Topic: Antique Battery

[mgmradio]

Bob,
    My A code convertible has AC and factory rally pac . I have the original window sticker and it has an upgrade charge for the 24F. My C code coupe with out AC also has an upgrade charge for the 24 F. So I don't think it was required for AC as it should have been included in the price of the AC.

[Bob Gaines]

Bob,
    My A code convertible has AC and factory rally pac . I have the original window sticker and it has an upgrade charge for the 24F. My C code coupe with out AC also has an upgrade charge for the 24 F. So I don't think it was required for AC as it should have been included in the price of the AC.

The upgrade from 22 to 24 is that way for 67 so just assumed it was the same for 65/66. It seems that for what ever reason the 24 F turns up on a A/C equipped car. Does anyone have paperwork for a factory A/C car that doesn't have the heavy duty battery?   

[outlawincorporated]

BOB.

YES  I do.  please see attached images.

both 66 cars that's I have owned and where unrestored when purchased and air con from factory as per paperwork.

regards.

PHILL BERESFORD.
MELBOURNE.
AUSTRALIA.

[Bob Gaines]

Oh well that theory seems shot down . On the bright side it should offer even more incentive for Battery suppliers to come up with the 22F version since they were used more then the 24F . If they do, they need to be careful and  make the 65-67 version and not the 68-70 version like what the current repro represents. There were substantially more 22F used as standard equipment in 65-67 then in 68-70 so it would only make sense to make the version that would have the most demand. It is bad enough have to see the inappropriate size batteries in a otherwise concours correct car let alone a 68 version as things stand now .

[carlite65]

i could not agree more. i have talked with virginia mustang & npd & they in turn have talked with the vendors and they expressed no interest in doing a correct 22 battery. i would purchase several if available. heck i would almost be tempted to settle for a dummy case for show purposes. maybe someone with one of those 3D printers could assist in this undertaking??

[Bob Gaines]

i could not agree more. i have talked with virginia mustang & npd & they in turn have talked with the vendors and they expressed no interest in doing a correct 22 battery. i would purchase several if available. heck i would almost be tempted to settle for a dummy case for show purposes. maybe someone with one of those 3D printers could assist in this undertaking??

My understanding is it is the cost of the mold for the case that is the main stumbling block. The mold for the top is costly too but not near as much . I overheard numbers in the 100,000.00 plus range. This has been consistant over the last 10 to 15 years I have discussed this with interested vendor parties . The ironic thing is that the market is already built in. The 22f battery would be needed by almost everyone 65-67 . The ones that originally came with the optional 24F battery still have a wrong example if they use the 68 based repro.  The same case with minor changes could be used for the 68-70 22f battery.Of course it would only stand to reason that  the 65-67 24F assembline top  and 68-70 22F top would be redone at the same time. The 24 F 65-67 battery would be the easiest to come out with and could be done now with relative smaller expense because the case is virtually identical to the current repro bottom case . The current repro 24f lid would have to be modified with the molded printing on top. The vendors don't want to invest more money in a new inproved reproduction and will not unless the enthusiast insists on the correct one!!!!  I have constantly heard them use the excuse "no one complains but you. The MFG wants  things to stay as they are so they can maximize their profits . I don't begrudge the vendors making profits but not at the expense of a wrong part for our beloved cars. 

[carlite65]

do you have any direct contact info for the vendor(s) involved? maybe we could start a campaign to let them know what is really needed..........just a thought.

[J_Speegle]

As judges we've discussed that we should be deducting when we find an incorrect sized battery in a car similar to what we do on just about any other piece attached to the cars. For some reason, in the past, have chosen to look the other way and now it seems that a small deduction (as would be expected in the weighted scoring method) is appropriate and might help motivate owners to call more and in turn influence the makers as they have been in so many other reproduction part examples.

[Bob Gaines]

do you have any direct contact info for the vendor(s) involved? maybe we could start a campaign to let them know what is really needed..........just a thought.

I have been in contact with 3 different parties over the years that were planning on doing the right batteries none of them are current MFG's. The latest was about 6 months ago. I have not check recently to see how that was going.  All of current MFG's seem to be un interested because the ones they were producing seemed to be good enough because no one complained except me (they said). I think with continued education so that enthusiasts with a desire for correct looking parts for their cars will become better informed and realize the current battery is not correct for the pre 1968 cars.

[KevinK]

Maybe we are going about this problem from the wrong direction.  The battery manufacturers have no interest in making low volume special batteries.  All we need is a case!  There are plenty of battery options which are smaller in size and will fit any of the old cases.  I saw some at Sema which you could get 3 or 4 of them in a regular battery case.  The battery part is easy.

[Toploader]

Maybe we are going about this problem from the wrong direction.  The battery manufacturers have no interest in making low volume special batteries.  All we need is a case!  There are plenty of battery options which are smaller in size and will fit any of the old cases.  I saw some at Sema which you could get 3 or 4 of them in a regular battery case.  The battery part is easy.

...and the case is the expensive part (read: high pressure injection mold).

[Bob Gaines]

...and the case is the expensive part (read: high pressure injection mold).

+1.

[KevinK]

...and the case is the expensive part (read: high pressure injection mold).

Yes, you are correct from the battery manufacturers standpoint.  By using another battery source, the case no longer needs to be manufactured to battery standards. Infact, it does not even need to be assembled.  We already have fake battery tops!  How much trouble can it be to convert that design to fit a box.  I'm just thinking the plastic parts suppliers might be easier to deal with, as the battery guys said flat out NO.  Just trying to put some ideas out there.  It's not very likely anyone here has much influence on making this happen.

The first generation cars have a couple options on repro batteries.  The third generation has no options and no hope of anything materializing in the foreseable future.

[PraireBronze]

3D printer?

[carlite65]

3D printer?

jay leno has a big one..........anyone know him??