1967 Smooth Deluxe Seats original vs. good/ excellent repros

[Kent]

My 67 GT500 has the smooth deluxe seats ( I know this is rare) and I have 2 sets of seats here and I wonder if both are original because there are some differences. The left one is an original in my opinion but is the right one also correct or maybe a later ford part or just a good repro?

[Kent]

more pics left one should be original, right one is maybe newer (fomoco?) upholstery

[Bob Gaines]

I would love to help but can't open a HEIC file to view pictures.

[Kent]

I just uploaded them again. Thanks Bob.

[Bob Gaines]

more pics left one should be original, right one is maybe newer (fomoco?) upholstery

I agree with your opinion. Both look to be OEM because of the welting. The left vinyl grain looks more typically assemblyline to me.

[J_Speegle]

more pics left one should be original, right one is maybe newer (fomoco?) upholstery

Just as a point. Your original pictures of the metal tags are related/identified the frames and springs only. Workers at San Jose installed the upholstery at the car plant.

Dug out some additional close-ups for comparison. Red seemed to show detail better than some of the other colors. Both of you seats show that they have had plenty of use and age with the foam breaking down and things moving around a bit. Of course Ford didn't supply or make available any material after the initial runs which typically would last in the system 2 years or so but it would have been the same or one of the factory providers unlike other service parts that were made for decades.

As for the details, will leave it to you to compare since your there in person and can change angle and lighting at will.





Looking at other 67 Mustang deluxe and Shelby original seats it appears to me that either two providers trimmed the seat upholstery differently or the supplier changed during 67 production as to how the edges were trimmed and finished. Some of the key features are high lighted with same color arrows (yours above other examples below) to help the process. Bottom pictures are from other cars to show that both styles of trimming were used during the year.

One additional detail to take notice of is the seat tracks and the change from the carpet runners early verses later which may indicate that the drivers seat rails from a later built car or something else, over all these years. Possibly a nicer deluxe interior Mustang donor car since they are would be a lot more plentiful and they used the smooth inserts the whole year. Have not determined when the change in the seat tracks took place as of yet.

[Kent]

Thanks to Jeff and Bob, Jeff did you attached pictures as I cant see them. I also think one seat (right) is a earlier or very early and te right one is a later one. I do have both versions as a set. I also need to take a look under the seats of my GT500 67 as its a very late build.

[Bob Gaines]

Thanks to Jeff and Bob, Jeff did you attached pictures as I cant see them. I also think one seat (right) is a earlier or very early and te right one is a later one. I do have both versions as a set. I also need to take a look under the seats of my GT500 67 as its a very late build.

Kent, look at the seat tracks. If the upholstery has never been removed than the tracks that have the removable plates on the studs indicate the earliest version and the tracks that have the plates that are permanently fixed on the studs are the later indication.I t was a transition during the 67 Mustang production year.

[J_Speegle]

Jeff did you attached pictures as I cant see them. .........................

Hmm not sure why you can't see them. Anyone else can't see pictures in my post above or the example below.

Notice the early seat track guides #1, are curved on the forward edge, only installed at the two front mounting studs while the later #2, are flat and attached at all four studs. Hope you can see this picture

[Kent]

No I´m not able to see the pictures.

[J_Speegle]

No I´m not able to see the pictures.

Kent - PM me a good email address and I'll send them as attachments if you want.

Jeff

[J_Speegle]

Just to help the discussion and others who may have related questions.

It appears, by comparing findings on unrestored Mustangs & Shelby's that the change over took place around the first few weeks of 1967 at San Jose. The style (standard or deluxe) interior had nothing to do with the style or type of seat runners. Would provide a link to the page on CMF but we've eliminated non-member access/viewing due to all the data scrapping bot activity that has been plaguing all the sites recently 

Additional examples have been added as of a couple of days ago but none of them changed the earlier results. Hope this helps others.


So as of July 1, 2020 a survey of the subject and examples suggests that the change took place between the oldest (real build date) example with the individual plates (04C/May 4th ) and the earliest example with the integrated plates (11C/May 11th) 

[Bob Gaines]

There was a time in May and June of 67 when the deluxe comfort weave material was not available and the smooth vinyl was substituted. I have seen examples of this in a number of very late production 67 Shelby's that I have studied. In those late examples the seat runners would have of course been the style with the plates staked to the threaded studs. 

[J_Speegle]

There was a time in May and June of 67 when the deluxe comfort weave material was not available and the smooth vinyl was substituted. I have seen examples of this in a number of very late production 67 Shelby's that I have studied. In those late examples the seat runners would have of course been the style with the plates staked to the threaded studs. 

Agreed. If you have just seat and not the car info they came from it can be misleading. Dates on the material may be a good indicator but not something you would see without disassembling the seats. In any case can't use the material as an indicator, solely, of the production/use period alone.