'62 red seatbelt redux

[Rob Edwards]

I posted recently about selecting appropriate repro webbing for a set of red seatbelts for a '62. Well, I lucked into a set of original red belts from a '62 (May build date) and thought I'd share the attached images. On the right is an uncleaned belt, while the one in the middle is after an hour in undiluted Simple Green, much plastic bristle brushing, and then a run through the heavy soil cycle in cold water in the washer. (And yes, the tongue looked like that before I started....) So originally I would have chosen sample #3, but now would definitely pick #1 (there were sun-protected areas of the original belts before cleaning that were the same hue as sample #1). So the originals have a lot more orange in them that I would have thought. Also, the next post contains a shot comparing the thickness of the sample vs. original. The old belts are definitely a lot thicker. The belts cleaned up so nicely that I'm just going to put them in the car and have the vendor just clean up the female buckles.
I know this is old hat to most folks here, but I thought it was pretty cool!

[Rob Edwards]

Old vs new webbing thickness (pic) *NM*

[John M.]

Re: Old vs new webbing thickness (pic)

Rob,
Always use the original belt material whenever possible. Also, you can carefully remove the stitching from the belt and restore the male buckle. There are a lot of people who can restich the belts and replace the worn Irvin tags so that no body would ever know that they have been removed.

Regards, John McGraw

[Geoff C.]

Nylon OEM thicker; Polyester Repo Thinner *NM*

[Clare Carpenter]

Re: Old vs new webbing thickness (pic)

Rob, Thanks for posting the seatbelt info. Very informative. I have a couple of questions for you if you don't mind. Did your fabric have any faded areas? Was there any "fuzzing" present near the tensioner? I am wondering if either condition can be taken care of in the reconditioning process.

What style buckles do you have? The 810's are cast metal/painted. I would be interested in the style and condition of what you have vs. the build date for you car. Thanks again for the information, I hadn't planned to use my fabric until I read this thread. Mine are stiff, dirty and appear to have some fading. Driver's belt has a bit of fuzzing. I'm hoping they can be cleaned up and reconditioned enough to be usable. Thanks again.

[Donald B.]

Re: Old vs new webbing thickness (pic)

A perfect example of the question - Why can't reproductions actually match originals? If you are going to go through the trouble of reproducing something - why no do it correctly?

[Jack H.]

For one...

The original belt fabric material has long been discontinued, replaced by DuPont with more modern material with a superior polymerization that allows less bulk material to be used and still meet the Federal spec on tensile strength.

For two: Since reproduction belts are made TODAY, they're required to meet TODAY's DOT standards. These require the fabric be protected from the potential of weakening when the fabric loops around metal edges. Soooo, you'll see the female clasps are coated with clear Plasti-dip to meet DOT spec where original belts weren't and that's another detectable difference on the Judging Field between the reproduction and the original part.

Basically, repro parts vary from originals for several reasons:

(1) The reproducing source didn't do the homework properly to tie down all the little nuissance items/issues.

(2) The reproducting source can't get some of the original materials because they've been banned by current legislation/rule making.

(3) The original tooling no longer exists and the reproducing source is cutting corners to make the part in low volume runs to meet a cost/price silhouette as best possible.

(4) Certain assembly methods used originally are now restricted.

(5) The part has been intentionally changed to 'try' and satisfy multiple market segments (daily driver, factory concours, hot rodder) and things like the use of SS as a substitute for regular carbon steel are done to justify the part cost and 'improve' it.

(6) The manufacturer wants/needs a way to distinguish his part from the original as a protection measure (false liability litigation, 3rd world 'rip off' copy cats, Etc.).

Bottom line, it's a complex issue and we the factory concours crowd who want it JUST like the original are in the minority as buyers as well as faced with the reality of making it in +2000 isn't the same world as making it in 196X....