Tweet
Does anyone know the exact dimensions of the yellow or styrofoam pads that are supposed to be glued to the underside of the rear deck of '66 convertibles ? These were there to prevent the convertible top latches from rattling. Does anyone make these parts ? Thanks Steve
-
-
Re: Rear deck foam pads
Hi Steve, The original form pads on my 1965 are 1 and 1/16 square by 5/16 thick. I have had this car since early 1968. Hope this helps. Page Campbell #2299 -
Re: Rear deck foam pads
Hi Steve, The original form pads on my 1965 are 1 and 1/16 square by 5/16 thick. I have had this car since early 1968. Hope this helps. Page Campbell #2299Comment
-
Re: Rear deck foam pads
Thanks for your help I really appreciate your checking for me. One more question. What type and color material are they made of ? Thanks, SteveComment
-
Re: Rear deck foam pads
Thanks for your help I really appreciate your checking for me. One more question. What type and color material are they made of ? Thanks, SteveComment
-
Re: Rear deck foam pads
Think you can find repro pads in Long Island and/or Dr. Rebuild. I KNOW the JG says they were there, but I personally question this one.
Weren't on my '65 (so what, could have fallen off). I did some primary 'research' by sifting through +100 decklids at a local Corvette scarp yard and found NO PADS and NO outlines of pads having been on any of the lids....
Next, I started looking at the AIMs. Supposedly the pads are there to prevent the chrome front soft top latches from rattling against the underside of the deck lid. OK, let's take this a wee bit further.
The dimensions given in other post are on the money. Look at the bottom of the deck lid and you'll see an ABSENSE of any 'alignment' marks in the fiberglass. Next, read the AIM's (through '67) and observe the pad is NOT called out and there's NO notes about where it should go in terms of X-Y orientation. Then, see that if this tiny pad were mis-aligned even modestly, it'd do NO GOOD....
Was this really a factory item? Was it somekind of running change that was an experiment in customer satisfaction (put on some cars but not all under limited use documentation)? Was it dealer installed? All good questions I've no answer for....
So, I took a 'hard line' that this was horse pucky. Then, three years ago a one owner 365HP A/C coupe drove into a local Corvette shop. Owner said he was having troubles trying to sell the car and showed us why.
The VIN tag (looked untouched to me) read 194675Sxxxxx. WAIT, that's a convertible prefix on what's obviously a coupe!!! I can understand someone trying to make a convertible out of a coupe, but vice versa makes little sense....
While looking at the car (a Jan '65 build), I pop the rear deck lid and two of those 'non-existant' anti-rattle foam pads stare at me yellowing nicely. Hosekay, folks it's your call on this one....Comment
-
Re: Rear deck foam pads
Think you can find repro pads in Long Island and/or Dr. Rebuild. I KNOW the JG says they were there, but I personally question this one.
Weren't on my '65 (so what, could have fallen off). I did some primary 'research' by sifting through +100 decklids at a local Corvette scarp yard and found NO PADS and NO outlines of pads having been on any of the lids....
Next, I started looking at the AIMs. Supposedly the pads are there to prevent the chrome front soft top latches from rattling against the underside of the deck lid. OK, let's take this a wee bit further.
The dimensions given in other post are on the money. Look at the bottom of the deck lid and you'll see an ABSENSE of any 'alignment' marks in the fiberglass. Next, read the AIM's (through '67) and observe the pad is NOT called out and there's NO notes about where it should go in terms of X-Y orientation. Then, see that if this tiny pad were mis-aligned even modestly, it'd do NO GOOD....
Was this really a factory item? Was it somekind of running change that was an experiment in customer satisfaction (put on some cars but not all under limited use documentation)? Was it dealer installed? All good questions I've no answer for....
So, I took a 'hard line' that this was horse pucky. Then, three years ago a one owner 365HP A/C coupe drove into a local Corvette shop. Owner said he was having troubles trying to sell the car and showed us why.
The VIN tag (looked untouched to me) read 194675Sxxxxx. WAIT, that's a convertible prefix on what's obviously a coupe!!! I can understand someone trying to make a convertible out of a coupe, but vice versa makes little sense....
While looking at the car (a Jan '65 build), I pop the rear deck lid and two of those 'non-existant' anti-rattle foam pads stare at me yellowing nicely. Hosekay, folks it's your call on this one....Comment
-
Re: Rear deck foam pads
White/yellow plastic foam about 1/8 inch (maybe a tad more) thick with adhesive on one side. Probably came with wax paper peel off backing to keep the adhesive intact. See, above 'mystery' post from me on this thread....Comment
-
Re: Rear deck foam pads
White/yellow plastic foam about 1/8 inch (maybe a tad more) thick with adhesive on one side. Probably came with wax paper peel off backing to keep the adhesive intact. See, above 'mystery' post from me on this thread....Comment
-
Re: Rear deck foam pads
Thanks Jack, I too have looked at hundreds of '66 convertibles and have never found these pads. I know two original owners and neither have pads. A couple a weeks ago I met an old friend who also is the original owner of a '65 convertible....it has pads. What I struggle with is when my '66 was judged I lost points because I didn't have the pads. When I asked the judges about the pads they told me they had never seen them either. I still lost the points. I'm not sure if I should add them or not.Comment
-
Re: Rear deck foam pads
Thanks Jack, I too have looked at hundreds of '66 convertibles and have never found these pads. I know two original owners and neither have pads. A couple a weeks ago I met an old friend who also is the original owner of a '65 convertible....it has pads. What I struggle with is when my '66 was judged I lost points because I didn't have the pads. When I asked the judges about the pads they told me they had never seen them either. I still lost the points. I'm not sure if I should add them or not.Comment
-
Re: Rear deck foam pads
Hi Steve, When I responded to our question about the foam pads I looked at my 65 #22714. This is a very late production car with a TBC of L09 and is a A.O. Smith body. I also have another 65 #20948 with a TBC of K28. This car is a St.Louis body and it also has the foam pads(only one of the two is still there) This is also a fairly late 65. The color of the pads is a light tan and appears to have some type of backing (might be some type of light weight vinyl) that had an adhesive pad that could be peeled off to stick it to the deck lid. They both are same shade of light tan. The foam material appears to be fairly dense. I don't know what other cars had them but I can see how they could easly fall off without leaving a trace. Hope this helps Page Campbell #2299Comment
-
Re: Rear deck foam pads
Hi Steve, When I responded to our question about the foam pads I looked at my 65 #22714. This is a very late production car with a TBC of L09 and is a A.O. Smith body. I also have another 65 #20948 with a TBC of K28. This car is a St.Louis body and it also has the foam pads(only one of the two is still there) This is also a fairly late 65. The color of the pads is a light tan and appears to have some type of backing (might be some type of light weight vinyl) that had an adhesive pad that could be peeled off to stick it to the deck lid. They both are same shade of light tan. The foam material appears to be fairly dense. I don't know what other cars had them but I can see how they could easly fall off without leaving a trace. Hope this helps Page Campbell #2299Comment
-
Re: Rear deck foam pads
As you can see this is a personal decision. On my '71, I found a few items that contradicted our judging guide, kept the car as is and did research. Found on two points car was right and JG was wrong. On one point car was incorrect (but to the AIM) and JG/Judge was right!
In some cases what to do is a tough call. AND, you've got to keep in mind the judges ARE your fellow NCRS members simply trying to do the best they can. So, when the book says "x" it's hard for us to score "y".
But, in this case the pads are inexpensive and can be removed easily if WE later find more facts and improve our composite Corvette knowledge. So, ball's back in your court....Comment
-
Re: Rear deck foam pads
As you can see this is a personal decision. On my '71, I found a few items that contradicted our judging guide, kept the car as is and did research. Found on two points car was right and JG was wrong. On one point car was incorrect (but to the AIM) and JG/Judge was right!
In some cases what to do is a tough call. AND, you've got to keep in mind the judges ARE your fellow NCRS members simply trying to do the best they can. So, when the book says "x" it's hard for us to score "y".
But, in this case the pads are inexpensive and can be removed easily if WE later find more facts and improve our composite Corvette knowledge. So, ball's back in your court....Comment
Comment