Are we sure the 69 wiper arms were plated and not painted?

[Michael L.]

Guys,

Are we sure the 69 wiper arms were plated and not painted? I have attached some photos of my wiper arms from my Sept 69 built coupe. These include photos that show where the paint has flaked off, as well as the reaction to the paint to paint remover I applied. I have read in the TIMJG and on the forum in a post just a couple of days ago that the wiper arms were plated black. As you can see in one of the photos, my arms have the correct markings on the underside of them, and the wiper blade holders are marked with the Trico Made in USA marking as described in the JG although I didn't include a pic of these since it can't be seen in the photos. This is a very original car and no reason to believe that these arms have been replaced. Not sure you can see it in the photos but the washer tubing attached to the wiper arm is not painted black like the arms were and does have the slightly brownish black plating that the JG says it should. I do not believe it possible that these arms were painted by a prior owner because it seems impossible that the tubing would have not have been painted. There is no paint on the attaching bracket/rivet for the tubing either, indicating that the tubing was attached after the painting was done. As a final point, most plating techniques (with the possible exception of chrome) do not yield the same kind of weather and rust resistance that paint does, so it just seems unlikely to me that GM would select a plating technique for something as exposed as the wiper arms. What do you think?

Mike

[Terry M.]

Re: Are we sure the 69 wiper arms were plated and not painted?

Guys,

Are we sure the 69 wiper arms were plated and not painted? I have attached some photos of my wiper arms from my Sept 69 built coupe. These include photos that show where the paint has flaked off, as well as the reaction to the paint to paint remover I applied. I have read in the TIMJG and on the forum in a post just a couple of days ago that the wiper arms were plated black. As you can see in one of the photos, my arms have the correct markings on the underside of them, and the wiper blade holders are marked with the Trico Made in USA marking as described in the JG although I didn't include a pic of these since it can't be seen in the photos. This is a very original car and no reason to believe that these arms have been replaced. Not sure you can see it in the photos but the washer tubing attached to the wiper arm is not painted black like the arms were and does have the slightly brownish black plating that the JG says it should. I do not believe it possible that these arms were painted by a prior owner because it seems impossible that the tubing would have not have been painted. There is no paint on the attaching bracket/rivet for the tubing either, indicating that the tubing was attached after the painting was done. As a final point, most plating techniques (with the possible exception of chrome) do not yield the same kind of weather and rust resistance that paint does, so it just seems unlikely to me that GM would select a plating technique for something as exposed as the wiper arms. What do you think?

Mike

Mike,
I don't think much of anything -- I just read the print. There are three or four different types of plating on the arms and washer tubes because each is a different material.

[Harmon C.]

Re: Are we sure the 69 wiper arms were plated and not painted?

I have removed the finish from lots of wiper arms and most I think were painted but some have a finish that seems like plating to me. The tubes finish was not black more of a brown finish on most tubing lines.

[Joe R.]

Re: Are we sure the 69 wiper arms were plated and not painted?

I'm just going to have to jump in here but first I know nothing about C-3 and want to learn less. But opinions are like (you know).

The arms shown in the pics are painted black and it's my opinion (again) that these were painted by some individual who owned the car in the past. Arms made by Trico were plated when delivered to GM. Several different processes since they had at least three different metals on each arm.

Again, it's my humble opinion that Trico never painted any arms black with any kind of paint. They were plated and not plated black.

JR

[Joe L.]

Re: Are we sure the 69 wiper arms were plated and not painted?

I'm just going to have to jump in here but first I know nothing about C-3 and want to learn less. But opinions are like (you know).

The arms shown in the pics are painted black and it's my opinion (again) that these were painted by some individual who owned the car in the past. Arms made by Trico were plated when delivered to GM. Several different processes since they had at least three different metals on each arm.

Again, it's my humble opinion that Trico never painted any arms black with any kind of paint. They were plated and not plated black.

JR

JR-------

Then, what was the original finish of these arms? Under the paint these arms appear to be bare metal. So, were these arms originally bare metal? Did someone remove the original finish perfectly and completely before painting the arms? Were these some sort of SERVICE arms that someone painted (even though no SERVICE arms were ever supplied in bare metal)? I HIGHLY doubt any of these possibilities.

[Joe R.]

Re: Are we sure the 69 wiper arms were plated and not painted?

Joe,

Are the arms on your C-3 Black?

What are they?

JR

[Edward J.]

Re: Are we sure the 69 wiper arms were plated and not painted?

Mike, I have a 72 when I restored the car I noted that the arms and nozzles had plating that had a greenish hue, Not to say that the at some point maybe the plating process started.

[Joe L.]

Re: Are we sure the 69 wiper arms were plated and not painted?

Joe,

Are the arms on your C-3 Black?

What are they?

JR

JR-------


Well, right now I don't have vacuum or electrical power in the car. However, based upon my recollection and what I can see by manually opening the door, the arms appear to be painted black. I don't think the washer tubes are painted but are otherwise finished, possibly a phosphate finish. I just don't recall regarding the blades. I do know, for sure though, that the blades including the insert rubbers are original to the car; I've never changed them in the 48 years I've owned the car since new.

[Russ S.]

Re: Are we sure the 69 wiper arms were plated and not painted?

The original arms on all three of my 73s and 74 are a black plating.

[Joe L.]

Re: Are we sure the 69 wiper arms were plated and not painted?

The original arms on all three of my 73s and 74 are a black plating.

Russ-----


1969 through 1974 did use the same part numbered arms. However, it's very possible that finishes changed over the years without a change in part number. In fact, it's even possible that finishes varied even within a particular model year. It could be that the GM specs for the parts allowed alternate finishes.

[Bill S.]

Re: Are we sure the 69 wiper arms were plated and not painted?

Russ-----


1969 through 1974 did use the same part numbered arms. However, it's very possible that finishes changed over the years without a change in part number. In fact, it's even possible that finishes varied even within a particular model year. It could be that the GM specs for the parts allowed alternate finishes.

Or different vendors who had the option to paint or plate the arms. Could be both finishes are "correct"

[Michael L.]

Re: Are we sure the 69 wiper arms were plated and not painted?

Again there is little doubt in my mind that the arms are original to my car and were not simply painted by a prior owner. The arms are clearly painted and were NEVER plated as evidenced by the perfect appearance of the metal once the paint was removed. The arms and blade holders are marked as originals. The WSW tubing IS plated (with the grayish/brown that has been mentioned) and there is not a trace of paint on the tube or the attaching clip/rivet. No driveway mechanic would have taped off those things so perfectly to eliminate even a trace of overspray. I'm going to refinish these with black satin paint and will print these pictures to bring with me when I have the car judged. From Lyle's observation above and what others have wrote I'm betting early in C3 production, at the minimum, at least some of these cars had wiper arms that were painted like mine are.

Mike

[Joe L.]

Re: Are we sure the 69 wiper arms were plated and not painted?

Again there is little doubt in my mind that the arms are original to my car and were not simply painted by a prior owner. The arms are clearly painted and were NEVER plated as evidenced by the perfect appearance of the metal once the paint was removed. The arms and blade holders are marked as originals. The WSW tubing IS plated (with the grayish/brown that has been mentioned) and there is not a trace of paint on the tube or the attaching clip/rivet. No driveway mechanic would have taped off those things so perfectly to eliminate even a trace of overspray. I'm going to refinish these with black satin paint and will print these pictures to bring with me when I have the car judged. From Lyle's observation above and what others have wrote I'm betting early in C3 production, at the minimum, at least some of these cars had wiper arms that were painted like mine are.

Mike

Mike------


I have no doubt that yours are original.