When the front fender bolt was removed and replaced by the Hood Bumper Assembly C4ZB-16763 (for the hood pins) should there be bolt washer witness marks in the fender paint, or was this bolt left out during fender assembly along the line? If the bolt remained could this bolt have been used by SA for the Monte Carlo bar?
Quote from: kram350 on March 04, 2018, 01:21:48 PM
When the front fender bolt was removed and replaced by the Hood Bumper Assembly C4ZB-16763 (for the hood pins) should there be bolt washer witness marks in the fender paint, or was this bolt left out during fender assembly along the line?
Bolt was installed like it was on any Mustang so it left marks in the paint around the attachment point
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/9/6-040318175612.jpeg)
The second question will require some time to compare unrestored bolt head markings for the best answer. Think I would also word the question to ask if they "did" not "could" they ;)
Quote from: kram350 on March 04, 2018, 01:21:48 PM
When the front fender bolt was removed and replaced by the Hood Bumper Assembly C4ZB-16763 (for the hood pins) should there be bolt washer witness marks in the fender paint, or was this bolt left out during fender assembly along the line? If the bolt remained could this bolt have been used by SA for the Monte Carlo bar?
While Jeff is sorting through his thousands of pictures I thought I would add to the discussion . Forget that the serrated second bolt is what we typically see. Given that the 65 Monte Carlo bars had a star bolt and a serrated SEMS bolt(observations and historical photos)instead of two star bolts that would indicate a SA added that particular bolt rather then re using it from the fender . This is evidence since the fender bolts on a 65 were star washer bolts. The regular production 66's (non carry over) used the serrated flat washer bolt in the fender. A variety of different makers marked fender bolts were used over the course of 66 Mustang production at SJ. The most common observed second bolt on the Monte Carlo bar in 66 is a SEMS marked serrated bolt . So if a SEMS marked bolt ended up on a car that had one of the other maker marked bolts in the fender that would indicate in that case that the bolt taken out of the fender was discarded in favor of a SA supplied bolt. I motion to convict. :D
I asked "could" because it seems like a lot of bolts would be discarded and there are always forum questions as to what Monte Carlo bolt is correct? One would think; remove fender bolts, remove and install bumpers, install bar with bolts just removed, drill hole for hood pins. Maybe the order of assembly did not allow for this sequence of events.
Would have been easier to focus on a narrower production period or a range of cars. Should have asked ::)
In any case looked at enough that I can report that very often it was easy to see that one or more of the Monte Carlo bar attachment bolts did not match either the inner (spring cover) bolts nor the fender bolts. This pattern was less obvious in earlier cars and late cars due to the bolts that were being found on unrestored examples.
Added a picture to my post above showing the witness marks or damage from the prior installation of the standard fender bolt at San Jose
Hope this helps
Thanks for the picture, car is 6S2072. Inner spring bolts are same as fender bolts, same as in the attached picture. I guess I will go with that bolt type in the bar. Thanks to all.
6S1348 original paint shows bolt pattern in paint.