63 Frame Restoration Questions Correct or Not

[Alan D.]

Re: 63 Frame Restoration Questions Correct or Not

That two tab design continued into 1965 cars. A TSB (1174) was issued on Nov 29, 1965.

[Timothy B.]

Re: 63 Frame Restoration Questions Correct or Not

Mike,

Are there lock washers shown in the picture under the spindle/half shaft bolts or is it my eyes. Looks like TR with grade 8 bolts also.

[Stuart F.]

Re: 63 Frame Restoration Questions Correct or Not

Well, I guess it's like they say in the legal profession: "Eye witness accounts are very unreliable", specially when the're 45 years old. so it must be with my post. Sorry.

Stu Fox

[Michael H.]

Re: 63 Frame Restoration Questions Correct or Not

Mike,

Are there lock washers shown in the picture under the spindle/half shaft bolts or is it my eyes. Looks like TR with grade 8 bolts also.

Tim,

What appears to be a washer is actually just an area that lost it's chassis black during "the wash", when solvent and air pressure was used to clean the area.

[Timothy B.]

Re: 63 Frame Restoration Questions Correct or Not

Mike,

Thanks for the response about the lock washer question. I don't see any french lock as later 63's are supposed to have, how is the bolt locked in place? It's also interesting to see the top portion of the rear exhaust hanger installed and painted black in the first picture.

[Michael H.]

Re: 63 Frame Restoration Questions Correct or Not

Mike,

Thanks for the response about the lock washer question. I don't see any french lock as later 63's are supposed to have, how is the bolt locked in place? It's also interesting to see the top portion of the rear exhaust hanger installed and painted black in the first picture.

Yes, that's correct. There were no lock straps on early 63's. Just the bolt and nothing else. I don't remember exactly when in 63 that the straps entered production. I also don't remember the VIN range of the car in the pic but it must be prior to the addition of straps.

[Harry S.]

Re: 63 Frame Restoration Questions Correct or Not

Michael, do you recall what the headmarks on the bolts were?

[Michael H.]

Re: 63 Frame Restoration Questions Correct or Not

Michael, do you recall what the headmarks on the bolts were?

Harry,

Sorry, I don't remember what the bolt head marks are. Been too many years I guess.
Hopefully, someone that does remember will post.

[Timothy B.]

Re: 63 Frame Restoration Questions Correct or Not

Harry,

Looking at Mike's picture it appears to me the bolt heads are TR and grade 8 but it's amazing no type of lock is used here. I can only imagine the damage if that union came apart.

It's also interesting looking at Tracy's picture to see something placed in the front crossmember center hole and I wonder if it's some kind of aligning tool to set the toe initally.

[John H.]

Re: 63 Frame Restoration Questions Correct or Not

It's also interesting looking at Tracy's picture to see something placed in the front crossmember center hole and I wonder if it's some kind of aligning tool to set the toe initally.

That's a pivoting pin/clamp detail that locates the front of the frame fore-aft and cross-car in the fixture; that fixture also has the spring-loaded plungers at each body mount bracket location that determined the shim count necessary to bring the mount heights to zero design datum.

[Michael H.]

Re: 63 Frame Restoration Questions Correct or Not

That's a pivoting pin/clamp detail that locates the front of the frame fore-aft and cross-car in the fixture; that fixture also has the spring-loaded plungers at each body mount bracket location that determined the shim count necessary to bring the mount heights to zero design datum.

Any comments on the blackout for 63-64 front and rear suspension/drive John? I have a feeling there are still a lot of folks that are rejecting my story.

[John H.]

Re: 63 Frame Restoration Questions Correct or Not

Any comments on the blackout for 63-64 front and rear suspension/drive John? I have a feeling there are still a lot of folks that are rejecting my story.

I'm with you, Michael - that gooey/sticky "chassis black" paint (originally P/N 3686683, "Underbody Protective Coating") was used for many years at St. Louis, both in the basement for the '63-'64 rear suspension, and at the end of the Chassis Line, just prior to Body Drop, for chassis blackout. Engineering-specified coverage reduced dramatically in '65 with the introduction of disc brakes, to little more than the outside of the mufflers.

The material was sprayed from 55-gallon drums adjacent to the line with Johnstone pumps mounted in the drums, with airless spray guns; there was NEVER any sort of "mitting" - that "legend" persists in spite of the fact that it never happened.

Chevrolet-Buffalo used the same material to paint the steering linkage, and it never dried there either - it was still sticky at the toe-in pit at St. Louis.

[Michael H.]

Re: 63 Frame Restoration Questions Correct or Not

I'm with you, Michael - that gooey/sticky "chassis black" paint (originally P/N 3686683, "Underbody Protective Coating") was used for many years at St. Louis, both in the basement for the '63-'64 rear suspension, and at the end of the Chassis Line, just prior to Body Drop, for chassis blackout. Engineering-specified coverage reduced dramatically in '65 with the introduction of disc brakes, to little more than the outside of the mufflers.

The material was sprayed from 55-gallon drums adjacent to the line with Johnstone pumps mounted in the drums, with airless spray guns; there was NEVER any sort of "mitting" - that "legend" persists in spite of the fact that it never happened.

Chevrolet-Buffalo used the same material to paint the steering linkage, and it never dried there either - it was still sticky at the toe-in pit at St. Louis.

Thanks John. I have a feeling a lotta folks "ain't buyin my story" on this but I'm sure they'll take another look at this blackout situation for 63-64 now that you are involved.

If a 63-64 were to be judged properly, it would loose a ton of points if all of the front/rear susp/drive components weren't coated with some sort of black coating.
Wonder what the deduct would be for "originality" on all of these components?

As previously mentioned by someone, the 63-64 JG does recognize the fact that these components "may have been covered" in black. It just isn't mandatory, yet.

[Timothy B.]

Re: 63 Frame Restoration Questions Correct or Not

John,

I thought the 63 frames were upside down and checked by hand with a guage tool that had steps that represented the shim count. Later frames used the method you describe.

Also, looking at the first picture just below the workers hand I see what looks like a spring around the rear brake drum. I know this has been discussed a few times here in the past because some believed the springs were used only on the front drums.

[Stuart F.]

Re: 63 Frame Restoration Questions Correct or Not

Michael, Michael;

Don't be so sensitive. The evidence certainly seems to support your position. As for me, I can only say what I remember and my memory is not infalible. It just seems that I would recall if the underside of my new 63 Corvette had gooy black stuff on it. When I first crawled under it to check my starter, I was very up close and personal with the under carriage. If I would have gotten that goo on me, I think I'd remember that. Within the first month or so I had the car on a lift at the hobby shop to change the oil/filter and do it's first lube job and, again, I don't recall anything like that - just a clean newly painted underframe with a slight amount of rust on the natural exposed metal components. My buddy, who would recall, is long gone now, so I guess there is no way to substantiate my recollections. But humor me; stay with "may" instead of "should". It's all part of that Corvette mystique of "never say never", Ha!

Stu Fox