If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You must be an NCRS member
before you can post: click the Join NCRS link above to join. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Although the latest edition of the '67 Judging Manual does not mention any particular logo on the inside wheel balancing weights, I've heard that it should say "Micro", which is debossed on the "correct" weight's and labeled in ounce's.
Read my article in the Restrorer or borrow that issue from a fellow NCRS member if you don't have it. I can't remember which issue it was, but it was within the past 1.5 years. There are several logos that are correct for mid-year cars, but best to read the article to get the details. Unfortuantely, I do not know of a source for any NOS or vintage weights, so you'll have to roam the junk yards to find some.
Thanks Steve and Gary, Paragon sells the wheel weights in their catalog, which states are correct and have the Micro logo on them. They say that's what the Judges are looking for. Wouldn't you know it, I just took off my rear tires and looked at the weights and they say Micro as well and I got them mounted at a tire shop four years ago. PT
You need more than just the MICRO name. Micro weights over 1/2 oz need to have the weight designation appear twice, both times in ounces, once on each side of the word MICRO. Most modern Micro weights have the metric weight on one side of the MICRO. So, you need to see what the Paragon weights look like. If you got new MICRO weight 4 years ago, I bet they have the metric weight embossed on them, which is a no-no for '67. Note that you cannot simply grind off the metric weight since that will leave you with a weight with only the designation on one side of the MICRO. My article explains everything in much detail. Find out what Paragon is selling and let us know.
In your photo the weight at the bottom shows the typical problem: 2.0 oz = 57 grams. This weight should get a deduct on a mid-year since it doesn't have the 2.0 embossed on both the left and right.
I can't quite read the numbers on the top weight. Are they 25 or 2.5 on the left? And 3.5 on the right? Makes no sense to me.
Gary, the weight in the bottom of the picture is 2 oz. The one at the top is 1.25 oz. The weight on my wheel says....2.5 MICRO 78. That's all I can make out. PT
__________________________________________________ _____________________________
In your photo the weight at the bottom shows the typical problem: 2.0 oz = 57 grams. This weight should get a deduct on a mid-year since it doesn't have the 2.0 embossed on both the left and right.
I can't quite read the numbers on the top weight. Are they 25 or 2.5 on the left? And 3.5 on the right? Makes no sense to me.
Now the numbers make sense (sort of), with 1.25 oz = 35 grams. With your 2.5 oz weight, the metric equivalent should be 70.875 or 70.9, or 71, but not 78. In any case, none of these weights will pass muster with any informed NCRS judge.
So, Paragon simply is selling some newer MICRO weights, but their statement that the judges are looking for the MICRO logo is misleading in several ways. First of all, there were at least 4 other suppliers, so MICRO is not the only acceptable weight, and second, if a weight has MICRO, but also has the metric designation instead of the english designation twice, you're going to lose points (except maybe for some of the very small, 1/2 oz weights).
We use cookies to deliver our services, and to analyze site activity. We do not share or sell any personal information about our users. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Tweet
Comment