Topic: 67 Inboard Lights -- hood latch support fasteners

[Bossbill]

Thanks to everyone who replied. The randomness of the bolts make sense.
I hadn't thought of the lack of outer bolts on the grill section of the support as the car was delivered to SA.

[jwc66k]

Here's my second pass at cleaning up the missing 67 body assembly manual page.
Its Ford designation is "N7-8105-2".
It's Osborn Productions number should be AM0016 page 10A. Page 10 is its corresponding Bill of Materials.
My "work in process" number is "0-N7-8105-2-97".
My intended "final" number will be "N7-8105-2-01"
I have to spend some more time cleaning up numbers and letters as the copy I started with was not a first generation copy.
After all these years, you got to do with what you got. (Complaints will be directed to an appropriate, nearby, circular file.)
Jim

[67gtasanjose]

Here's my second pass at cleaning up the missing 67 body assembly manual page.
Its Ford designation is "N7-8105-2".
It's Osborn Productions number should be AM0016 page 10A. Page 10 is its corresponding Bill of Materials.
My "work in process" number is "0-N7-8105-2-97".
My intended "final" number will be "N7-8105-2-01"
I have to spend some more time cleaning up numbers and letters as the copy I started with was not a first generation copy.
After all these years, you got to do with what you got. (Complaints will be directed to an appropriate, nearby, circular file.)
Jim

Suggestion (and assumption)...
These pages can or will be entered into the Library section for 67's?

[J_Speegle]

Suggestion (and assumption)...
These pages can or will be entered into the Library section for 67's?

We can work on that. Much more appropriate place since these parts were not installed for the cars being discussed in this tread.

[jwc66k]

Suggestion (and assumption)...
These pages can or will be entered into the Library section for 67's?

We can work on that. Much more appropriate place since these parts were not installed for the cars being discussed in this tread.

I was not happy with my first attempt so it's back to square one, or two in this case. To bring the entire drawing up to minimum standards would be difficult. It might be easier to lay a blank sheet of vellum on top of this copy and trace it. I chose to keep the original drawing portion and replace the text of the parts item numbers located inside the circles with upgraded letters. It is time consuming and my Photoshop software does not always cooperate with me.
I will post my revised copy in this thread and put a second copy in the 67 section of the library.
Jim

[J_Speegle]

..................It is time consuming and my Photoshop software does not always cooperate with me.

Just as time consuming but more basic and easy to control would be to use just a version of the old MS paint brush. Used it for years to illustrate books and to produce posters and other drawings used commercially

[67_1183]

The May 1967 photo of 962 shows color differences of the bolts but not quite enough resolution for markings though I can convince myself of seeing a raised lip on the top edge of the bolts similar to the == style.

What do others see?

[Bob Gaines]

The May 1967 photo of 962 shows color differences of the bolts but not quite enough resolution for markings though I can convince myself of seeing a raised lip on the top edge of the bolts similar to the == style.

What do others see?

I believe the color differences are the results of different batch of bolts subject to the zinc phosphate process resulting in lighter and darker.  The bolts could be the == marked ones but since all of the bolts used in that area have the raised top edge regardless of makers mark using that detail as a reason to think they are that == marking is a stretch . The ==, SEMS ,or RBW marked bolts were all used at one time or another.

[J_Speegle]

................. The bolts could be the == marked ones but since all of the bolts used in that area have the raised top edge regardless of makers mark using that detail as a reason to think they are that == marking is a stretch . The ==, SEMS ,or RBW marked bolts were all used at one time or another.

Agree that since the installation of the hood latch support was in a different area of the plant there is no reason to assume that the fender (for example) bolts would have any direct correlation with the bolts holding the support. That IMHO is why looking at unrestored examples from the same production period would be the best resource though we don't have that in this situation 

[Bossbill]

I'm fortunate to have an unrestored GT350 in the area and got his permission to post some pics of his latch area. If a car is not on a show field I always ask permission prior to posting details.

I've seen this car more than once and it still sports original paint and its Thermactor is totally intact. Very few parts have been changed out. It still has its original alternator!

The car is later than mine with its Ford build date of mid May. Since it's an outboard car the latch area may well be undisturbed. Close ups reveal no additional tooth marks.

I left the pictures large to show as much detail as possible.

Naturally, we can't absolutely verify originality . . .

[J_Speegle]

I'm fortunate to have an unrestored GT350 in the area and got his permission to post some pics of his latch area. If a car is not on a show field I always ask permission prior to posting details.

Can you at least (guessing the owner doesn't want car details shared) when the car was built at San Jose? If you have a registry the info for all cars is in there

Just so that we can label and compare the info in the pictures to other like cars
Thanks

[Bossbill]

Its SJ Ford build date is May 19.

[jwc66k]

My latest attempt on cleanup of the missing drawing page from the "67 Mustang Body Assembly Manual" (AM0016), Ford drawing N7-8105-2. I replaced all the item numbers and letters in the item circles (aka bullets) and some of the text with "cleaner" letters/numbers; plus removed as much of the "dust" (aka *obscene* tracks) from the face of the drawing. None of the actual drawing lines were altered (I think). Included in the attachments below is the associated Bill of Materials (page 10, Ford drawing N7-8105-3) for reference, with some minor cleanup.
Note: the prefix "0-" on the attachments is to place the drawings at the front of my computer's "Car" directory while they are being worked on. The associated suffixes, "-01" and "-02" are the latest revision of my efforts.
I will add these to the Library later.
Jim