68 Air Conditioning -Sealing

[lakeholme]

OK, Rod, I'm on the same page with you now...

"Yellow glue", I've learned, is actually a specific kind of glue in the glue business world.  But you were talking about weatherstrip adhesive.  (I didn't even know it came in yellow?!?)  I can undestand what you mean about not letting it show past the seal.  I had to work carefully and slowly (or at least as slow as drying adhesive will let you) to get a clean job with the black.

Note that Mark X22 says his has lasted a long time.  I'll have to wait and see on mine...

Any of you who were looking for 69 baffles, there's another post on CRG about them, and he may be looking to sell them...

[1968RSZ28]

If anyone is still looking for a pair of '69 a/c baffles, here is a used pair for sale complete with seals:

http://www.camaros.net/classifieds/showproduct.php?product=17261&cat=8

Paul

 

[lakeholme]

If anyone else has any experience with:
1. The glue not sticking well over a long period of time (and what kind of glue you used).
2. Where and what type of foam you bought to go between the radiator and the support (3937127/8).
I'd like to hear from you!

Thanks in advance.

[68L30]

I still don't buy into the glue concept.....How long did this take you to do this? Do you think GM would take that kind of time on the line? How do they keep the seal from shifting while it drys with people climbing all over it? It just doesn't sound logical.....There would be obvious glue residue everywhere on the radiator support..... I have never seen that before....only the clips and holes for mounting them....Just my opinion....


Steve

[bertfam]

Steve, Chevrolet didn't use glue. They used double sided tape and just peeled it off and stuck it on.

Ed

[lakeholme]

I still don't buy into the glue concept.....How long did this take you to do this? Do you think GM would take that kind of time on the line? How do they keep the seal from shifting while it drys with people climbing all over it? It just doesn't sound logical.....There would be obvious glue residue everywhere on the radiator support..... I have never seen that before....only the clips and holes for mounting them....Just my opinion....


Steve

Steve, I do appreciate your opinion.  You make some good points, and they explain part of why GM eventually went to clips.

But Ed is right. The original 68 seal was "taped" on.  The 68 AIM shows that... No clips. --See note 10 in the AIM page that Ed posted for us above.

The repo seals do not come with the tape (and they don't come with the holes for the clips or the clips) and a two sided tape that would hold under that heat is vitually impossible to find.  There are no clip holes in my support because clips were not used then --and yes, my car originally came with AC.  In an effort to find something that works well in the "pre-clip" time, some of us have turned to glue.  That would be closer to two sided tape than clips --in light of the documentation from the AIM.

Does your 68 have AC?  What's the build date?  If it doesn't have AC does it have dimples on the support?  If it does, I'd love to see a picture...

As to your questions:
1. About a minute... Granted not assembly line speed, but not bad without practice.  With the tape, it would have only taken seconds.
2. If the tape was anything like the glue, it's almost instantaneous.  I think your question applies to both; i.e., "How would the clips not get pulled out or holes torn with people climbing all over it?"
3. If you will look at my picture above, you will see no residue. It's a single bead of glue under the seal, just like the tape would have been.

[68L30]

I’m sorry if I sound argumentive..but I really do have a theroy as to why the seal was never put on with an adheisive or glue from the FACTORY…I can speak  my thoughts a lot better than I can type…LOL.. Please bear with me…

1.   After looking at my copy of the AIM ….I noticed the date of the drawing to be 11-3-67..a few months after the production srtart of 68…released 11-7.This document clearly shows the  3937128 seal using the backing.If using these dates, two months of production clearly did not use the seals at all.

2.   The TSB I quoted earlier states “ Special under hood sealing at the radiator support to improve air displacement has been released for  PRODUCTION ( effective 6-19-68) AND FOR SERVICE…

3.   Why would point number two (the TSB) be needed  IF the procedure in the AIM been started somewhere close to the dates shown?

4.   My theroy is…..They were not used untill approx 6-19-68…Then they (factory) used holes and clips for the mounting of the seal. The use of the adheisive was  used as as service only fix ,for cars with excessive compressor head pressures per the TSB .

5.   Did your car have the side baffles? If the answer is yes….are they stapled on or do they use # 8x 1/2  sheet metal screws? The factory would have used the staples….the service replacement would have used the screws per the TSB…Does your car have the piercings for the  installation of the baffle 5/16 bolts on the core support?J-nuts or regular nuts?
 
6.   Again all I have ever notice is the core support with the mounting holes…I have never personaly looked  at  one that used the adheisive backing. The question is …How would I know if I did if the seal was missing? Adheisive remains? I guess it is impossible to know for sure after a car has been restored  and not documented..I would not use the after market seal as a guide.The seal from what I recall has a slight difference from the factory seal…Like most repro parts they came close.Why were the clips never offered in repro ? That’s easy they were never listed in the AIM….

7.   As for the AIM….I never read it as gospel.It is a great tool to assemble your Camaro…BUT.. I have noticed errors in the book before as well as updates. I have been in manufacturing quality control for 20 years and have learned that prints and documents are not updated and revised like we all would like them to be.

8.   Yes my car has A/C….It is a O7E car with a VIN of 4808**…My car does have the holes and clips in the core support. My car also has the side baffles with seals that are stapled on.I have also reproduced the correct 6550133 compressor decal that is correct for 68…Most use the incorrect decals offered by the repro  vendors….

9.   I will post pics  of my core support later…..   


Steve   

         

[68L30]

After going back and reading this discussion again.....I noticed your car didn't receive the side baffles either.This makes sense with my theroy....A 12D car did not get seals of any kind. It's falls early in production in 68... if you go by the first AIM release of approx 11-7....And way too early for the June 19 dated TSB...If anything... a complete service retro fit of these components is possible. Due you have your  orig compressor decal? If yes is there a white paint dot next to the shift numer on the decal? If yes, your unit was in for O- ring  seal service on the a/c system....Updates to the other seals may have been performed at that time......


Steve       

[lakeholme]

Steve,

Don't see your discussion as negative at all.  That's what we're here for...

You're taking an interesting read on the AIM, etc.  It's different from everything else I have heard.  Where you really get my attention is the baffles.  I've wondered about that part of the evidence from the start.

I'm going to try an get Ed or someone from CRG in on this...

[JohnZ]

1.   After looking at my copy of the AIM ….I noticed the date of the drawing to be 11-3-67..a few months after the production srtart of 68…released 11-7.This document clearly shows the  3937128 seal using the backing.If using these dates, two months of production clearly did not use the seals at all.

2.   The TSB I quoted earlier states “ Special under hood sealing at the radiator support to improve air displacement has been released for  PRODUCTION ( effective 6-19-68) AND FOR SERVICE…

3.   Why would point number two (the TSB) be needed  IF the procedure in the AIM been started somewhere close to the dates shown?

4.   My theroy is…..They were not used untill approx 6-19-68…Then they (factory) used holes and clips for the mounting of the seal. The use of the adheisive was  used as as service only fix ,for cars with excessive compressor head pressures per the TSB .

I'll add this - the release date on an A.I.M. sheet, especially as a running change during the model year, has little relationship to when a given part actually entered production; it only indicates when the drafting room released the sheet, which was created as a result of an engineer submitting an ECR (Engineering Change Request) to Drafting.

The incorporation date of a new part was handled in a different system, by an NPC (Notice of Production Change), which instructed the plant to introduce a part change, disposition of cancelled parts (if any), and to report the VIN number of the first car produced with the change incorporated. The date a change was effective (as reported by the plant in response to an NPC) was always noted in a TSB (sometimes the VIN of the first car with the change was also included), like the 6-19-68 date noted in this TSB.

Having worked in that system for many years, I'd conclude that the change went into production on 6-19-68; the 11-7 A.I.M. sheet simply indicated Engineering intent at that point in time (which changed later to holes and clips instead of 2-sided tape).

[lakeholme]

Having worked in that system for many years, I'd conclude that the change went into production on 6-19-68; the 11-7 A.I.M. sheet simply indicated Engineering intent at that point in time (which changed later to holes and clips instead of 2-sided tape).

Thanks for the clarification, John.

[68L30]

Having worked in that system for many years, I'd conclude that the change went into production on 6-19-68; the 11-7 A.I.M. sheet simply indicated Engineering intent at that point in time (which changed later to holes and clips instead of 2-sided tape).

Thanks for the clarification, John.

I read this as......tape never made production......Correct? 


Steve   

[JohnZ]

[/quote]



I read this as......tape never made production......Correct? 


Steve   
[/quote]

No way to know if it did or not without seeing the NPC, and they were informal internal documents, never published; in this situation, the only evidence would be an untouched known-original car.

[68L30]

I read this as......tape never made production......Correct? 


Steve   
[/quote]

No way to know if it did or not without seeing the NPC, and they were informal internal documents, never published; in this situation, the only evidence would be an untouched known-original car.
[/quote]


I'll buy that.....Time to start digging for early unrestored 68's with a/c.......The trouble is... most have already been screwed up! I've owned my 68 for 23 years and have been heavy into 68's ever since..........Very tough to find orig optioned cars...even harder to find correct ones....I hate all these cookie cutter restos that copy each other...How about restoring exactly what you have found on a particular car.......JMHO...


Steve 

[lakeholme]

I read this as......tape never made production......Correct? 

...Time to start digging for early unrestored 68's with a/c....... 

No...

Yes...

I've already checked with a couple of folks who have data on 68s with AC, but no one seems to have enough data to make a determination. I can find a few examples of seals and a few of no seals, but most say don't know --and all are hard to document. It strikes me as John says, "No way to know..."  I'm not prepared to so easily dismiss the AIM.  The lag time between 11-3-67 and 6-19-68 seems hard to qualify and could only point to the decission to switch to clips.

Like Steve says they may be hard to find, but...
I'd really like to hear from others --with documented, original 68s with AC.