Topic: 69 convertible convertible seat track spacers

[Bob Gaines]

I am looking for thoughts on the usage of the convertible bell shaped seat track spacers the factory used to raise the seat track. I don't know if it is a early or late issue etc.. I have not seen enough on unrestored cars to formulate a pattern.

[ninedrvr]

My car has them. Nov 22, 1968 build date at Dearborn

[krelboyne]

We find those occasionally too. I believe that the Ford part number is C6OZ-6362016-A - Spacer - front seat track to floor.
We list them as seat risers or extensions. For a boost to your bucket or bench seat.
If this is a common 1969-70 Mustang convertible installation part, I have a theory. We would have to make some comparison measurements of the convertible seat risers to prove it.

Ford called them 'upper floor cross members'. Basic Ford part numbers 10672/73. 1969-70 Cougar and Mustang did not share the same ones. Cougar platforms are shorter, due to the Cougar seats having more foam padding.

I postulate that Ford may have used a 'common', shorter seat mounting cross member, in all 1969-70 Cougar and Mustang convertibles.

Comparing the Ford and Mercury MPC's, gives me the same Ford numbers for those cross members. Both with Mustang part numbers. C9ZZ-7610672-A and C9ZZ-7610673-A. Coupe or hardtop models are C9ZZ-6510672-A and C9ZZ-6510672-A, which I know is wrong for a hardtop Cougar. The Dynacorn Mustang floor pans are about 1 inch taller than a stock Cougar hard top model. My guess is Ford did not support a Cougar part number for service replacement parts? (FYI fastbacks used C9ZZ-6310672-A and C9ZZ-6310672-A).

[specialed]

The first time i seen them on a vert i thought someone added them maybe a short person needed them to see out the windshield better as my thinking was why use a bell shaped spacer instead of a square block would be stronger as one of my verts seat bottom frame was cracked and broke from the seat rail rocking around on that top rounded off bell spacer. I wonder if the cougar seat foam is taller than mustang and cougar and mustang verts used the same seat platforms then ford needed to raise the mustang seats if they had shorter foam. I have seen these spacers on most but not all 6970 mustang verts and they used a longer bolt bell spacer and a round paperlike gasket or ring of some sort i remember.

[ninedrvr]

Did the 1969 Shelby convertibles use the spacers? My car was originally a standard interior car. Just wondering whether the high back bucket cars used the spacers vs the standard seats.

[Bob Gaines]

Did the 1969 Shelby convertibles use the spacers? My car was originally a standard interior car. Just wondering whether the high back bucket cars used the spacers vs the standard seats.

Yes the 1969 Shelby convertibles used the spacers. That observation is not in question. If all 69 Shelby converts used them is still unanswered for sure. Apparently from observations at the very least the majority used them .  If your 69 Shelby convertible had standard interior in it at one time then a previous owner/shop changed it out from the factory deluxe interior.

[67gta289]

I believe that the Ford part number is C6OZ-6362016-A - Spacer - front seat track to floor.

That is what I see as well.  Ford and Mercury MPC pictures attached.  It is interesting that the 67-68 Mustang/Cougar spacer has a basic part number 13190, but then again that is more of a fancy washer to, I suppose, prevent the carpet from getting snagged, whereas the 62016 is really intended to be a spacer.  It is also interesting to see in the Mercury MPC that a basic part number 60482 is also designated as a "spacer (front seat track to floor).  I did not chase that thread.

Are these shown in the 69 Mustang and/or Cougar assembly manuals?  I don't have a copy of those.

Ford called them 'upper floor cross members'. Basic Ford part numbers 10672/73. 1969-70 Cougar and Mustang did not share the same ones. Cougar platforms are shorter, due to the Cougar seats having more foam padding.  I postulate that Ford may have used a 'common', shorter seat mounting cross member, in all 1969-70 Cougar and Mustang convertibles.  Comparing the Ford and Mercury MPC's, gives me the same Ford numbers for those cross members. Both with Mustang part numbers. C9ZZ-7610672-A and C9ZZ-7610673-A. Coupe or hardtop models are C9ZZ-6510672-A and C9ZZ-6510672-A, which I know is wrong for a hardtop Cougar. The Dynacorn Mustang floor pans are about 1 inch taller than a stock Cougar hard top model. My guess is Ford did not support a Cougar part number for service replacement parts? (FYI fastbacks used C9ZZ-6310672-A and C9ZZ-6310672-A).

That is what I see as well, a copy of the Mercury MPC is attached for others.

[Bob Gaines]

The seat spacers look like the picture in my first post and not like what is illustrated in previous posts.

[RoyceP]

My opinion the parts shown in the MPC illustrations above are unrelated. I found these in a '68 standard Cougar. I suspect they were installed by a dealer to compensate for a very short driver so they could see over the steering wheel.

The seat spacers look my picture in my first post and not like what is illustrated in previous posts.

[K-HESS]

 I checked on two 1969 convertible parts cars I have and both have the spacers. The first picture is from a car built at Metuchen 9T108xxx which according to the buck tag it has an early build date of 10J. The second picture is from a car built at Dearborn 9F200xxx and the Marti report shows a build date of E28.

[specialed]

The convertible seat platforms are not as wide as the coupe fastback because of the convertible unique wider inner rockers frame rails supporting the unibody unlike coupe and fastbacks having a roof support. So are the vert seat platforms a different angle or height than the coupe as we know the fastback is unique and has its unique windshield but coupe and vert share same windshield in 69 70 mustangs. Another possibility is some of the vert seat spacers may have been removed back in the day by tall big drivers for more room especially on 4 speed cars shifting is tight. I know some tall guys who have installed modified seat rails( moved back )  and someone sells a kit for seat rail extensions i was told.  These vintage mustang werent designed for tall big (huskey) americans u know.

[Bob Gaines]

The convertible seat platforms are not as wide as the coupe fastback because of the convertible unique wider inner rockers frame rails supporting the unibody unlike coupe and fastbacks having a roof support. So are the vert seat platforms a different angle or height than the coupe as we know the fastback is unique and has its unique windshield but coupe and vert share same windshield in 69 70 mustangs. Another possibility is some of the vert seat spacers may have been removed back in the day by tall big drivers for more room especially on 4 speed cars shifting is tight. I know some tall guys who have installed modified seat rails( moved back )  and someone sells a kit for seat rail extensions i was told.  These vintage mustang werent designed for tall big (huskey) americans u know.

Or americans who have evolved into the Huskey configuration.   

[SFM6S0000]

The original seats to my 69 GT350 convertible (#362) have those spacers.

Dave

[67gtasanjose]

Or americans who have evolved into the Huskey configuration.   

+1
*combined with growing accustomed to driving newer vehicles that typically have much better combinations of seat positioning available, stepping back in time to these older "basic" seats, you certainly feel "squeezed in".
I hadn't driven my 67 for over 20 years and once I got it going (new seat foam padding and all), I certainly wasn't as comfortable as I was when I was 16 years old!

[carlite65]

when you're '16' you mostly do not care about 'comfort'.