The 62 judging manual indicates that the glove box door of the seat separator should have six phillips head screws. The middle screw was installed before the door was painted to hold the door to the hinge. The bottom and top screw on each side was added later after painting to hold the stainless trim on the door. The 62 AIM shows different part numbers for the middle and top and bottom screw. Page 222 of Noland Adams book clearly shows a 60 glove box door with a clutch head screw in the middle position. Corvette Central includes a diagram with their glove box screw set that shows a clutch head screw in the middle position. Is the 62 judging manual correct? If so what documentation supports six phillips screws? Are there documented original 62s that support the six phillips head screw statement in spite of evidence to the contrary?
62 Seat Separator
Collapse
X
-
Re: 62 Seat Separator
The 62 judging manual is correct. We've documented several hundred cars that I know of from #311 to 14530 with that configuration. 60's used clutch heads in many spots that 62's used phillips head screws, and this is another of them. It always scares me when someone references a vendor catalog as a possible documentation source. Their desire is to sell you parts, not help you document your car. Those who have participated in judging manuals have as their agenda to provide the best guide possible, period.- Top
-
Re: 62 Seat Separator
If you are aware of hundreds of examples with phillips screws I accept your view. I doubt Corvette Central cares if the kit includes six phillips screws or four plus two clutch head. They will sell the kit either way. Since all of the available evidence, including the NCRS archives, Nolands book, the AIM manual and the CC kit indicates a variance from the judging manual I wanted clarification.- Top
Comment
-
Re: 62 Seat Separator
Greg, suspect the vendors just carry the same package compartment screw set configuration from 56 through 62. Where as some of the years such as 62 were different. In alot of cases the vendors have had these errors pointed out to them. They repro lots of parts. Some of the parts are 90% correct. The cost of tooling for making a particular part 100% correct is out of site and often unattainable. Particularly for a $25 part. But the vendors will refer to said parts as 100% correct. Go figure. JMTCW, Gary....NCRS Texas Chapter
https://www.ncrstexas.org/
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61565408483631- Top
Comment
Comment