'64 Body Mounts

[Dale M.]

I am questioning any variances in the 2 inner body mounts of the cross member by the rear of the seats. I observed a '64 that has 2 body mounts near the center that connects the body to this cross member. On my car, an AO Smith, March 16, 1964 build date, it only has a strap connecting to brackets at this point. This strap connects under a lip on the cross member. Picture attached.

[Gene M.]

Re: '64 Body Mounts

Dale, your car is not original in this area as noted by finishes, hardware and assembly. It would be concluded there are other changes made. Your photo shows the seat belt reinforcement brace not the body mount.

[Dale M.]

Re: '64 Body Mounts

Gene, This car is not original, it had a replacement frame installed many years ago. I had just discovered the discrepency in these body mounts. I don't believe this cable under the cross member was used until 1965. I am wanting to confirm when this cahnge became effective. Thanks for your input.

[Gene M.]

Re: '64 Body Mounts

Dale, the two piece rear e brake cable as far as I know is the sams as a mid build 64 and continues into 65 on cars with the disc brake delete (drum brake cars). I do not have any experience with earlier 64 build cars. But I can tell you the cable does run under the rear x member on mid build 64 into 65 as you photo showes. The LH cable is shorter than the RH. Your cable saddle bracket at thread adjustment is up side down.

[Duke W.]

Re: '64 Body Mounts

Those are not actually body mounts. They are seat belt anchors. The configuration changed over the years and was generally improved. The various year AIMs show the details and allow you to trace the changes, some of which may have required small modifications to the frame as the model years passed.

Duke

[Doug L.]

Re: '64 Body Mounts

Here is a view of what I think you are looking for. This is a December '63 car. The zinc chromate plates shown in your photo are riveted to the body and as stated above are seat belt anchors, not body mounts. The 2 brackets shown in the attached photo will receive a rubber donut and washers (as I recall) between the mounts and the body.
Doug

[Alan D.]

Re: '64 Body Mounts

These may help a little. From a Mar64 car. Sorry the photo's are not very sharp however car is not where I can get more pictures. (note the green (for AO) & black rectangle plates are typically only riveted on the inboard side and not on the outboard sides, I assumed that the factory works could hold the outside plates. I have seen the lack of rivets on 5-6 original 64 cars. The drive shaft should be covered with black out and just noticed one of the seat bolts is to long.)

[Duke W.]

Re: '64 Body Mounts

Here is a view of what I think you are looking for. This is a December '63 car. The zinc chromate plates shown in your photo are riveted to the body and as stated above are seat belt anchors, not body mounts. The 2 brackets shown in the attached photo will receive a rubber donut and washers (as I recall) between the mounts and the body.
Doug

It's interesting that on '63 models, the inboard seat belt mount was reinforced to the frame, but there was no outboard seat belt mount reinforcement on the seat belt mounting bracket that was just riveted to the floor pan.

Of course, in that era crash testing was not done, so there was probably little engineering analysis that went into the seat belt anchor design and, very likely, no formalized testing. In later C2 years cable reinforcements to the frame were added to the outboard mounts, and I think something similar was used on the inboard side rather than the frame bracket and rubber cushion.

The first model year for federally mandated crash testing was 1968.

Duke

[Dale M.]

Re: '64 Body Mounts

Alan, and others, thanks. I can see your pictures just fine. I have a March car as well. But I did state that someone about 10 years ago redid the frame. I am trying to confirm when this design changed. I believe that my confiruration may me a 65. I have an AO Smith car, therefore the zinc chromate green primer. These reinforcements are the seat belt brackets, but as in you picture they connect to the cross member with rubber wahsers and bolts just like the body mounts. It seem to be duel purpose and surely does reinforce the seat belt fasterner at these points. If it was for the seat belts, then it would have been cheaper to use the cable like in my car instead of the angle bracket on the frame and the rubber washers bults, nuts, ect. I have a picture of a December '63 car, it looks like yours, except this is an original with rust. ElysDec63.JPG

[Dale M.]

Re: '64 Body Mounts

Gene, I am not talking about the e brake cable. I have a second cable that runs under the x-member, The cable is black and does not show up very well on my picture. Sorry to confuse you. I have brackets on the seat belt reinforcements bolt coming straight down that have a cable through them and connect under the x-member. My cross member has a lip to hold this cable. Thanks

[Alan D.]

Re: '64 Body Mounts

Dale suspect your arrangement is incorrect . . .

The 64AIM S1bolt & weld sheetB2.00 shows the inboard support, 3832537-8, that was the same pn used for 63, with a change date of 5-11-64 for the outboard supports, 3864683-4.
Now S1 assembly sheet C17.00 with last change date of 9-19-63 seems to show just a bolt, 3797466, (same for all 4 attachments). A great many of the changes made to 64 cars appear to have happen in April from the limited samples I have seen.

So I would try to find out just what the 65AIM shows us, sorry I do not have one.

[Gene M.]

Re: '64 Body Mounts

Dale, your frame is not 64, appears to be 65, maybe 66. The seat belt cable clamped to the frame on x member and fastened by nut to the seat belt brace on both ends started in 65 build.

You have incorrect finishes even for an AO Smith car. The seat belt reinforcements (4) s/b plated finish. The rear seat anchor plates (4) s/b natural. The green zinc chromate was used on the front seat brace (2) and the front shield toe braces (2) rivited on tub floor pan by AO Smith (not in your photo).

[Dale M.]

Re: '64 Body Mounts

Alan, thanks. I have my '64 AIM, but I will look for a '65. What is really giving me a difficult itme is the View A on the D115 sheet 2.00, "No. 3 & 4 Body Mounting & Inbord Mounting". This View A looks like a corner bracket between the X-member and the frame. I understood that this reinforcement did not happen until '65. When I looked at another '64, it has an Angle bracket welded to the x-member for the inboard support. This does not look like the diagram in the AIM.

On B2.00 where you referenced pn 3832537-8, these seat belts reinforcement plates are the same in both configurations. On my car this bracket is holding a cable that connects under the cross member, while the other '64 has rubber cusions, shims, etc. and connects to an angle bracket welded to the frame. I wante to find the date for this design change. I will check around my local for a '65 AIM. Thanks for your reply, great information.

[Dale M.]

Re: '64 Body Mounts

Gene, thanks. I am learning all the time. I did not know the differences and assume since the other AO Smith were zinc chromate, that these we also. This car started with a lot of undercarriage rust. I understand the frame had a large hole just before the kick-up and was sagging a lot. Someone must have replaced the frame. The seat belt brackets were very rusted and I replaced them. I need to restore the outside seat belt brackets, but did not want to remove the body just for that. With the later model fram and the reinforcement between the frame and this cross member, I have no room. I appreciate your help.