Trunk Lid Rubber Bumpers

[jeff68]

What are the correct trunk lid rubber bumpers for a 68 Camaro?  I have pictures of my original trunk lid from when my car was taken apart, and it appears to show bumpers that are about the same size as the current reproductions.  However, it is my understanding that part number 4721222 is the correct rubber bumper, which is a fairly small diameter with a domed head. 
Check out this e-bay auction for a pic of the 4721222 bumpers:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/NOS-67-68-69-CAMARO-TRUNK-LID-BUMPERS-Z-28-L78-COPO-L89-/130440403994?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item1e5eda9c1a

Now, what's strange is that these genuine GM bumpers are still available through vintageparts.com for about $20 for a pack of 5.  Why did the last set sell for over $180 on e-bay?? 

Anyhow, I was able to pick up a few sets of NOS 4721222 bumpers from HBC for fairly cheap.  I was just wondering if these are indeed correct for my 68 or should I use the larger diameter reproductions?

[x77-69z28]

i will have to look through my parts, but i believe the number is the same, but the bumpers are a newer design and thicker.

[68camaroz28]

i will have to look through my parts, but i believe the number is the same, but the bumpers are a newer design and thicker.

The part # did stay the same but there are differences compared to the ebay site Jeff noted. By the way, they are up to a $100 with an hour and half to go. I have some GM bagged 4721222's which were purchased in the mid to late 80's and they must have made a e/c (eng. change) as again they are different. But the individual bagged 4721222's are still about 20-25% thinner than some other non bagged ones I believe were purchased in bulk from GM in the 90's. Never bought any repro's so do not have anything to compare to.

[GaryL]

The ones Vintage Parts has are correct. I bought them and they work perfectly. The ones in the ebay auction are too thick.

[Dave69x33]

Wow...$124.50 for correct trunk bumpers, but this is the kind of detail needed if you are restoring a desirable numbers matching car, and striving for near perfect 1000 point car.  Attached is a picture of these same bumpers I took on a friend's survivor '69 Pace Car located in my area. 

The repro bumpers are too thick as mentioned in this thread, and this seller also shows on the eBay ad.

[68camaroz28]

Not too sure I would say correct as it might depend on what year you have. Example, friend of mine has a 68 Z/28 survivor that has been off the road since 1974 and other than a few things like the smog off, etc. it is as it came from the factory. This is the bumper that is on his deck lid.


I have rubber bumpers purchased in what I believe was the mid to late 80's and each one is individually bagged. They have the part # embossed and one of those matches exactly to the diameter and thickness of what is on the 68 survivor. We can even feel what seems to be the remnants of a part #. This is that bumper:


Now a picture of the individual bagged GM bumper compared to I believe bulk ones I purchased in the in the 90's. Much thicker and bottom shape different.


Now add in what was advertised on ebay as correct and having two friends who have 69 Camaros with the smaller ebay type bumper and the picture becomes cloudy. The one on ebay compared to the other two is a smaller diameter, and thinner yet.

[GaryL]

Not too sure I would say correct as it might depend on what year you have. Example, friend of mine has a 68 Z/28 survivor that has been off the road since 1974 and other than a few things like the smog off, etc. it is as it came from the factory. This is the bumper that is on his deck lid.


I have rubber bumpers purchased in what I believe was the mid to late 80's and each one is individually bagged. They have the part # embossed and one of those matches exactly to the diameter and thickness of what is on the 68 survivor. We can even feel what seems to be the remnants of a part #. This is that bumper:


......

I believe you have the correct bumpers, the one that Vintage Parts now sells. They look like the old crusty ones I took off.

[My68SS]

I believe you have the correct bumpers, the one that Vintage Parts now sells. They look like the old crusty ones I took off.

Got a link to Vintage parts?

[L78 steve]

When I purchased my 69 some time ago the bumpers were missing. I installed the type in the center and the trunk would not latch,too thick. Did not know the small domed type existed until now.

[jeff68]

Vintage Parts = www.vpartsinc.com

Interesting information from everyone.  So it looks like the 69 trunk bumpers are usually the small domed ones while my 68 would take the larger diameter slightly thicker ones.

[big iron]

Would the 67 and 68 be the same? I cannot research the number as my 69 P&A only goes to 9.990, the rest is missing.
Bob

[jeff68]

I believe you have the correct bumpers, the one that Vintage Parts now sells. They look like the old crusty ones I took off.

Gary - Sent you a PM about getting the bumpers from Vintage Parts.  You can post the reply here if you want, as others may be interested in how the bumpers are packaged.

[L78 steve]

Vintage parts shows they have 299 of the 4721222 but picture. No telling which version they have.

[jeff68]

No telling which version they have.

I believe that GaryL is telling us what version they have (assuming that he recently purchased them from Vintage Parts).

[My68SS]

Would the 67 and 68 be the same? I cannot research the number as my 69 P&A only goes to 9.990, the rest is missing.
Bob

According to April 1970 PnA, 4721222 is applicable to 67 - 69 Camaro [also chevy, chevelle and passenger ex. st. wagons]