-
-
Re: 1968: "brought to the attention of the NCRS"
Geoffrey----
I can't help very much with the screws. The original screws used were GM #4767684. This part was NEVER available in SERVICE from GM and, as far as I know, is not reproduced. GM suggests to use #8-18 X 3/8" screws for the application. I see no reason why an oval head or pan head standard phillips head machine screw should not work.
As far as the grease caps go, the current GM replacements (for the last 25 years, or so), GM #539153, are configured a little differently than the originals which were GM #3775190. The GM #539153 do not have the "dimples". The dimples were originally used in order to be compatible with the anti-static devices once used. I think that the GM replacements, although without dimples, will also work with the anti-static devices. The configuration of the "dimple" in the Paragon reproduction caps that I've seen is not exactly lke the originals so even these parts would likely not please the "discriminating restorer".
The GM #3775190 are occasionally seen for sale on eBay and usually sell for about $50-100 per set-----more if more than 1 "frothing-at-the-mouth", "pay-anything-to-get-original"-type folks get involved in a bidding war to "catch the prize".In Appreciation of John Hinckley -
Re: 1968: "brought to the attention of the NCRS"
I had no idea we judged grease caps. WOW!!Comment
-
Re: 1968: "brought to the attention of the NCRS"
Joe-----
I don't think that the grease caps are judged. Plus, since they're under the hub caps for which, as far as I know, removal is not required for judging, they're configuration is rather moot. Nevertheless, some folks want things to be "correct" right down to a "gnat's ass". That's fine, too, and a worthy goal in the overall scheme of things. Personally, I wouldn't pay a huge and ridiculous price to achieve such correctness for such a small and rather irrelevent detail, but there are more than a few folks that would and DO. In an academic sense, I like to KNOW what the correct configuration is for just about everything, but I refuse to obsess on achieving it on a car. That's my own perspective, though, and I don't expect everyone else to see it that way.In Appreciation of John HinckleyComment
-
Re: 1968: "brought to the attention of the NCRS"
Joe, I agree with your sentiments exactly. Although not being as good with expressing my thoughts as you I tend to be reluctant to so. You know of this first hand. I try not to offend anyone so I usually remain quiet. Praise usually goes much farther. Thanks for the clarification. JoeComment
-
Re: 1968: "brought to the attention of the NCRS"
Joe-----
Regardless of what mistakes that myself (especially) and others have made in the past regarding misinterpreting things said, please don't remain quiet. That's what discussion boards are all about. When it comes to misinterpretting, and sometimes foolishly overreacting to, the PERCEIVED intentions of folks, my "track record" is not nearly as good as I might do with the technical stuff. In fact, I'd say that my record is quite dismal.In Appreciation of John HinckleyComment
-
Re: 1968: "brought to the attention of the NCRS"
Joe
You really hit the nail on the head for me with your remark about wanting to know what the correct configuration of a part is as opposed to obsessing over having such a part correct on your car. You hit on the reason I lurk so much on this board and enjoy it so much. Don't sell yourself short. Many's the time when a had just a few minutes to look over the day's postings here, and I read all of your postings for the day and very little else. Your contribution to this board is WAY more important to many of us than you'll ever know. Thanks, LarryComment
-
Re: 1968: "brought to the attention of the NCRS"
My original 68 outer window felts were attached with spin rivets. These rivets wenr rhrough the felt, rubber v-seal and metal attachment bracket to the door.Comment
Comment