Cazman
Active Member
This was on the forbbodies forum. '66-'72 I think.
I would think that it would be similar for our cars.
I would think that it would be similar for our cars.
How does this look?
- Thread starter Cazman
- Start date
I don’t like it, destroy it and don’t retain any of the info. More wrong than correct.
they didn’t use semi gloss black, it was gloss with no primer or prep, so it didn’t shine like full gloss
Backing plates weren’t Painted, they were plated.
Gold sway bar end links form factory? No that was aftermarket.
all attaching nuts black? I have many silver plated trim castle nuts on NOS parts.
Strut rod washers were a brown colored coating. Bill Rolik enterprises sells these in brown.
they didn’t use semi gloss black, it was gloss with no primer or prep, so it didn’t shine like full gloss
Backing plates weren’t Painted, they were plated.
Gold sway bar end links form factory? No that was aftermarket.
all attaching nuts black? I have many silver plated trim castle nuts on NOS parts.
Strut rod washers were a brown colored coating. Bill Rolik enterprises sells these in brown.
Last edited:
In order to replicate factory-production finishes, sometimes it's necessary to use something a bit different to get to the desired gloss and finish. Even a combination of paints, sometimes. BTAIM
When I think of "gloss black", it conjures-up a hard, black, shiney finish. Period. Like the over-restored "chassis black" that many people seem to like on GM vehicles. BUT the quality and type of paint can influence this too. In any event, a resultant "semi-gloss" finish was used in many more places that restorers like to use "gloss black" so it shows better, BUT will result in deductions at OEM-producti Which on-accurate show judging. In reality, GM used a satiny black on all of their suspension items that were black. Which is also about what Chrysler did, too, as I recall from the middle 1960s or so. The stub frames and such were sprayed black, whereas the suspension items were dipped (a container filled with water, with a layer of black paint floating on the water, so I was told by somebody that researched it. Which explains the runs/sags in the paint on those parts.
C-bodies didn't have sway bar end link bolts until the 1974 model year, but B-bodies had them earlier than that.
Grille-side core support paint was a flatter-satiny black applied over the basic body color. Sometimes sprayed, sometimes brushed, sometimes both, by observation. Many times not too neatly or completely, just that most of "there" was black.
Many of the "black bolts and such" were allegedly an 80-hour, military-spec anti-corrosion finish. Which can be somewhat replicated on normal bolts by brushing "gun blue" liquid on them. I would not have believed that if a Mopar club member hadn't demostated that to us at a club meeting. BUT having the correct bolts to start with, rather than hardware store bolts, can be important.
In ANY event, the correct restoration of a vehicle is by duplicating/replicating the various finishes, inspection stamps, paint daubs, and grease pencil writings as the car had on it originally. Takiing pictures upon disassembly is important to document these things. Of course, these things matter for show judgings where such OEM-correct items really matter.
By observation, the problems can occur in mixed-marque shows where everybody takes on over how well the GM incorrect/over-restored cars look (with their incorrect shiney black paint where GM never put it!) in comparison to a correctly-restored Chrysler or Ford product. The general public, especially the public of a vintage which only knows what they've seen over their short lifetime (on cars built before they "hit ground"), tend to have the orientation that all cars should look like the over-done GM cars. An earlier form of "dis-information" well before politics got involved in that word.
I also know that not everybody wants or desires to do an OEM-correct restoration or such. OR represent their vehicle as OEM-production-accurate. That's fine, too. Just depends upon which "game" you desire to play and the rules governing the "game".
Y'all enjoy!
CBODY67
When I think of "gloss black", it conjures-up a hard, black, shiney finish. Period. Like the over-restored "chassis black" that many people seem to like on GM vehicles. BUT the quality and type of paint can influence this too. In any event, a resultant "semi-gloss" finish was used in many more places that restorers like to use "gloss black" so it shows better, BUT will result in deductions at OEM-producti Which on-accurate show judging. In reality, GM used a satiny black on all of their suspension items that were black. Which is also about what Chrysler did, too, as I recall from the middle 1960s or so. The stub frames and such were sprayed black, whereas the suspension items were dipped (a container filled with water, with a layer of black paint floating on the water, so I was told by somebody that researched it. Which explains the runs/sags in the paint on those parts.
C-bodies didn't have sway bar end link bolts until the 1974 model year, but B-bodies had them earlier than that.
Grille-side core support paint was a flatter-satiny black applied over the basic body color. Sometimes sprayed, sometimes brushed, sometimes both, by observation. Many times not too neatly or completely, just that most of "there" was black.
Many of the "black bolts and such" were allegedly an 80-hour, military-spec anti-corrosion finish. Which can be somewhat replicated on normal bolts by brushing "gun blue" liquid on them. I would not have believed that if a Mopar club member hadn't demostated that to us at a club meeting. BUT having the correct bolts to start with, rather than hardware store bolts, can be important.
In ANY event, the correct restoration of a vehicle is by duplicating/replicating the various finishes, inspection stamps, paint daubs, and grease pencil writings as the car had on it originally. Takiing pictures upon disassembly is important to document these things. Of course, these things matter for show judgings where such OEM-correct items really matter.
By observation, the problems can occur in mixed-marque shows where everybody takes on over how well the GM incorrect/over-restored cars look (with their incorrect shiney black paint where GM never put it!) in comparison to a correctly-restored Chrysler or Ford product. The general public, especially the public of a vintage which only knows what they've seen over their short lifetime (on cars built before they "hit ground"), tend to have the orientation that all cars should look like the over-done GM cars. An earlier form of "dis-information" well before politics got involved in that word.
I also know that not everybody wants or desires to do an OEM-correct restoration or such. OR represent their vehicle as OEM-production-accurate. That's fine, too. Just depends upon which "game" you desire to play and the rules governing the "game".
Y'all enjoy!
CBODY67
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2010
- Messages
- 27,944
- Reaction score
- 26,885
My ‘67 Imps have end link bolts.
Cazman
Active Member
In general, it is nice to know which parts where bare, painted, or plated. As I am doing the complete stub frame, I might as well paint what was supposed to be painted and do not over do it.
That would be nice to know, but this list posted above has too many errors on it to be followed.
Similar threads
- Locked
