Topic: 66 NJ K Code Snubber Bracket and Bumper Question

[sgl66]

NOTE: The first five (including the first) posted were separated from another thread so we can focus on the two cars (built at different plants) separately

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I've seen 'A' code GT's with that style bracket bolted to the snubber.  There is usually another rubber bumper that attaches on top of the metal piece.

Here's one on my K code that wasn't supposed to be there. I spoke with Fred Ballard several years ago about this when I was doing a cleanup and I recall he said because the "A" code GT had the same snubber plate as the "K" GT, it was probably added because it was a "GT" without any consideration for the 8" or 9" rear and the rubber on the 9" pinion bracket. One would have been later removed probably at the dealer because having both would cause issues. It didn't sound like that was the first time Fred had heard about this. In the 40+ years I've owned this, it's never had the rubber on the pinion bracket the way it "should" be.

[J_Speegle]

Here's one on my K code that wasn't supposed to be there. I spoke with Fred Ballard several years ago about this when I was doing a cleanup and I recall he said because the "A" code GT had the same snubber plate as the "K" GT, it was probably added because it was a "GT" without any consideration for the 8" or 9" rear and the rubber on the 9" pinion bracket. One would have been later removed probably at the dealer because having both would cause issues. It didn't sound like that was the first time Fred had heard about this. In the 40+ years I've owned this, it's never had the rubber on the pinion bracket the way it "should" be.

Seems that often when there is a example of how things were not suppose to be built or assembled the cars turn out to be NJ built cars.  Just an observation. Also if enough examples could be found we would likely find that mistakes like this could be tied to a single shift or a production period rather than random if original

[sgl66]

My car Is a  Dearborn.... didn't have the additional part bolted to the snubber so I was just wondering why and more importantly WHAT it is and what its suppose to do.

I think you're referring to the metal part highlighted in green? The part highlighted in blue appears to be part of the rubber bumper assembly normally found on 8" snubbers and from an old EBay ad, it looks like they only had the metal highlighted in blue.

Good question what it's for, I have no idea

[Bob Gaines]

I think you?re referring to the metal part highlighted in green? The part highlighted in blue appears to be part of the rubber bumper assembly normally found on 8? snubbers and from an old EBay ad, it looks like they only had the metal highlighted in blue.

Good question what it's for, I have no idea

Same purpose as the 9 inch version. It is a pinion snubber. It is just mounted differently . The 8 housing doesn't have a bolted on metal shield like the 9 inch but the 8 inch does have a made into the housing shield of sorts. On a severe drop like if the car came down hard after being air born over the crest of a hill.  I believe the rubber snubber cushions and keeps moving parts like pinion yoke from making contact with the floor.

[sgl66]

Same purpose as the 9 inch version. It is a pinion snubber. It is just mounted differently . The 8 housing doesn't have a bolted on metal shield like the 9 inch but the 8 inch does have a made into the housing shield of sorts. On a severe drop like if the car came down hard after being air born over the crest of a hill.  I believe the rubber snubber cushions and keeps moving parts like pinion yoke from making contact with the floor.

I think the question is about the metal plate. (highlighted in green and also seen in Legendary Motorsports image) The rubber bumper is attached to its own metal plate (highlighted in blue)

What's the point of sandwiching that (green) plate between the bumper and snubber plate welded to the body? I know they were intended for 8" rears but don't now if both pieces were used because I've never looked closely.

[J_Speegle]

I think you?re referring to the metal part highlighted in green? The part highlighted in blue appears to be part of the rubber bumper assembly normally found on 8? snubbers and from an old EBay ad, it looks like they only had the metal highlighted in blue.

Good question what it's for, I have no idea

Not sure what application the spacer would come from.

Since the Hipo snubber bracket on the unibody has no mounting holes for the bumper you show not sure how it relates to the subject. Realize that the OP started out with showing many of the incorrect brackets and bumpers 

Maybe we need to split the subject so that another thread can focus on the non-HiPo bumper, possible mistake produced on at least one car from a different plant, elsewhere. Be prepared

[sgl66]

Since the Hipo snubber bracket on the unibody has no mounting holes for the bumper you show not sure how it relates to the subject.

According to this VA Mustang blog and many other examples I've seen, there are 2 holes where the bumper "could" be installed. Am I missing something? I did see in the other thread pictures you posted of plates with no holes so maybe they made 2 styles?  http://blog.virginiaclassicmustang.com/2012/10/new-65-70-mustang-rear-end-pinion.html?m=1

[J_Speegle]

According to this VA Mustang blog and many other examples I've seen, there are 2 holes where the bumper "could" be installed. Am I missing something? I did see in the other thread pictures you posted of plates with no holes so maybe they made 2 styles?  http://blog.virginiaclassicmustang.com/2012/10/new-65-70-mustang-rear-end-pinion.html?m=1

Yes there is an earlier and later - at least at San Jose for 65 and likely at the other two plants though the change over took place at different times. All depends on where and when the specific car was built. The link shows the "new" reproduction of the later version with the three holes that I mentioned just recently in the 65 Dearborn discussion on the subject and pictures of the earlier version with the single hole were posted there too. Have not found any NJ examples to post as of yet to this thread.

If you notice in the link their research shows the change taking place in April 65, six months after when your car was likely built, but they don't state which plant but guessing that's not NJ

Just to confirm since the angle is not the best to see the detail. Your reporting that you car has the larger/longer version of the snubber plate where the forward edge of the plate extends to and over the main floor section of the undersides?


Don't seem to I have any real clear pictures of other October built 65 NJ since those cars are in short supply in decent condition. Need more examples to help determine what and when things took place for K codes at NJ

[65Fatback]

@sgl66 YES...that's it exactly. Lots learned here 👍

[Bob Gaines]

I think the question is about the metal plate. (highlighted in green and also seen in Legendary Motorsports image) The rubber bumper is attached to its own metal plate (highlighted in blue)

What's the point of sandwiching that (green) plate between the bumper and snubber plate welded to the body? I know they were intended for 8" rears but don't now if both pieces were used because I've never looked closely.

I don't study the 8 inch rear ends much but the most logical use of the steel angle bracket associated with the rubber snubber is to keep the tall rubber from deflecting much when it hits the center section . At least that is going to happen when the action happens.

[sgl66]

Just to confirm since the angle is not the best to see the detail. Your reporting that you car has the larger/longer version of the snubber plate where the forward edge of the plate extends to and over the main floor section of the undersides?


Don't seem to I have any real clear pictures of other October built 65 NJ since those cars are in short supply in decent condition. Need more examples to help determine what and when things took place for K codes at NJ

It definitely has the 9" plate and unless I'm mistaken it looks like the VA Mustang version. I don't have any good pictures showing details but plan on jacking the car up in the next few days to put new tires on and will get some.

[J_Speegle]

I don't study the 8 inch rear ends much but the most logical use of the steel angle bracket associated with the rubber snubber is to keep the tall rubber from deflecting much when it hits the center section . At least that is going to happen when the action happens.

Me neither. Guessing that the depth for contact would be much greater in a car equipped with an 8" since the single bumper on the body distance will be greater to the nose of the pinion retainer than on the larger 9" and its larger bolt on bracket

It definitely has the 9" plate and unless I'm mistaken it looks like the VA Mustang version. I don't have any good pictures showing details but plan on jacking the car up in the next few days to put new tires on and will get some.

Look forward to finding out what NJ was doing around that time period and comparing it to the other plants

[sgl66]

Jeff,

Here's a few pictures of what NJ was using in October 65. As usual, it's NJ and not supposed to be this way but it is. I have no idea if the 2nd rubber bumper was ever attached at the factory and later removed but I chose to leave the existing rubber as is and to the best of my knowledge has never been removed.

[J_Speegle]

Is this from your car?

If so I think it would be best, sure your going to, seek out more examples of K codes built there in Oct 64 to help determine if that is what they were doing or this was a mistake

Just basic investigative steps and process

[sgl66]

Yes, this is my car. Based only on my discussion with Fred Ballard 5-6 years ago, this is probably a mistake made more than once. I'll keep an eye out for other NJ cars but as you know, they're not common. Maybe others will chime in on this site in the future.

BTW, my car was built Oct 65 so this thread should be in the '66 category