is the type of rivet, not the color. Style of the head, slightly different to a basic pop rivet, a few variations.
-
.............. It' been suggested that they should be a rosette color per federal regulations but did ford use them?
That style (6 sided head) of rivet was used but it depends on plant, and time period
-
Some cars used a pan head Philips screw not rivet
-
Some cars used a pan head Philips screw not rivet
I've not see that before - nor do the auto thief books from the period list screws as an accepted practice.
Will PM
-
You were involved in this thread here
http://forums.vintage-mustang.com/concours-forum/571693-vin-plate-talk-not-allowed.html
http://forums.vintage-mustang.com/vintage-mustang-forum/540272-need-new-dash-vin-plate-2.html
there was mention in this thread here
http://californiaspecial.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-10600.html
Personally Dearborn May and San Jose July.
There were 3 different styles based on my years in the hobby, Rosette, plain style rivet and some Black Phosphate Pan phillips head.
I have a pic somewhere and will look
-
IMHO I have not seen the screws to be original for any of the Mustang Plants though I'm sure some PO's reattached them with screws. I'll look for other examples from the plants and months you listed to illustrate that.
Sure there would have to be hundreds if not thousands of cars with screws if that was the norm.
Did recheck the 70 NATB Motor Vehicle Identification Manual that states 1970-68- VIN Stamped into Metal Tab (1970 Stainless Steel, 1969-68 Aluminum) Riveted to Instrument Pane: 1970-1969 on Left Hand Side, 1968 on Right Hand Side. VIN Visible Through Windshield
Believe there is possibly a reference to the attachment method in the TSB articles and in the Dealer communications. Also have a early 70's Auto thief handbook I'll check
Are you thinking that screws were used when all of the plants rivet tools (must have had a few with all the lines and at least some back ups) were broken/not available like the radiator support seal stapler at Dearborn?
-
and here with a pic
http://forums.vintage-mustang.com/vintage-mustang-forum/540272-need-new-dash-vin-plate-2.html
no one said it was the norm quite the opposite is MHO.
No One has seen more than just a small sampling of what was produced in total. Some more than others but still a small amount
-
Guess that we should suggest to others that screws were not the norm and suggest that owners be careful with their choices ;)
Hate to see anyone lose a car or end up in court over such a small detail - but have seen it happen :(
-
Are you thinking that screws were used when all of the plants rivet tools (must have had a few with all the lines and at least some back ups) were broken/not available like the radiator support seal stapler at Dearborn?
I am not one for speculation Jeff but perhaps something like that happened.
The fact that several have witnessed the exact same screw selection has validity. I am very confident that my personal cars were not tampered with. I inspected them very closely because they were not the norm therefore researched and found others had witnessed the same.
-
Thanks for sharing will continue to look at this detail as well as others in my travels as I'm sure you will :)
-
I hope not to be the lucky curator of any more cars with them :)
It is good for the hobby that we make mention and not denounce. Broad strokes can often be proven wrong in Ford speak. Mass production of a low priced car with 1000's of components by low paid workers at different plants leads to anomalies as witnessed frequently on all of the car specific forums.
-
I hope not to be the lucky curator of any more cars with them :)
It is good for the hobby that we make mention and not denounce. Broad strokes can often be proven wrong in Ford speak. Mass production of a low priced car with 1000's of components by low paid workers at different plants leads to anomalies as witnessed frequently on all of the car specific forums.
This is such a "touchy" situation in forum discussions. I learned to be more careful (and am still learning) on my input to threads. It was suggested that I might use phrases like "In the example I have,..." and to leave it as an example and for others to concur, or not.
I believe something I said in a thread a while back that must have been considered as a "denounce" by a reader because the subsequent comment language seemed a bit angry. I then became angry also because I felt my example was accurate and correct. Certainly, anger wasn't my motive. Being "right" wasn't either. I was simply trying to establish having an anomaly (or two actually) from comments previously posted in that particular thread, while attempting to point out the build dates and assembly plants involved in the two examples I had that did not seem to line up. I mispoke when I suggested another member had been "duked" into changing a part that may actually have been correct for his application (given my examples) Using that one word "duked", was the error I believe.
Some people on these forums have very good reputations among the fellow members. Engaging them, even by accident, isn't always easy to avoid when "typing" out replies.
Forums like this one is, are an invaluable source to hobbyists & restorers. Some members restore for a living and it really isn't a hobby for them so writing anything that might be damaging, can be extremely costly for them. The combined knowledge of the forum's members is overwhelming. Inadvertently stepping on somebody's toes will occur, and hopefully we can respond, not out of haste, but out of compassion for the restoration community. We ARE very passionate about our work, we sometimes easily get offended. We need to remember these comments can possibly steer people the wrong direction (by accident) when we put our personality above principles.
Richard
-
and here with a pic
http://forums.vintage-mustang.com/vintage-mustang-forum/540272-need-new-dash-vin-plate-2.html
no one said it was the norm quite the opposite is MHO.
No One has seen more than just a small sampling of what was produced in total. Some more than others but still a small amount
I worked at a salvage yard in the 70's and 80's in So.Cal., I saw several examples on Various 68 Fords (various models) that had the screws (like VMF forum pictures) and not just the rivets. I remember thinking how easy they could be switched and how rediculous that the dash pad covered them. Obvious, somebody in the Car Theft market would have been tempted, and I never saw them after 68 model year and assumed Ford had been told to make a change. I never saw another car maker put those VINS way over on the right side either and we all know that changed in 69 model year as well.
put me down as rocking the boat ;)
Richard
-
Think this discussion is a good example of human nature and how much our experiences and beliefs inflluence us. Some see something out of the ordinary and assume that its a modification by a previous owner while another looks and see something they believe was done at the factory.
I fully admit my opinions are influenced by many years of hot rodding/modifying cars as well as all the stories I hear around the dinner table about the crooks and what they would go through while trying to cover their tracks and efforts.
Guess this might end up like the engine vin's. Factories were by law suppose to do one thing and most of the time they followed the rules though for one reason or another one or two slipped through here or there. But the discussions and sharing will continue ;)