Underhood core support and radiator seal

[Oregonjam]

I just read this topic: 1969 Under hood weather stripping and decals

I have a 1968 AC Camaro with 07D build date. The radiator support has factory stamped holes in the top and the seal is fastened with clips exactly as is shown in the 69 AIM. The Support has the end plates with staples as shwon is the 68 AIM to prevent air flow between the fender and core support opening. It is a blend between what I see in the 68 and the 69 AIMs. Does anyone else have an example of a late 68 with the same approach? I suspect that this would be a running change as the improvements were made for the soon to start production for 69. Any thoughts on this?

The only thing that is missing is the 3937127-8 (seal R. & L.H.). This I have never seen. Does anyone have an example of these self adhesived seals. I am mostly curious as to the material that was used.

Thanks for all your support,
John

Added: I just came across this thread:
http://camaros.org/forum/index.php?topic=1726.0;all

My example plays into what Phillip is suggesting and the examples of late 68s having core suports with holes for clips to be used on the seal for AC cars.

[lakeholme]

John
Please post a picture.
I've seen 69's and a few late 68's restored with the seals, by not any original 68's.
That would also answer the glue vs clips question that the 68 AIM raises.
THANKS!

[lakeholme]

That's "but not any original 68's"... My spell checker on my cell has a mind of its own!

[lakeholme]

The 68 AIM on C60, B3 says "Remove backing for installation" about seal 3937126 on the support.  That seems to imply some kind of adhesive.  But in the end we "concluded that never happened" in the other thread.  Does your 126 seal have any adhesive in addition to the clips???

Pic is off a restored 69.  No idea about the actual material.  It was a very dense foam. Owner said it was heat resistant and he got it a Lowes...

[Oregonjam]

Phillip,

Thanks for the info.  I'll shoot a few pics tonight. It does not have any adhesive but I will look closely to see if there is any residue. I'll shoot the overall, crosssection of seal and clip detail.

Thanks,
John

[noschevys]

Just a note on this.   I have the original core to hood seal for my 68 RSSS 350 AC car.  None of the repo's that I saw have the correct profile.  I contacted Mike Hinshaw at Metro Moulded Parts and sent him my original.  They are in the process of developing tooling to correctly make repo's from my original.  I have not seen them yet, but he said they will be available in late August.  Give MMP a call and ask Mike Hinshaw about them.

[Oregonjam]

noschevy,

I am interested in if the design of the seal was different between using adhesive and clips.

Can you uplaod a cross section pic of your example and your build date?
Does your seal use clips or adhesive?
Is your core support drilled, stamped or with out holes or dimples?

I am not in need of a core to hood seal but a lot of cars are missing it. I will have my pix re-sized and uploaded tomorrow but would like to compare them. My build date was 07D of 68 and the one installed is either the original or a service relacement that is over 25 years old as I have never had it off the core support.

Does anyone have an original example of the core support to radiator two part seal?

Thanks.
John

[Oregonjam]

CoreToHood1 - Clip installing seal to core, one on each end of seal.
CoreToHood2 - Clip installing seal to core along the rest of the length except ends
CoreToHood3 - Hood to seal end cross section

I do not see any adhesive residue under the seal.
Builds date is 07D, 1968, L48 with AC and auto trans.

Thanks,
John

[lakeholme]

John,
Thanks for the pictures.  This verifies what was the final conclusion is in the other thread.  I'll keep my eyes open for original 3937127-8 on a 68.

[Oregonjam]

Phillip,

No problem. I read through the otherthread that followed this in 2007. Good discussion.

I am curious if the clips were the same on the 1969 AC seal. Does any one have an example that they can confirm the type of clips used are the same as the below photos for late 68?

Thanks,
John