Rich Yanulis

Interesting.......

I just looked at my car.
The gap is quite similar to the photo you posted.

MikeM

US cars and trucks of the '60's were not designed to have a consistent, car/car closure panel fit. They were designed in such a way that there would be lot's of variation.

For example, I worked on one vehicle that had margin specs of 6 mil +/- .75 mil. The actual assembly process yielded +/- 2.0 mil or actual margins between 4 mil and 8 mil. When the variation got that wild, the product had to be repaired on line some way. Bending, shimming elongating holes, etc., whatever was required.

Panel flushness was 0, +/- .5 mil but actual ranges would would be +/- 2 mils. Same process as above to fix it.

I won't go into the reasons why that happened but suffice to say, all the parts could be to print but the final product yielded terrible results sometimes.

It wasn't until we started using SPC charts to log and illustrate the fact that the design given us did not meet customer expectations that things changed. That's why today, everything looks great. Constant, even margin and flush panel fits and they all look alike.

The UAW slugs used to get credit for the poor fits but in reality, it wasn't them, it was the poor design which was cheap to design, build, and if anything went wrong, they could blame the assembly plants.

If John was able, I'm sure he'd give an amen to this description of what things used to be like in the plants.

RatDog

Thanks, Mike! That's good stuff I never knew.


Overall, the seams on my '67 are pretty good. However, when I park it next to my wife's '12 GS, the difference is astounding. I'd call the GS seams and panel fit as close to perfection as a human can get. Actually, same thing with our '14 Honda CRV grocery getter.


Even though my '67 looks pretty good, if I was buying a new car (of any kind), with those kind of seams and panel fits, I wouldn't accept it.


So, I guess we're spoiled by the fit and finish on new cars and feel our old cars should be that way, too, even if they were never that way to begin with.


Thanks,
Steve

MikeM

I just knew I shouldn't have looked!

The left side door/fender margin on my '63 is about 1.5 mil at the top, chanigne to 1 mil at the peak and varying between 1-2 mil down to the rocker. I always thought that was way too tight but it is what it is.

The right side is about 4 mil at the top (point of discussion) and within GM spec. It continues to vary from 3-4.5 mils all the way to the rocker.

I will never be able to sleep tonight!

65hihp

rest easy.
that variation is just perfect!

Frankie the Fink

Steve as far as metal bodied 60s cars it varied. Look at a factory 65/66 Mustang at the headlight buckets or the rear edge of the trunk. The fit range was from "totally appalling" to "almost doesn't suck" and that's about as good as it got.

Lola T70

I bought my 65 about four months ago and I noticed bodywork repairs, didn't matter to me as long as the car was straight. After all it is a 50 plus year old car and has history. I plan on driving mine regularly so those flaws weren't as important. I've worked the Amelia Island Concours every year since its inception and have seen plenty of those perfect cars.. They're cool, but just don't interest me as they are now art pieces and no longer cars. Just my opinion, but if the car is to be seriously driven what difference does it make other than resale or the show field.

Frankie the Fink

I have no doubt.

The well-known FUBAR with the coupe roof engineering dimensions resulted in a lot of work for the line guys without question. Fitting the upper door frames, 'reefing' the doors into submission and grinding/filling when needed...

I always look at 63 coupe doors when I find them open to spot that 'crinkle' where the factory guy pulled the top of the door frame in to get things looking decent...

65hihp

My thinking is this: When I am looking to buy a vette, if I see that the body is nice and virgin in all the hidden places, I know that car still has UAW built integrity. There are no horror stories hidden underneath the shiney paint. Horror stories keep me awake at night, and I need my sleep. When I can own an old vette still wearing it's original paint, I really sleep well.

SW Vette

Not me - if I had your 64 fuelie in my garage I'd be either rubbin on it or drivin it 24/7

rponfick

To me the question would have to be how hard the car was hit. If it got to the frame, it would be a large factor for me. If it was just fiberglass, I can handle that.
Ralph

65hihp

LMAO- ROFL- LOL

leif.anderson93

Steve,
That's because a "human" didn't build your GS, a computer controlled robot did. Laser cut panels put together by computer controlled robots do the same precise thing time after time. "Fit and Finish" wasn't even in the American lexicon back when these cars were built. As a matter of fact, they only got worse going into the '70s and '80s. IMO, it's nothing short of a miracle that the U.S. automobile industry survived this time period. They just knew that whatever they built the American public would by...and we did because we didn't know any better. Once, the Germans (and the Japanese) started showing the American public what "fit and finish" looked like, it forced the American manufactures to start building a more quality product. Some of the most hideous designs were the '73 & '74 model automobiles when the Feds dictated 5MPH bumpers. The designers had no idea how to integrate that into their design. If you want to see horrible "fit and finish", just take a look at any automobile from that era.

vettebuyer6369

While I would prefer a completely original and virgin body on my car and wouldn't argue that this would be the optimum in value, fact is these cars are over 50 years old.

When I met the guy who bought my 63 originally, he told me it wasn't "unhit" because he knows it was bumped in the rear once driving in the snow during a St Louis winter in 1965. Apparently it was just a car then.

Oh, well.