Author Topic: 67 taillight retaining nut differences  (Read 2314 times)

Offline 67gta289

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3080
Re: 67 taillight retaining nut differences
« Reply #15 on: May 11, 2019, 09:16:56 AM »
Thanks Marty.  Must be an error in the MPC.  There is a lot of conflicting information on the nut I'm looking at...
John
67 289 GTA Dec 20 1966 San Jose
7R02C156xxx
MCA 74660

Offline 67gtasanjose

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5093
  • "Take the MUSTANG PLEDGE"
Re: 67 taillight retaining nut differences
« Reply #16 on: May 11, 2019, 11:01:58 AM »
I do not believe that they could use the same hardware, the tail light housing studs are a machine thread and the quarter ornaments  studs are pot metal that uses a tin nut that cuts its own thread.
If I am interpreting you correctly, the "tin nut" is ONLY on the molding clip within the quarter extension, and those tin nuts do not at all look like the nuts John has pictured ( and I also attached here again)

It would appear that the only detail nailed down at this point is that the "chrome bezel studs" CAN be removed (though they are included as part of the chromed bezel) and are the same studs actually used on both variations (based on discovery within this thread).

At this point in time, if I am following this correctly, I believe the only thing NOT CONFIRMED is when were the non-standard nuts utilized (the 6 used in the attached picture that secure the taillamp housing). In John's image, it looks like the nuts were not the same.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2019, 12:01:08 PM by 67gtasanjose »
Richard Urch

1967 (11/2/66, S.J.) GTA Luxury Coupe, 289-4V w/Thermactor Emissions, C-4, Int./Ext. Decor +many options

2005 (04/05) GT Premium Convertible, Windveil Blue, Parchment Top w/Med. Parchment interior,  Roush Body Appointments

Offline jwc66k

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7348
Re: 67 taillight retaining nut differences
« Reply #17 on: May 11, 2019, 12:12:44 PM »
Must be an error in the MPC.  There is a lot of conflicting information on the nut I'm looking at...
Remember, the MPC (Ford Car Parts) is a service document. It reflect replacement items many years after the initial assembly of your Mustang was completed. The MPC is a consolidation of many model years of parts that Ford keeps in inventory and Ford prefers to keep the inventory as small as possible (as a corporate cost savings). The MPC may or may not reflect what is on your car. Use it at your own discretion, or peril.
Jim
I promise to be politically correct in all my posts to keep the BBBB from vociferating.

Offline 196667Bob

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
Re: 67 taillight retaining nut differences
« Reply #18 on: May 11, 2019, 12:22:41 PM »
Jim : In this case, both the Assembly Manual and the MPC both show the same nut ; a stamped (PAL type) nut with an 11/32" Hex and a 15/32" flange ("washer") diameter. The problem is that the hex portion on the nuts in John's sample picture appear to be "solid" and not stamped.

Bob
1966 Coupe, C Code, 3 Sp MT, 6T07C154XXX, Build Date 11/22/65
1967 Conv, C Code, C4, 7F03C154XXX, Actual Build Date 01/31/67
MCA 04909

Offline jwc66k

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7348
Re: 67 taillight retaining nut differences
« Reply #19 on: May 11, 2019, 02:23:59 PM »
Bob,
I documented it as such in the spreadsheets. It's an instance of engineering's hardware selection vs. the assembly lines' hardware use vs. Ford service replacement hardware. In this case, I would mark up my copy of the 67 Mustang Electrical Assembly Manual, and the Body Manual too, as I have marked up my 64, 65 and 66 Manuals.
Jim
I promise to be politically correct in all my posts to keep the BBBB from vociferating.

Offline J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24632
Re: 67 taillight retaining nut differences
« Reply #20 on: May 11, 2019, 06:40:40 PM »
The problem is that the hex portion on the nuts in John's sample picture appear to be "solid" and not stamped.

Solid nuts is what I've always found on thousands of the 67's I've seen and in the pictures in my collection except for the odd one here or there but those cars showed evidence of rework and damage repair
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline 196667Bob

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
Re: 67 taillight retaining nut differences
« Reply #21 on: May 12, 2019, 04:15:37 AM »
Solid nuts is what I've always found on thousands of the 67's I've seen and in the pictures in my collection except for the odd one here or there but those cars showed evidence of rework and damage repair

Jeff : As this thread may have become somewhat confusing with discussion about "standard" taillight bezels,the Rear Deck Grill (Applique), and molding nuts on 68's, I think a little clarification may be in order.

In the your comment I quoted above, since you noted "...found on thousands of the 67's I've seen...", I assume (?) that you are talking about the nuts on the standard chrome bezel studs ? If so, I don't believe that there is any question, at least in my mind, that these nuts are solid, and in fact, "standard" 8-32 Keps nuts. It also appears that they are, most likely, Hardware Part # 34653-S100, which has a zinc dichromate finish, which would be the same as the finish of the studs.

However, the underlying ("bottom line") question to which we are trying to find an answer, is in regard to the nuts used on the 12 studs when the Optional Rear Deck Grill was installed. The problem here is that both the Assembly Manual and the MPC note that the nut used was Hardware Part # 377523-S100 (which is listed as a stamped steel nut [PAL nut], 8-32, with an 11/32" hex), yet the third picture in John's first Post, a picture of a '67 trunk on a car with a Factory installed Rear Grill, shows a zinc or cad, solid flange nut. stangerdude Posted in his Reply that the solid flange nuts are what he had seen on several original Rear Grill applications. John and I are trying to confirm what nut was really used for the studs when the Rear Grill Option was present. Interestingly, a search through my Ford Standard & Utility Parts Catalogs of 1959,60; 61, 65, 66, 69, and 75 shows no 8-32, solid steel flanged nut. Possibly this was only an Assembly Line item ??

Do you, or anyone reading this, have any pictures of the taillight area(specifically showing the stud nuts inside the trunk, on cars with a known Rear Grill Factory Option ?

Thanks for your help.

Bob
1966 Coupe, C Code, 3 Sp MT, 6T07C154XXX, Build Date 11/22/65
1967 Conv, C Code, C4, 7F03C154XXX, Actual Build Date 01/31/67
MCA 04909

Offline J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24632
Re: 67 taillight retaining nut differences
« Reply #22 on: May 12, 2019, 05:26:24 AM »
Jeff : As this thread may have become somewhat confusing with discussion about "standard" taillight bezels,the Rear Deck Grill (Applique), and molding nuts on 68's, I think a little clarification may be in order.

Yes and don't know how 68's got into the discussions. Only takes place when we allow the threads to go astray :)


Do you, or anyone reading this, have any pictures of the taillight area(specifically showing the stud nuts inside the trunk, on cars with a known Rear Grill Factory Option ?

Believe I do and they were posted in an earlier thread about the subject of the rear grill option. Will have to see if they got left over on PhotoBucket or moved over after the purge. Hate when you can picture the picture just can't find it or a copy   ::)

John (67gta289) posted pictures of some examples in some of the other threads related to the subject. Such as the one below back in 2010

http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/index.php?topic=1219.msg6168#msg6168

« Last Edit: May 12, 2019, 06:03:53 PM by J_Speegle »
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline 67gta289

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3080
Re: 67 taillight retaining nut differences
« Reply #23 on: May 12, 2019, 06:53:35 AM »
Remember, the MPC (Ford Car Parts) is a service document. It reflect replacement items many years after the initial assembly of your Mustang was completed. The MPC is a consolidation of many model years of parts that Ford keeps in inventory and Ford prefers to keep the inventory as small as possible (as a corporate cost savings). The MPC may or may not reflect what is on your car. Use it at your own discretion, or peril.
Jim
Jim, the intent of using the MPC was to identify the use of the same nut in other Ford applications.  They are also used on some on 68-69 Fairlane/Torinos so I can see what I can harvest on my next junk yard run.
John
67 289 GTA Dec 20 1966 San Jose
7R02C156xxx
MCA 74660

Offline ruppstang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3938
Re: 67 taillight retaining nut differences
« Reply #24 on: May 12, 2019, 09:23:25 AM »
It is hard to tell by the picture but those nuts look like the ones used to secure the vented hood bezels, dash pads at the bottom and the AC defrost duct to the dash. Just my experience.

Offline 196667Bob

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
Re: 67 taillight retaining nut differences
« Reply #25 on: May 12, 2019, 08:02:00 PM »

Yes and don't know how 68's got into the discussions. Only takes place when we allow the threads to go astray :)


Believe I do and they were posted in an earlier thread about the subject of the rear grill option. Will have to see if they got left over on PhotoBucket or moved over after the purge. Hate when you can picture the picture just can't find it or a copy   ::)

John (67gta289) posted pictures of some examples in some of the other threads related to the subject. Such as the one below back in 2010

http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/index.php?topic=1219.msg6168#msg6168

Jeff : The thread you referenced with the link, while I can't open any of the pictures, from what I could see and read, it appears that the discussion is centered around the fasteners for the studs cast into the rear grill panels. There is really no question on them ; they are stamped steel, #10, self-threading, crown nuts (376423-S100). The real question is in regard to the 12 nuts (6 on each side), used on the "studs" (threaded rods) that are used around the taillight openings. These are the same threaded rods that were used on the "standard" taillight chrome bezels, but all indications are that different nuts were used with the rear grill, than were used on the standard bezel rods.

As noted in the current thread, the Assembly Manual calls for 377523-S100 nuts  to be used. Per Ford S&UPC, these are 8-32, stamped steel (PAL type) nuts, with an 11/32" hex, and a 15/32" flange diameter. However, The 3rd picture in John's opening Post of this thread appears to show these 12 nuts as being solid and not stamped. This is why I was hoping that you had some pictures of known original Rear Grill Optioned cars from the "trunk side, that would show the nuts around the taillight area.
Hopefully, this will clarify the issue.

Bob
 
1966 Coupe, C Code, 3 Sp MT, 6T07C154XXX, Build Date 11/22/65
1967 Conv, C Code, C4, 7F03C154XXX, Actual Build Date 01/31/67
MCA 04909

Offline jwc66k

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7348
Re: 67 taillight retaining nut differences
« Reply #26 on: May 12, 2019, 08:13:50 PM »
- (I) don't know how 68's got into the discussions.
The nuts shown as found being used on 67 taillight housings and rear panels in the pictures are the same ones used on 1968 taillights per the 68 Electrical Assembly Manual, 34653-S2 ( 8 ). Service, in this case, is a whole different subject.
Jim
« Last Edit: May 13, 2019, 12:28:37 AM by jwc66k »
I promise to be politically correct in all my posts to keep the BBBB from vociferating.

Offline 196667Bob

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
Re: 67 taillight retaining nut differences
« Reply #27 on: May 13, 2019, 01:52:54 AM »
Jim : I agree that the 34653-S nuts (8-32 Keps nuts) were used on both the 1967 and 1968 Standard Taillight Bezel studs (threaded rods). However, I see no documentation or pictures that shows that they were also used on the 12 studs when the Rear Grill was present. It would seem to make sense that the same nut used on a sheet metal taillight bucket would not be the same nut used on a die cast panel. In addition, the third picture that John Posted in the opening of this thread, of a known original Factory Rear Grill Optioned car, clearly shows that the nuts shown are not the 34653-S nuts.

Where did you find that it is noted, or shown that the 12 nuts to be used on the Rear Grill are the same as the 12 nuts used on the standard bezels ?

Bob

1966 Coupe, C Code, 3 Sp MT, 6T07C154XXX, Build Date 11/22/65
1967 Conv, C Code, C4, 7F03C154XXX, Actual Build Date 01/31/67
MCA 04909

Offline J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24632
Re: 67 taillight retaining nut differences
« Reply #28 on: May 13, 2019, 05:51:04 PM »
Jeff : The thread you referenced with the link, while I can't open any of the pictures, from what I could see and read, it appears that the discussion is centered around the fasteners for the studs cast into the rear grill panels. There is really no question on them ; they are stamped steel, #10, self-threading, crown nuts (376423-S100). The real question is in regard to the 12 nuts (6 on each side), used on the "studs" (threaded rods) that are used around the taillight openings. These are the same threaded rods that were used on the "standard" taillight chrome bezels, but all indications are that different nuts were used with the rear grill, than were used on the standard bezel rods.

Thanks for taking the time to bring me up to speed. Once we get allot of posts and long responses in these discussions it easy to miss the tree from the forest - side and extended discussions.

I recall pictures and for the time being have not been able to locate them which is odd.  I do recall the stamped steel style for the panel retention to the taillight panel but didn't focus, at the time, on the ones at the tail light housing. Will continue to look
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline 196667Bob

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
Re: 67 taillight retaining nut differences
« Reply #29 on: May 17, 2019, 06:00:03 PM »
Jeff : Any luck yet on finding pictures of the taillight area inside of the trunk on 67's with known Factory Rear Grills ?

Just checking.

Bob
1966 Coupe, C Code, 3 Sp MT, 6T07C154XXX, Build Date 11/22/65
1967 Conv, C Code, C4, 7F03C154XXX, Actual Build Date 01/31/67
MCA 04909