69 Wiper Refills

[Chuck G.]

Have been going through the 68-69 JG. Came upon this, and I paraphrase: Wiper refills have patent numbers AND the TRICO name. This applies to the rubber refill only, not the metal arm which does have the TRICO name and logo.

The numbers embossed on the rubber refills are something like

"7020XXX CAN 52 55 58 PATENT PEND."

Question: Should the refills have just the patent numbers, OR should the TRICO name be there too? Thanks in advance. Chuck

[Dave S.]

Re: 69 Wiper Refills

Chuck,

I have bought the RB-15, 15" long Trico refills which fit many mid years as well as the shark cars up to at least the mid 70's. They have TRICO and patent numbers on them and I believe they are corret in that respect. They are incorrect in that the metal spline is shiney metal and not black. I don't believe any replacements had the black spline. I have a couple of originals w/ the black spline to show me the difference. Hope that helps.

[Peter L.]

Re: 69 Wiper Refills

Dave - Please double check but I think '68 and up at least into the mid '70s used the 16" wiper blade assemblies. The refill for the TRICO blade assemblies would be the RF-16. Pete

[Joe L.]

Re: 69 Wiper Refills

Pete and Dave-----

Yes, 1968-82 used a blade insert which was, nominally, 16" in length

[Chuck G.]

Re: 69 Wiper Refills

Should have specified, but yes, these are the 16" refills, not the 15" used earlier. Chuck

[Jack H.]

Re: 69 Wiper Refills

There are/were different versions of across-the-counter Trico 16-inch refills. You can generally distinguish along these lines:

(1) Is the original box red/white, or multi-colored with picture(s) of various cars. Original factory correct rubber can be found in either package depending on WHEN it was actually made....

(2) What does the end flap on the box call out? RF-16, RF-16-1, RF-16-2, Etc. This defines whether the refills were constructed using the Latch-Lock feature or not. Some blade holders required the refills to sport Latch-Locks to 'snap' into final position while other, similar blade holders had captive tabs at both ends to prevent the refill from moving/sliding out. On the captive tab holders, you bent the holder back, started the rubber sliding in and when it was fully inserted, the spring force of the blade holder caused the bent tab ends of the holder to swing down and 'lock' the rubber into final position.

(3) Early 16-inch refills will have 'dots' on the side which I think represent injection fill points into a carousel mold. 'Middle' era 16-inch refills will have three 'ribs' on the side which I think came from fill points on a continuous flow, extrusion molding process. The upper side of these middle era refills (adjacent to the refill's metal holding 'rails') exhibit repeating 'cup shaped' indents spaced about 2.75-inches apart and this area of the rubber side rail is where the patent deboss disclosure it. Late or current era refills the three side ribs altogether and have no patent disclosure info. The early refills seem to always be packaged in the red/white box. Mid-era refills can be found in either box. Late era refills seem to always be packaged in the 'pretty box' container.

(4) I'm looking at an NOS 'mid-era' refill right now. The patent info is on ONE SIDE ONLY but there are 'cup' marks and triple side wall ridges on both sides. The Patent disclosure alternates being randomly obscured by the 'cup' shaped indentations (marks left by a rotating machine to grab, hold, and 'walk' the cooling rubber out of the extrusion mold?). The alternating emboss reads:

"Trico 2733469, 2834976"

Then

"Trico Pat.2543383, Can.1949, BR.593775"

One would need to either have access to Trico internal drawings to understand what happened when and if there were n-tuple forming machines running side by side with slightly different emboss facilities or look up each of the listed patents, determine their individual 'grant dates' and timeline the refill rubber differences accordingly.

(5) On the refill rails, early rails (used on all rubber with 'dots' on the side and early 3-line sidewall) had a slit down the middle with cross-over 'loops' on the top side spaced at roughly 1/2-inch intervals. To my knowledge these were always left natural SS. Later era refill rails (no 'dots' or 'lines' on the side of the rubber) have no upper SS cross over loops. In the era of question (1969), I believe the rail construction was early style with upper cross overs, SS rail with discrete/separate SS latch lock and rails and latch lock either painted or anodized semi-flat black.

[Chuck G.]

Re: 69 Wiper Refills

Thank you, Jack. I've printed out your response for future reference. Seems like many sell the refills with Patent numbers only, but no "Trico" name. I had never really paid that much attention to the refill numbers and logo's. The refills on my car have the 3 ribs, but just have the Patent numbers as listed in my original post above. There is no "Trico" name anywhere on the rubber. Looks like another item to add to my ever-growing list of "stuff" to look for. Thanks again. Chuck

[Peter L.]

Re: 69 Wiper Refills

Chuck - In examining 2 sets of TRICO RF-16 Latch-Lock Refills one set with two lines running the lenght of the insert and the other set with three lines running the length of the insert the following is embossed on the one side of the 3-line refill(since that's what you have) below the metal vertebra:

ONE OR MORE PATENTS 2543383,2687544,2697241 2766474,2834978,BR.683375 702899,702900 702849 CAN.52,55,58 PATENT PEND.

On the opposite side ~2 1/2" from the left end was a 2 digit number, 89 one the one and 50 on the other and ~1 1/2" from the right end were -73A on one and -105 on the other.

Note neither side had TRICO on the refill. The two line refills have diferent patent numbers but appears basically the same in configuration. Pete

[Chuck G.]

Re: 69 Wiper Refills

Hi Pete. Sounds like you have the "3 rib" refills like I have...all the right Patent numbers, but NO Trico name. Chuck