Topic: Wire Harness Clips under Radiator - 68 NJ

[dave6768]

According to all the parts catalogs, these clips are for 69 and 70.  Is it possible that my July 21, 68 Metuchen had these clips?  Or, should I go ahead and get the 67/68 clips?

[jwc66k]

In 1968 there was a "similar" looking clip used, 382350-S (ref 68 Electrical Manual, AM0023 page 8, item 7, 4 each) from the 69 and on version, 383104-S. I don't know what the differences are.
Jim
On second thought, if you use the 68 type, no question will be asked by a judge about its use. If you use the 69 and on type, you will have to provide documentation including a change over date. The rock and hard spot syndrome.

[ruppstang]

I have had cars that had the 69 style too.

[TLea]

In 1968 there was a "similar" looking clip used, 382350-S (ref 68 Electrical Manual, AM0023 page 8, item 7, 4 each) from the 69 and on version, 383104-S. I don't know what the differences are.
Jim
On second thought, if you use the 68 type, no question will be asked by a judge about its use. If you use the 69 and on type, you will have to provide documentation including a change over date. The rock and hard spot syndrome.

Not sure what the second part of your comment means but its pretty belittling. There is a vary slight difference between 68 and 69 clips and maybe if you stopped quoting assembly manuals and asked the people that are trying to help others here rather than making snide comments about judges you might get an answer

[jwc66k]

Not sure what the second part of your comment means but its pretty belittling. There is a vary slight difference between 68 and 69 clips and maybe if you stopped quoting assembly manuals and asked the people that are trying to help others here rather than making snide comments about judges you might get an answer

Before we get into a flaming war, read what I said again - twice. Without documentation, a deviation from an established standard will cost you points. That's the statement plain and simple. It is one of the underlying concepts of MCA judging.
Jim

[dave6768]

My dad bought this car in 1971 as the second owner and I have every reason to believe they are original to the car.  I'm inclinded to stay with them.  It appears from ruppstang that I'm not the only one.  It appears, my question has been answered...yes it is possible.

If it is trurly original and I change it, that's not right...we'll loose another part of history.  I would prefer to say as original as possible...even if it casues a judge to question it.

[krelboyne]

These are the three clips found in the assembly manuals.

[TLea]

Thanks for posting pictures Scott, that is constructive.
Jim, No flaming here. Your post had an underlying suggestion to it. Seen it before and just getting tired of it

[CharlesTurner]

Can we get further clarification on this.... was the middle version the only one for '68 or was the '69 used towards the end of production?  Guessing there are some assembly plant variances also?

What about the '67 style, any info that it was used into early '68?

It's a detail I haven't paid much attention to, just curious.

[TLea]

As far as I know the 68 style was used in 69 early. The 68 style was at least used in NJ very early on, Nov cars on. Cant say for sure on pre strike cars

[midlife]

To me, the original poster's clip looks to be a 68 version on a late 68 car....

[Brian Conway]

     This is typical of the harness clips used under the radiator on my 9/19/68 Metuchen car.    Brian

[ruppstang]

These are the three clips found in the assembly manuals.
 
Scott thanks for the pics, with out seeing the 68 and 69 together it is hard to see the difference.  I am now sure the cars that I have  have the 68 style clips.

[krelboyne]

These are the three clips found in the assembly manuals.
 
Scott thanks for the pics, with out seeing the 68 and 69 together it is hard to see the difference.  I am now sure the cars that I have  have the 68 style clips.

My pleasure Marty, I had to determine the differences my self.
Hard to explain without a picture.