Hopefully someone can identify this pictured rivet. After looking for a GT-350 for 20 years finally able to purchase 6S2227 a few weeks ago from the previous owner since 1972. As I've been assessing the car- I noticed the rivets used to hold the side scoops are unlike what i have seen on real GT-350's in the past. Typically you see the standard aluminum rivet. I've not started disassembly yet so i don't know the configuration on the inside behind fiberglass panel. The attached picture displays the dark blackish colored rivet. It has an extended head on it. The previous owner of 47 years stated this is the way he received the car. I have a good eye and does not seem to ever been wrecked. Both side scoops have the same rivet setup on both sides, top and bottom. Can anyone identify? Thank you Fred
its hard to tell 100% from the picture but it looks like a standard pop rivet, installed from the inside, with a pop rivet washer on the outside of the scoop just as it should be on that late of a car. I think it still has the head of the pop rivet shaft still in the rivet so it looks like a strange rivet that was installed from the outside. john brown
Quote from: mustang7red on February 28, 2019, 12:15:01 AM
its hard to tell 100% from the picture but it looks like a standard pop rivet, installed from the inside, with a pop rivet washer on the outside of the scoop just as it should be on that late of a car. I think it still has the head of the pop rivet shaft still in the rivet so it looks like a strange rivet that was installed from the outside. john brown
+1 .Just a little dirty which may make you think it is a different material then aluminum.
The addition of the washer ( I have seen on other higher number cars) deforms the head a little differently. IMHO those are original.
Randy
Quote from: rraceme on February 27, 2019, 10:18:44 PM
Hopefully someone can identify this pictured rivet. After looking for a GT-350 for 20 years finally able to purchase 6S2227 a few weeks ago from the previous owner since 1972. As I've been assessing the car- I noticed the rivets used to hold the side scoops are unlike what i have seen on real GT-350's in the past. Typically you see the standard aluminum rivet. I've not started disassembly yet so i don't know the configuration on the inside behind fiberglass panel. The attached picture displays the dark blackish colored rivet. It has an extended head on it. The previous owner of 47 years stated this is the way he received the car. I have a good eye and does not seem to ever been wrecked. Both side scoops have the same rivet setup on both sides, top and bottom. Can anyone identify? Thank you Fred
Congratulations on finding a car!
I'm not sure exactly what it is, but based on all of the later cars that I have observed, they are original.
Brant ,
The ones I've seen had washers on the front two rivets only not the back one.
Randy
Quote from: gt350hr on February 28, 2019, 11:34:16 AM
Brant ,
The ones I've seen had washers on the front two rivets only not the back one.
Randy
Based on the later cars that I have observed, this style of fastener is unique to the very late cars. It appears to be something different from the standard pop-rivet used on the majority of '66s.
Quote from: gt350hr on February 28, 2019, 11:34:16 AM
Brant ,
The ones I've seen had washers on the front two rivets only not the back one.
Randy
+1
6S2020's had washers on top and bottom front rivets only.
Thanks for the responses. I've attached another picture from the LH side showing the upper side scoop rivets. It used the same style rivet all around. I guess the reason I want to know, once I start my restoration I desire to use the same rivet. Notice in the picture the hose adapter not riveted to the inside of inner quarter rather pushed through the outside (prior scoop install) and riveted in. Never seen that either! My car currently in un-restored condition and should be equipped as when manufactured. I plan to swap the hose adapter to the inside during restoration because I don't like the way this looks. Once I remove the interior I will post a picture of inside rivet hardware too. maybe because my car was one the last of 150 built they did something different? Did I read something about experimenting with glue on side scoops? if someone has seen these rivets before or can source them --let me know. Thank you for the valuable information- Fred
Fred,
It could be as simple as a "personell change". A different worker "might" have done it "his'' way LOL. I would change it too if mine were that way.
Randy
Quote from: rraceme on February 28, 2019, 01:40:41 PM
...................... Notice in the picture the hose adapter not riveted to the inside of wheel house rather pushed through the outside (prior scoop install) and riveted in. Never seen that either!
Yes and so should the duct in the rear wheel well be installed from the outside of the car rather than from the inside like earlier cars. After all the cars built the other way the change may have been changed for some unknown reason - easier or change of worker assigned to that task
You will see and read allot of things. Not all will be correct and stories told for decades get retold and retold on the web.
Quote from: rraceme on February 28, 2019, 01:40:41 PMif someone has seen these rivets before or can source them --let me know. .....
May have been a change in tool or rivet not certain - just a possibility IMHO
Here are some examples of what appears to be the change. Looks like the two changes (direction the ducts installed) and the rivet change may have taken place at or around the same time. Haven't gone through all my pictures and data to graph out the findings and post a survey finding as I've done with other details
Earlier
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/11/6-280219141715.jpeg)
Later
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/11/6-280219141730.jpeg)
J-Speegle, Yes you are correct the Hose adapter which exits the wheel housing is installed backwards too. Very ugly. I will over photo document both hose adapter mount points and during the restoration mount to my taste which would be reversed. If the next owner wants to reverse down the line they can? Additionally I plan to install 1" Shelby drop too because I like the way it performs and looks too.
To All, Thank you for your contribution to my tiny rivet request. I'm absolutely blown away with amount of incredible information SAAC member's have on GT-350's. I look forward to utilizing members in the future with possible questions. You guys are amazing! Fred
Yep for some reason the real late 66s like yours had the duct hose fitting riveted on from the outside . someone from Ford probably told them it would save 5 minutes of time doing it that way. The pop rivets are aluminum and the front two rivets should have the rivet backup washer when installing the scoop. Get some to help , will save you another 5 minutes and cussing
Quote from: acman63 on February 28, 2019, 05:34:12 PM
Yep for some reason the real late 66s like yours had the duct hose fitting riveted on from the outside . someone from Ford probably told them it would save 5 minutes of time doing it that way. The pop rivets are aluminum and the front two rivets should have the rivet backup washer when installing the scoop. Get some to help , will save you another 5 minutes and cussing
Real late must mean after 6S2020 as the ducts are all fitted from the inside on it. (never been messed with)
Also found unused rivets and used rivet tails under the carpet, been there since SA installed the scoops, ducts and plexiglas trim.
Scoops on 2020 used standard style pop rivets to fasten and leading two, top and bottom got the washers.
yep in that area. we can't pinpoint serial number wise . Ive heard stories that a different tech did the last ones and didn't follow protocol but we may never know exactly
Rivet stems should be under the carpet on a division 1 concours car ;) I remember when I first suggested that to Bob G and he gave me "that look". Over the years we've found all kinds of "memorabilia" ( read trash) left in the cars during the SAI rework process. I was only joking about it needing to be there for division 1.
Randy
Thank you all for answering my question about rivets. I've not started restoration on my car yet but when I do, would like to use the same rivet set up. If anyone knows a source for replacements identical rivets, I would appreciate that information.
Fred
I have a follow up question on this topic please. In the pictures that are posted some of the rivets appear to be painted black, others appear to be aged natural aluminum. I would assume that the quarter panel inserts and the inside of the scoops were painted black prior to the scoop being riveted to the quarter panel. I imagine that natural is correct. Painted rivits or natural?
Thanks, Karl
Quote from: Karguy on March 07, 2019, 12:53:47 AM
I have a follow up question on this topic please. In the pictures that are posted some of the rivets appear to be painted black, others appear to be aged natural aluminum. I would assume that the quarter panel inserts and the inside of the scoops were painted black prior to the scoop being riveted to the quarter panel. I imagine that natural is correct. .....
Correct not painting of the rivets once they were in place originally for the side scoops or duct ends
Well its been a long time since I started this thread. But after almost 3 years of ownership, I'm finally starting disassembly of 2227. Today I removed one of the side scoops and wanted to share my finding on the rivet design. As I was told years ago, the side scoop only has 2 rivets. One on top and another on the bottom located closest to the opening. The rivet is two parts and plastic. The hole in the body of the car is about 5/16 of an inch and hole in fiberglass scoop very similar in size. The rivet assembly has an insert which goes in first and then the rivet rod part is pushed into the insert. I will load several pictures of the plastic rivet. Previous owner of my car left it sitting since late 70's or early 80's- very unmolested. what I'm listing may be common knowledge, but the mounting and design configuration surprised me. I will load pictures after this post. In good faith everything Im reporting is what I've observed. Thank you for reading, Fred
Pic1
Pic2
Pic3
Pic4
Last pic
Quote from: rraceme on December 26, 2021, 09:33:51 PM
Last pic
Hi Rraceme,
Does the car have a watershield on both sides? Does it look factory? Please advise the material. Is it a clear type plastic? Please take a full shot of shields. I have never seen before on a fastback.
Thank you
Cory
Yes Corey I took several pictures of it in place. It was not on driver's side only passenger side. I carefully removed it and was going use as a template to make new for both sides. It was very very delicate when removing. Then my wife put several our dogs in my workshop.... yes, they ripped it into about 500 pieces. So my pictures is all that is left. I've never seen one either.
More pics
Hi Rraceme,
Bummer. This could have been a new opportunity to repop these shields. I checked around several Mustang Parts retailers and found they did not provide this shield.
Can you tell if it was formed at all or if the corrugations were formed over time just from the heat cycles? I am assuming it was just flat. Would it be possible to get one of those 500 pieces to see the material? Maybe a first class USPS letter?
Thank you for sharing. Always finding out something new.
Take care
Cory
Corey- it was thick, about 2 mm or so and clear in color. only attached at the very top. bottom and sides were hanging loose (as seen in pictures). The way you see it in the pictures is the way i saw it when i first removed interior panel. Though it is hard to say- it looked flat but was cut to fit that interior panel. My guess, when Shelby American was installing duct work- technician pulled it off during installation.
My wife feels very sad about what happened. We foster old or sick dogs and she had no idea the dogs might damage anything. I've restored and stripped LOTs of 1965-66 mustangs and I've never seen one on a fastback either, i was excited when i saw this one.
Quote from: rraceme on December 27, 2021, 09:46:56 AM
Corey- it was thick, about 2 mm or so and clear in color. only attached at the very top. bottom and sides were hanging loose (as seen in pictures). The way you see it in the pictures is the way i saw it when i first removed interior panel. Though it is hard to say- it looked flat but was cut to fit that interior panel. My guess, when Shelby American was installing duct work- technician pulled it off during installation.
My wife feels very sad about what happened. We foster old or sick dogs and she had no idea the dogs might damage anything. I've restored and stripped LOTs of 1965-66 mustangs and I've never seen one on a fastback either, i was excited when i saw this one.
The plastic shields are interesting looking but I don't think they were something SA did. I have not seen anything like that on the many I have seen,worked on or heard of others describe. Most likely it was a PO installed fix.Regular fastback Mustang had air vents so the inner vent box came with a drain because it was exposed to rain and needed a way to get rid of water .There should not be a need on a 66 GT350 given the 1/4 windows seal out the elements just like the fixed windshield and back glass. If a quarter glass was not installed properly maybe a fix for a leak that could not be stopped. Just my opinion . Others may have a different one.
+1. I have (45 year ago) experience with 6S2334 and it didn't have plastic shields when the P.O. took it apart for the first time.
Thank you for the responses. I'm assuming the moisture plastic barrier cover was installed at the San Jose plant when built, if I implied was installed at S.A. I apologize. It was only on the passenger side of car but both sides have the glue residue suggesting at one time both sides has moisture barrier installed. I'm no expert, but maybe when the SA tech installed my cars duct hose rather than removing plastic barrier, on the RH side just moved out the way? I will load pictures of glue on surface. It is funny how when I loaded pics of the unique rivet someone saw the moisture barrier. I don't get to read our forum often but it is incredibly entertaining when I do. Thank you all, fred
Hi all,
Here is a theory for you. Is it possible this shield is only on very late GT350's? There use to be a drain hose on a drip tray for the B-pillar quarter vents. These drain hoses, late in Mustang production were dropped and possible replaces with this water shield. The bean counters may have found a cost savings. These vents could still leak water and needed the shield to help direct water to drain holes. Now, a very late GT350 that received the rear brake ducting and fittings was performed from outside of the car. That means the water shield would not have been disturbed or removed during the SAI production.
Earlier GT350's, where the duct pieces were installed from inside the car, it is likely the water shield was not there to begin with, because the standard Mustang fastback would of had the drain tube instead. The drain tube might have been a delete item at the San Jose plant for cars to be sent to SAI for conversion or SAI removed the drain hose. It is possible during the transition from drain tube to water shield, a few GT350's with inside duct work had the shield removed at SAI because they were in the way and not longer needed. But the very late cars, with ducting installed from the outside, these water shields could have remained in place. Because 6S2227 is very late, I believe this is what we are seeing.
I hear that to "never say never" on these Shelby cars. It is possible that water shield is there only on very late GT350's and late production Mustang fastbacks.
Cory
The direction of how the duct ends were installed or applied to the body was a production period thing. To the inner or outer surface of the quarter panel. What you found is the practice on later built cars.
https://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/index.php?topic=20351.0 (https://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/index.php?topic=20351.0)
Looking at the running changes thread over there the last time I did a survey I came up with the "Change from inner to outer somewhere between approx 6S2020 and 6S2070"
Hope this helps others
Quote from: Bob Gaines on December 27, 2021, 12:10:48 PM
The plastic shields are interesting looking but I don't think they were something SA did. .............................
You will find them on non-Shelby fastbacks also so they IMHO are a Ford thing. Now exactly what production period and plants I've not looked into let though have removed my share from Mustangs over the years
I thought that the rivet design the OP posted a picture of in #20 and #21 was interesting .
Quote from: Bob Gaines on December 27, 2021, 11:05:45 PM
I thought that the rivet design the OP posted a picture of in #20 and #21 was interesting .
Appear to be some sort of short shaft plastic rivets. Wonder if they have been off at some point - the scoops
Side profile of the rivet head is much much thicker than a metal rivet
If they are/were factory there would be more examples (more cars with them) with the same IMHO
A different angle of them
(https://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/16/6-281221001303-166941333.jpeg)
Quote from: J_Speegle on December 28, 2021, 12:13:54 AM
Quote from: Bob Gaines on December 27, 2021, 11:05:45 PM
I thought that the rivet design the OP posted a picture of in #20 and #21 was interesting .
Appear to be some sort of short shaft plastic rivets. Wonder if they have been off at some point - the scoops
Side profile of the rivet head is much much thicker than a metal rivet
If they are/were factory there would be more examples with the same IMHO
A different angle of them
(https://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/16/6-281221001303-166941333.jpeg)
Sorry I do not have any pictures of or remember seeing that type of rivet on a 66 GT350 before. It certainly is not typical.
Jeff / Bob, thank you for your response. Looking at this thread back in Feb 2019 Jeff loaded a couple pics of other cars with same rivet configuration. Also I took pics today of the RH side and is the Same. Though I know I can't be 100 percent on this suggestion, but I've restored or stripped a lot mustangs and my car looks like it was never wrecked. Maybe I'm not clearly understanding your suggestion, but seems if you don't think they are SA original? .
Quote from: rraceme on December 28, 2021, 07:14:13 PM
Jeff / Bob, thank you for your response. Looking at this thread back in Feb 2019 Jeff loaded a couple pics of other cars with same rivet configuration. Also I took pics today of the RH side and is the Same. Though I know I can't be 100 percent on this suggestion, but I've restored or stripped a lot mustangs and my looks like never wrecked.
Could you provide (here or through PM) of that post as I don't recall it. The pictures I posted above were, if I recall correctly, from one of your earlier post. Just different angle
Would not need to be from an major accident. Repaint or replacement of a cracked scoop would be a couple of other reasons to remove and reattach them
Quote from: rraceme on December 28, 2021, 07:14:13 PMMaybe I'm not clearly understanding your suggestion, but seems if you don't think they are SA original? .
Agreed not what was found on original cars that I recall
Quote from: rraceme on December 28, 2021, 07:14:13 PM
Jeff / Bob, thank you for your response. Looking at this thread back in Feb 2019 Jeff loaded a couple pics of other cars with same rivet configuration. Also I took pics today of the RH side and is the Same. Though I know I can't be 100 percent on this suggestion, but I've restored or stripped a lot mustangs and my looks like never wrecked. Maybe I'm not clearly understanding your suggestion, but seems if you don't think they are SA original? .
Quote from: J_Speegle on December 28, 2021, 12:13:54 AM
Quote from: Bob Gaines on December 27, 2021, 11:05:45 PM
I thought that the rivet design the OP posted a picture of in #20 and #21 was interesting .
Appear t]o be some sort of short shaft plastic rivets. Wonder if they have been off at some point - the scoops
Side profile of the rivet head is much much thicker than a metal rivet
If they are/were factory there would be more examples (more cars with them) with the same IMHO
A different angle of them
From my perspective the rivets look different then typical. Typical is a generic pop rivet installed from the inside with a small flat washer on the outside portion of the rivet which is what Jeff's pictures show. I concour with Jeff's statement that they look like the short shaft plastic rivets which is not typical rivet shape. Regardless of if plastic or metal they look different then typical.
With all that said more than happy to export and invite anyone else with similar attaching hardware on an unrestored late 66 example to share some pictures. Clear pictures are difficult but this sort of discussion sometimes turns up new details. Not very often but does happen often. At the same time that is how we discover and learn new things
I brought the images from reply 20 and 21 to the top that look different then a generic pop rivet that SA typically used .
Jeff- I'm not sure how-to re-post the pictures but in this original thread ( on page 1) dated 2\28\ 2019 listed pictures of earlier and later examples of 1966 GT350's side scoops. It was a red scoop and white scoop displaying my same plastic rivet. Maybe it was not your pictures, but someone in this original thread posted those 2 pictures in 2019.
Sorry to continue to further this rivet issue but it is really important for me (and potentially others with later built GT-350s) when i start reassembly.
thank you, Jeff, for your guidance- Fred
Quote from: rraceme on December 29, 2021, 11:12:02 AM
Jeff- I'm not sure how-to re-post the pictures but in this original thread ( on page 1) dated 2\28\ 2019 listed pictures of earlier and later examples of 1966 GT350's side scoops. It was a red scoop and white scoop displaying my same plastic rivet. Maybe it was not your pictures, but someone in this original thread posted those 2 pictures in 2019.
Recall the picture it is in Reply #10. The red car's "rivets" do look similar let me look up the specific car and look for indications of its past and condition at the time the picture was taken.
Of course another car with the same part or fix would not automatically prove that it was a Shelby done thing. Will take some time to look through, always adding additional pictures as they become available, and see what we can see
In an effort to "report back" I looked though my collection of pictures and though I do not have pictures of every car there does appear to be a group with similar attaching hardware as shown as found on 6S2227 in this thread. The attaching wholes were much larger to fit the "plastic" anchors.
Don't know if Shelby used this method for a somewhat short period and through the end of the year. Currently I found the cars were numbered from approx 6S208x and 6S2227 the latest at this point for a total of 8 examples. Of course not all pictures were perfect but the visible end of the hardware is very different in the way it looks between the narrow expanded end of the rivet and the much wider insert style.
Hope this helps and I hope we collect more examples to expand our understanding
Since we don't split threads on this site... following along with the plastic water sheet I wanted to report that I pulled the interior rear seat side panels for the first time since 6S1203 was new and there were no shields. Don't know if they were there from San Jose but they might have been removed at Shelby since they would have been in the way of installing the side scoops and ducts. Maybe 6S2227 just got skipped for some reason. Not allot of pictures of cars with the interior panels removed except in full restorations where everything is removed, clean and repainted
Quote from: J_Speegle on December 29, 2021, 09:01:12 PM
Since we don't split threads on this site... following along with the plastic water sheet I wanted to report that I pulled the interior rear seat side panels for the first time since 6S1203 was new and there were no shields. Don't know if they were there from San Jose but they might have been removed at Shelby since they would have been in the way of installing the side scoops and ducts. Maybe 6S2227 just got skipped for some reason. Not allot of pictures of cars with the interior panels removed except in full restorations where everything is removed, clean and repainted
Hi Jeff,
I agree with you, that if 6S1203 had a plastic water shield, that it is likely SAI removed during the duct pieces installation from inside the car. It would have been in the way. If the 6S1203 had a vent drip tray drain tube, it was also likely removed at SAI because it too was also in the way or no longer needed with the sealed quarter window or both. For the cars after 6S2022 or 6S2070 to 6S2374, it appear most cars had the ducting pieces installed from the outside the car. It is then likely the water shield was not disturbed and thus was left in place. I believe that is why 6s2227 still has the shield, along with not being disturbed for 55+ years. Below summarizes the perfect storm for the water shield images from 6S2227.
1) Water shield installed at San Jose plant
2) Ducting pieces installed from outside the car
3) Not disturbed for 55+ years
I found what appears to be the "Shield - Quarter Trim Water" in the MPC under group 31090-1 with shield part numbers C5ZZ-6331090-A and C5ZZ-6331091-A. It is interesting that Ford spared this service part for 65-68 Fastbacks. I am assuimng this does mean these cars were all built with the shield, but could be spared to a car in service with leaking issues. Does that sound right? Ford stopped sparing the part July 1973 according to the MPC notes.
I have also read that the water shield was dropped at the end of the 1966 production in favor of the drain tube. All 67-68 Mustang fastback went back to the more reliable drain tube.
Cory
Quote from: 6s1640 on December 30, 2021, 03:01:53 AM
if 6S1203 had a plastic water shield, that it is likely SAI removed during the duct pieces installation from inside the car. It would have been in the way. If the 6S1203 had a vent drip tray drain tube, it was also likely removed at SAI because it too was also in the way or no longer needed with the sealed quarter window or both.
Will have to see by taking another look
Quote from: 6s1640 on December 30, 2021, 03:01:53 AMFor the cars after 6S2022 or 6S2070 to 6S2374, it appear most cars had the ducting pieces installed from the outside the car. It is then likely the water shield was not disturbed and thus was left in place. I believe that is why 6s2227 still has the shield, along with not being disturbed for 55+ years. ................
Are we certain that 6S2227 is untouched? Is the current owner the original one?
Workers would still need to access the area to fully install the complete ducting. Guess we're going to need more evidence and examples before we can believe IMHO that this is not a case of a simply mistake or just one car where the removal got skipped. Just trying to look at this objectively
Quote from: 6s1640 on December 30, 2021, 03:01:53 AM
I agree with you, that if 6S1203 had a plastic water shield, that it is likely SAI removed during the duct pieces installation from inside the car. It would have been in the way. If the 6S1203 had a vent drip tray drain tube, it was also likely removed at SAI because it too was also in the way or no longer needed with the sealed quarter window or both.............
Reporting back. As expected the style of interior rain gutter (for lack of a better term) lacks the ability to use a drain hose like used in 65
(https://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/16/6-301221200746-167041498.jpeg)
Of course the addition of the quarter windows eliminated the possibility of water getting into this area. At this point my opinion is that at least for cars in this period/order group San Jose eliminated the water shield as they did some other things according to the specification forms. Some of these brackets that had not been installed returned or matched Mustangs closer to the end of production
Hi Jeff,
I agree with you again. This has to stop. LOL. Yes, when there is no fitting on the vent drip tray (rain gutter) no drain tube can be attached. A 1966 Mustang fastback with the absent fitting for drain hose, I believe would of had the water shields C5ZZ-6331090-A and C5ZZ-6331091-A. Without first hand knowledge at the SAI plant, we can only guess the sequences of events. But my guess is the San Jose plant, for the early 1966 GT350's destine to LAX, the drain tube was on the delete list of parts. It no longer had any purpose with the sealed quarter window. When San Jose changed over to the water shield, they failed to update the delete list, no one told SAI of the change, and cars were delivered to LAX with water shield. Cars with ducting pieces installed inside the car, the shield was ripped out because it was in the way. This could be verified with left over glue residue still on the car, for a non restored car with absent fittings. The absent fitting is critical for this check. For the cars between 2022 to 2070 to 2374 with ducting installed outside the car, it is likely the water shield was not disturbed and left in place, like 6S2227.
Cory
There is a time period at the San Jose plant when the vent tray drain fitting was still in place with no hose and the water shield was installed. These are transitional cars. The changes to the drip tray and water shield were not timed well. It is likely the plant continue to use the vent tray detail with fitting until they were all used up. There was no need to throw away. It was only late in the production the vent drip tray was fabricated with no drain fitting, like the image posted above. The total cost savings was not realized until the end of production.
Cory
It seems counter intuitive that Ford would use this primitive contraption that appears less efficient compared to what it replaced. It would require more labor to install compared to what it replaced too. It would be interesting to know the reason for the change.
Quote from: 6s1640 on December 31, 2021, 12:05:17 AM
There is a time period at the San Jose plant when the vent tray drain fitting was still in place with no hose and the water shield was installed. These are transitional cars. The changes to the drip tray and water shield were not timed well. It is likely the plant continue to use the vent tray detail with fitting until they were all used up. There was no need to throw away. It was only late in the production the vent drip tray was fabricated with no drain fitting, like the image posted above. The total cost savings was not realized until the end of production.
Cory
Any context of when that Mustang was built? VIN or projected build date?
Guess the change might have just been cost savings. But just a guess based on the reason for so much of the other changes.
Hi Jeff,
Sounds like a survey. I can start off. The k-code I am working on is a February 8, 1966 build, VIN 6R09K1635XX. It does not have the drain tube fitting and looks like the image you posted. On the prior image above I posted, I do not know the VIN or build date, but it has to be before my car with the drain tube fitting. It might be better to start a new thread.
Cory
Just as a follow-up from another discussion on the subject elsewhere the presence of the water shield has been found on an unrestored example in the late 6S4xx's so the application appears to not be related to late cars. Possibly related to the group order or just a rare mistake made by a worker or two during the production year
(https://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/16/6-010122220007-16717646.jpeg)
Have also found two products so far used to attach the shields to the rain gutters
Hi Jeff,
Here is another example of a late GT350, 6S2339 with ducting pieces installed from the outside. This photograph was take through the latch hole in the quarter panel. (Thank you Brian.)
You can see the shield is wrapped over the duct tubing and still tucked into the side area.
On your image above, does it appear the shield was also glued along the forward more vertical edge? I can see what looks like adhesive residue. I wonder if removing the shield was up to the mechanic making the ducting installation. Maybe not a mistake, but a personal choice to leave in place or remove. Thank you for posting, more data.
Take care
Cory
Quote from: 6s1640 on January 03, 2022, 10:25:50 PM
Hi Jeff,
Here is another example of a late GT350, 6S2339 with ducting pieces installed from the outside. This photograph was take through the latch hole in the quarter panel. (Thank you Brian.)
You can see the shield is wrapped over the duct tubing and still tucked into the side area.
On your image above, does it appear the shield was also glued along the forward more vertical edge? I can see what looks like adhesive residue.
Yes we've collected pictures where it appears that spray contact adhesive was sprayed on the inner B pillar support. Of course over years its given up. Similar, likely brushed adhesive, was applied to the inner lip of the rain gutter to attach the shield to it. In other examples its been report that on other cars were found with a light grey dum-dum along that edge. The rain gutter attachment really only need to work until the interior trim was installed since the three screw that were inserted into the rain gutter would hold it somewhat in place for the long hall
Quote from: 6s1640 on January 03, 2022, 10:25:50 PMI wonder if removing the shield was up to the mechanic making the ducting installation. Maybe not a mistake, but a personal choice to leave in place or remove. Thank you for posting, more data.
Maybe or maybe , on the ones that detached or fell down once the trim and screws were removed the worker (s) didn't make the effort to reinstall and they just got tossed
Question? When the ducting flange pieces are attached from the outside, isn't it be possible to install the hose without removing the interior panel?
Drill the 3"+/- flange holes in the quarter and outer wheel well. Reach thru and push the plastic shield out of the way and shove the hose with flanged attached thru the quarter panel. Reach thru the outer wheel well and grab the hose and pull thru, then attach the hose with rivets, then rivet the flange to the outer wheel well.
Then a push rivet and glued on scoop would make sense. Am I missing something here?
Quote from: kram350 on January 03, 2022, 11:45:57 PM
Question? When the ducting flange pieces are attached from the outside, isn't it be possible to install the hose without removing the interior panel?
Drill the 3"+/- flange holes in the quarter and outer wheel well. Reach thru and push the plastic shield out of the way and shove the hose with flanged attached thru the quarter panel. Reach thru the outer wheel well and grab the hose and pull thru, then attach the hose with rivets, then rivet the flange to the outer wheel well....
Can't reach in the hole to guide the duct hose with my hands. Guess others may be able to
Still going to have to access the area from the insides for the scoop rivets unless the change to the exterior mounted ducts coincides with the usage of the plastic push pins and larger attaching holes discussed earlier
Sill more data that needs to be collected IMHO so we can weigh the findings
Friend has car SFM2249 which has outside hose installed flanges, so we discussed the reason for this. We both thought installing the hose and flange was possible without removing the rear seat and side panels. Since I was about to install the rear brake ducts on 2072, I reached thru and grabbed the hose to verify if this was possible. It was. I have small hands an shinny arms. Same owner of 2249 owned a SJ '66 fastback (Oct 14 '65 build date), it had the interior plastic sheet.
FYI 2072 scoops were riveted from the inside with 6 aluminum rivets and hose flanges were inside the body.
Yes, but wouldn't the inner panels have to have been removed anyway to install the side windows?
Quote from: Tomdeg on January 06, 2022, 02:33:05 PM
Yes, but wouldn't the inner panels have to have been removed anyway to install the side windows?
Certainly the uppers, but may not have had to remove the lowers as well, if the overlap/installation order was like the '67's.