Topic: Convertible Tops are not all the same

[68 S Code]

I've restored a few convertible top frames over the past year and have seen how some individuals selling them have really no clue as to what they are talking about. Although physically similar there are many differances between the years.  I can post many photos here outlining those differences between say a 64 1/2 top a 67 and 68.  Maybe there is a better way to do it so this info just doesnt end up buried. Even though the Ford interchange books may show that the tops off any of the 65 to 68 years can be made to fit that doesnt mean they are correct for that paticular year. My hope is that the information can be used by Judges, hobbiests and those who visit this site. If there is interest let me know and i can figure out a way to get the information out.

[TLea]

Richard may have beat you to it, see reply #8

http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/index.php?topic=2273.msg11704#msg11704

[68 S Code]

Tim, Richard from down under and I have been sharing info via email for the past year. I have been compiling pictures and sending him of the details I've been finding as I restore these structures. I will be sending him a flashdrive soon. Even in his post where he mentions the main side rail hinge being cast up to 67 will need to be changed as I have a 67 top downstairs which has the 68 pin version. Must have been a running change mid year. The hinge is a quick identification point but there are parts which differentiate the 64.5 to 67 as well. There are differences in the header verticle strakes, chrome catch mechanism profile, latch handle mounting point to the header, scissor mechanism markings, fastener differences used at #2 bow connection to the side rail mechanism, the #2 and #3 bow end brackets, bolt type used to connect rear side rail piece to the intermediate side rail, #4 bow differences and even found that the 64.5 uses smaller bolts to mount the cylinder access plate at the main mounting bracket than a 67/68. Granted I only have pics I took of a 66 and 69 structure but I will study the 66 pics to see if its even different then the 64.5.  I will be sending all the pics to Oz shortly but figured i could  share some of this here if people want to see pics versus just verbal descriptions. but is it worthwhile to just post as a thread?

[TLea]

Of course its valuable. Maybe put it in a pdf and then put it in a thread where it could be easilly found. I would save it to my disk if you get it in a file.

[68 S Code]

Tim the PDF suggestion is a good idea thanks.

[J_Speegle]

If you put something together (in word for example) we can convert it with ease, have you approve of the article then post it in the library with the others when we get that all worked out again.  We'll of course left you pick your own header picture and put your name on it 

[68 S Code]

Concern is the file size because of photographs but I think I found a way to reduce them by using a google tool called Picasa. Let me work on this and i will see what i can put together.

[CharlesTurner]

Adobe has some compression utilities, but might be for the full Acrobat version (pay for version.)

[J_Speegle]

Concern is the file size because of photographs but I think I found a way to reduce them by using a google tool called Picasa. Let me work on this and i will see what i can put together.

IF you post a thread with the info I can just grab the text and pictures, reformat them in the Article frame work and publish it in pdf. Have not had a problem yet doing it that way - have about a half a dozen articles we will post once we have a place again to store them here