Are there any details on the jigs originally used by SA to paint fiberglass exterior parts?
I'm trying to get the right 'shading' on parts and would like to know in what the position (laying down, hung by hinge holes, etc) the various exterior parts were painted by SA (if by SA at all!)
After removing all the undercoating on the nose and a hurried previous respray I have no details on any of my pieces.
Your best resource is the original photos....
http://www.thecoralsnake.com/1969Plantpics
(http://www.thecoralsnake.com/712056a.jpg)
(http://www.thecoralsnake.com/931393a.jpg)
I have seen those, but that's an AO Smith plant.
Is the assumption that the 67s in LA were done the same way?
Sorry, I misunderstood your request....1967 Shelbys are a whole different animal. They of course, didn't have the volume of items to paint.
I was told, I never saw pictures, that the fiberglass was put on saw horses and painted that way.
The underside of the hood was not painted as well as inside of the nose. I don't remember if the underside of the rear deck was but I think not.
The shaddow lines are in the overspray and probably depends on which angle the painter shot from.
I'm presuming that they were painted inside of the paint shop but considering that the vast majority of LA "body shops" painted outside in that time period, I wouldn't be shocked if the Shelby's weren't too.
Quote from: Bossbill on May 08, 2018, 12:20:53 PM
Are there any details on the jigs originally used by SA to paint fiberglass exterior parts?
I'm trying to get the right 'shading' on parts and would like to know in what the position (laying down, hung by hinge holes, etc) the various exterior parts were painted by SA (if by SA at all!)
After removing all the undercoating on the nose and a hurried previous respray I have no details on any of my pieces.
Form my point of view yes it seems that the parts were painted at SA as needed.Although there are not any definitive pictures evidence from original paint cars seems to indicate hoods where painted flat. I envision something like a saw horse or TV tray that painters still use. I am not completely sure on the The trunk lid probably something similar because of the overspray pattern similar to the hood.. The front nose seems to typically have a consistent amount of overspray around the inside perimeter. The side scoops and end caps also appear to be painted flat. Regardless the scoops and end caps once mounted will not have any overspray visible.
The one picture I recall, is the cars on the line, fiberglass onthe nose unpainted?
Good points, Bob!
I suspect the nose was off this car at one time, so I'm not sure this pic is indicative of normal process:
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/975/41936625722_24172f8da1.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/26TNaM5)
There is no primer behind the paint on the mating surface. During the cleanup of tar-based undercoat on the back side I did find the clear silicone on some of the mating surfaces.
I, too, remember a pic of a few cars with noses installed without paint. Don't remember the context.
Quote from: Bossbill on May 08, 2018, 03:48:12 PM
Good points, Bob!
I suspect the nose was off this car at one time, so I'm not sure this pic is indicative of normal process:
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/975/41936625722_24172f8da1.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/26TNaM5)
There is no primer behind the paint on the mating surface. During the cleanup of tar-based undercoat on the back side I did find the clear silicone on some of the mating surfaces.
I, too, remember a pic of a few of cars with noses installed without paint. Don't remember the context.
There is not evidence to suggest the nose piece was painted on the car . I can only imagine that the nose might have been on the cars in the picture to test for pre fit. I suspect the nose was stood on the flat fender flange and painted that way faced towards the ceiling. Just my take on the situation.
Quote from: Bossbill on May 08, 2018, 12:52:04 PM
..........Is the assumption that the 67s in LA were done the same way?
Not at all. Different people, companies and other details
For 67 production since there were changes (steel lined verses non-steel lined) during the year related to painted or unpainted back sides the process likely changed as need be for the application for those two items.
Not aware of any photo documentation from 67 like we have for the other years unfortunately :(
(http://www.shelbyforums.com/attachments/customprofilepics/profilepic823_1.gif)
Looks like at least a few, noses were fitted to cars and then painted
On that picture of the 69 being painted, that is on a special jig that got lowered down to a lower floor where it is united to the rest of the car but, that's not the question.
The black that I see under the hood on the 69's is black gel coat or is it flat black paint and is it expected to show over spray? Sorry but I never noticed that before.
The bottom of the 69 hoods were sprayed black
I think the painting rack is different from the crane/jig that carries the assembly to the car for installation
The bottom of the '69 hoods were painted semi gloss black after receiving body color. Apparently they used a hand held mask of sorts which left an uneven paint line.
The dolly which carried the assembly does appear to be different from the one on which they are painted.
Quote from: Coralsnake on May 08, 2018, 08:51:12 PM
(http://www.shelbyforums.com/attachments/customprofilepics/profilepic823_1.gif)
Looks like at least a few, noses were fitted to cars and then painted
What makes you think they were painted that way?
They may have been removed and painted, but the photo says they were fitted first and then painted
Quote from: Coralsnake on May 08, 2018, 10:15:07 PM
They may have been removed and painted, but the photo says they were fitted first and then painted
Well at least on that car ;)
Sure looks like allot of addition effort if done on all cars for some unknown reason that couldn't wait until it was painted
Maybe something else will present itself to provide some additional insight
Quote from: J_Speegle on May 08, 2018, 10:50:31 PM
Quote from: Coralsnake on May 08, 2018, 10:15:07 PM
They may have been removed and painted, but the photo says they were fitted first and then painted
Well at least on that car ;)
Sure looks like allot of addition effort if done on all cars for some unknown reason that couldn't wait until it was painted
Maybe something else will present itself to provide some additional insight
The second car in the pic also, not just first one. The lead car is #231.
Quote from: 67_1183 on May 08, 2018, 10:57:08 PM
The second car in the pic also, not just first one. The lead car is #231.
Good catch and thanks - didn't notice the passenger headlight eyebrow.
Interesting that this is in the early part of the production year. Wonder if that has an impact on why they were installed
It's no secret that the early fiberglass on the '67's was poor quality and fitment.
A number of the early cars have yellow grease crayon on the back of the scoops, and tail end fiberglass with the car number, most I've seen or seen photos of were double-digit cars, and some owners have stated that their car had a part with the number from another car, usually one of the same color. It does seem as though fiberglass parts were fitted and adjusted to a car, marked and then painted and then final installation.
How long that lasted - ??? But that kind of stuff is probably why guys like Fred Goodell were brought in and revised (better) parts, methods of installation and suppliers implemented to see that all the extra production costs' came to an end.
Anthony (Road Reptile) has thought that early cars fiberglass parts were painted in small groups of the same color in the paint booth on saw horses (or something like that) - flat to answer the OP question. Not sure how long into the production run that may have lasted. As Bob and Jeff stated only the hoods and deck lids of the metal framed hoods and deck lids got body color on top and underside. The all fiberglass only on the top with over-spray showing to varying degrees on the undersides.
Quote from: J_Speegle on May 08, 2018, 11:09:28 PM
Interesting that this is in the early part of the production year. Wonder if that has an impact on why they were installed
It seems the two piece fronts were tried after these, based on VINs. Ongoing issues?
http://www.saacforum.com/index.php?topic=1552.15
Quote from: Coralsnake on May 08, 2018, 10:15:07 PM
They may have been removed and painted, but the photo says they were fitted first and then painted
I am in agreement that is why I stated as much in reply # 9 "I can only imagine that the nose might have been on the cars in the picture to test for pre fit."
Looking closer at the pic shows that the 1st, 2nd, 4th and 5th cars also have the (unpainted) nose piece installed. The second car has door stripes installed, none of the rest do.
Btw, the pic was also on the cover of a Shelby American. I do not remember which one.
I think an interesting aside here is that the flanges are pure black with no hint of green tint or fiberglass strands. After reading the two-part nose thread it appears that it's possible the side edges are made separately and then incorporated into the mold.
After trying my hand at fiberglass molding it's certainly one way to address flanges without intricate multi-part molds.
What happened is what happened back then BUT it seems that IF the cars were assembled anywhere near in Shelby # sequence, by 221, something should have been ironed out.
Is 221 actually job #1? They tended to hide those cars down in production like #100 being the first 500?
I'm almost suspecting that this picture is of the first 67's to "go down the line" and they discovered that there is just this "one little problem with the nose", i.e., "they don't fit right"? :o
I don't see where they were going to assemble these cars TWICE or fit the nose, then send it to the body shop, then wait for it to come back to install it? That makes no sense to me but heck, I'm bats nutz anyways? ;)
Dosn't make sense to install headlights into the nosepiece if they were going to remove it again for paint?
These are metal framed hoods - second car shows underside painted.
Pre-production line where they really figure out how to produce more than the one or two and see how everything really fits?
Quote from: 67350#1242 on May 09, 2018, 01:49:28 PM
Dosn't make sense to install headlights into the nosepiece if they were going to remove it again for paint?
The headlights can be installed and the nose added or removed. The headlights and mounting brackets do not attach to the nose.
Quote from: shelbydoug on May 09, 2018, 01:28:38 PM
What happened is what happened back then BUT it seems that IF the cars were assembled anywhere near in Shelby # sequence, by 221, something should have been ironed out.
Is 221 actually job #1? They tended to hide those cars down in production like #100 being the first 500?
I'm almost suspecting that this picture is of the first 67's to "go down the line" and they discovered that there is just this "one little problem with the nose", i.e., "they don't fit right"?
Yes, it seems there were a number of theory vs reality issues. Also, the cars in the photo were in the 200 Shelby VIN's so not the first cars. And yes they were not completed in strict numerical order.
Quote from: JD on May 09, 2018, 02:47:57 PM
Quote from: 67350#1242 on May 09, 2018, 01:49:28 PM
Dosn't make sense to install headlights into the nosepiece if they were going to remove it again for paint?
The headlights can be installed and the nose added or removed. The headlights and mounting brackets do not attach to the nose.
+1. It is harder to install after the nose is installed from my point of view.