Topic: Fender Bolt Washer

[CharlesTurner]

The owner of that car is a member here.  It was somewhat 'refreshed' back in the 80's or so.  The fender bolts most likely were replaced at that time.

Maybe the washer was also refreshed and wire wheeled during that time.  Just a suggestion.

[jwc66k]

The last pic in Jeff's post would support a phosphate finish.  Note that the bolt is non-original...

We have a "non-standard" bolt used with a "suspect" washer and you're trying to tell me it's factory. That's fine.
Jim

[CharlesTurner]

We have a "non-standard" bolt used with a "suspect" washer and you're trying to tell me it's factory. That's fine.
Jim

The washer is no doubt original to a time period of '66 production at the Metuchen plant.  If you were paying attention to the entire discussion, there were 3 other examples shown.  I haven't researched it enough to nail down a time period.  It was definitely within at least Dec '65 through January '66.  I had another '66 GT coupe example, but couldn't find the pics.  I think Phill B. may have them as that car was built close in production to his car.

I'm sorry that this does not fit into your perfect assembly manual world.  It's a great example of variances between assembly plants and those that strive to get the details right by paying attention.

[J_Speegle]

As far as I know, .................

I think that is the limitation we all start from and one of the reasons we all participate here is to discover those things we don't or didn't know

We have a "non-standard" bolt used with a "suspect" washer and you're trying to tell me it's factory. That's fine.

That was the purpose of posting those pictures showing a number of cars with the same washer arrangement and now we have other examples noted so the washer has past our normal stated practice because of those multiple examples.  I have no idea of why the factory appears to have tried this arrangement. Apparently it did not achieve the intended purpose since it was dropped and not repeated that I'm aware of.

I do believe that if this was an owners modification they would have placed washers under all of the fender bolts but instead we have multiple examples all with the same practice for all the same (positioned) bolts. That is enough for me to at least consider that it was possible and we need to continue to investigate and have an open mind about it.  Not like 65-66 NJ cars have been widely available to me over the last 40 plus years. Maybe you've had more experience with them but still think the facts have reached the standard for consideration at this point.

[sgl66]

This is from a picture I took in 1980 before any restoration occurred. The fender was original to the car so from this, Metuchen was using double washers as early as mid October 65.

[Building 3]

Here is what I have on both sides of my Metuchen convertible. Never been restored or repainted. The fenders don't look to have ever been removed. Buck tag says K21.

[jwc66k]

Based on the pictures in Jeff's number 14 reply, the fender bolt appears to be of the assembled washer type, so is this discussion about two washers and a bolt, or one washer one regular fender bolt? So far, I see no measurements, just pictures. That would be a start. I expanded the picture in reply 20 (I have a 24 inch monitor) and measured the washer diameter, the "second" washer diameter and the hex drive of the fender bolt. Assuming the hex drive is 1/2 inch, the inner washer is around 0.800 inch - real close to the nominal 13/16, or 0.813, inch diameter of the regular fender bolt, and the outer washer is around 1.090 inch - real close to the nominal 1.125 inch of washer 44725-S2 which was used as a spacer. According to assembly line practices in San Jose, the first and last bolts of the top six fender bolts were "loosely" attached to allow fender adjustment to the hood and door (they were tightened and the remaining four were installed). Did Metuchen follow the same practice?
Using the previous as a guide, and the fender adjustment washer on the wrong side of the fender, the finish would be -S2, which was part of the original question.
My main point is that the objective of the forum is "concourse" restoration, and more and more "deviations" per plant and time period arise. In judging, how is this handled when judging is supposed to be against a standard? If deviations are noted (like the tire label on the glove box door) and included in a judging package, would that be advisable? Or does all this fall on deaf ears?
Jim
 

[rrenz]

Here are some measurements. I Did paint these to make them a little more presentable due to some heavy rust, however  Im fairly certain these are original to my car.

[jwc66k]

Here are some measurements. I Did paint these to make them a little more presentable due to some heavy rust, however  Im fairly certain these are original to my car.

That one measurement, thank you, indicates that the washer is most likely 44725-S2 which was the one that was supposed to go between the apron and fender. It is available from AMK as either -S2 (phosphate) or -S8 (clear zinc).
Jim

[J_Speegle]

............ In judging, how is this handled when judging is supposed to be against a standard? If deviations are noted (like the tire label on the glove box door) and included in a judging package, would that be advisable? ............

Though it does not always happen but with today's use of forums and the internet I believe we go through a process of discovery then followed by discussion, looking for other examples and patterns. If the deviation from norm appears to have merit then the judges who participate or view the information can introduce the new possibilities or facts to the judging community. Since there is not currently (so believe we will eventually have the ability) room on the printed forms for every detail we discover its falls on the shoulders of the judges and the owner.

As in other situations where there is a new detail I would counsel any owner to go prepared and introduce the detail during the introduction of the judging team. Hopefully they will provide the opportunity by asking the owner if there is anything unusual or different that they want to offer before judging starts.  Its a smart practice IMHO for the team since it gets these out and in front so that the team is aware of the detail though it will still be with decision to accept or not the explanation.

By discussing the detail prior to the show on a forum such as ours it is hoped that one of the team members will recall the detail, discussion and the acceptance of the possibility or fact. If so the process should go much smoother.

Of course its not our purpose here to focus on the rules or how cars are judged, but discuss and attempt to discover the true parts, details, practices and methods  our beloved cars were produced with

Just my opinion

[rrenz]

That one measurement, thank you, indicates that the washer is most likely 44725-S2 which was the one that was supposed to go between the apron and fender. It is available from AMK as either -S2 (phosphate) or -S8 (clear zinc).
Jim

Thats interesting.Before painting these I tried to phosphate these washers and was pretty unsuccessful. As a matter of fact i Re-Phosphated that fender bolt along with the washer and the washer wouldn't Darken up on me. When I cleaned the rust up I was initially thinking that these were originally zinc.

[J_Speegle]

Thats interesting.Before painting these I tried to phosphate these washers and was pretty unsuccessful. As a matter of fact i Re-Phosphated that fender bolt along with the washer and the washer wouldn't Darken up on me. ,,,,,,,,,,,

Would, to me, suggest that there is some remaining earlier applied plating or coating that kept the direct contact with the base metal

[jwc66k]

Thats interesting.Before painting these I tried to phosphate these washers and was pretty unsuccessful. As a matter of fact i Re-Phosphated that fender bolt along with the washer and the washer wouldn't Darken up on me. When I cleaned the rust up I was initially thinking that these were originally zinc.

That's a good sign that the washer was zinc plated. If you have a chance, go to the Processes, Products & Techniques section and look up Phosphating 101 (it's on the third page) for some hints.
Jim

[outlawincorporated]

The washer is no doubt original to a time period of '66 production at the Metuchen plant.  If you were paying attention to the entire discussion, there were 3 other examples shown.  I haven't researched it enough to nail down a time period.  It was definitely within at least Dec '65 through January '66.  I had another '66 GT coupe example, but couldn't find the pics.  I think Phill B. may have them as that car was built close in production to his car.

I'm sorry that this does not fit into your perfect assembly manual world.  It's a great example of variances between assembly plants and those that strive to get the details right by paying attention.

Charles.
I agree with your findings on the extra washer on the cowl fender bolt. I have examples from November 65 through to March 66 where this was the process for NJ built cars.

to give you a example which might refresh your mind of this process

blue parts coupe (both sides)
Franks GT (both sides)
reference blue coupe in Australia (left side only)
Lincolns green convertible (both sides)

in my opinion the extra washer is a different finish than the normal, most likely zinc

regards.

PHILL BERESFORD.
MELBOURNE.
AUSTRALIA.