When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
My 76 has dealer applied undercoating (Confirmed on the original dealer order / invoice). Its a garage kept 26k miles car.
What I am curious about is how sloppy were they? Looks like they sprayed undercoating all over everything. Which is good but even the tire carrier is covered.
Hi,
As I remember it the undercoating was seen as a way for the dealer to make a few extra $$ on the sale of the car.
At our local dealer the fellow who washed the car before delivery also did the undercoating.
Probably about $.79 a can.
Regards,
Alan
Hi,
As I remember it the undercoating was seen as a way for the dealer to make a few extra $$ on the sale of the car.
At our local dealer the fellow who washed the car before delivery also did the undercoating.
Probably about $.79 a can.
Regards,
Alan
As a young man I starting out at the Ford dealer before working in the body shop , I worked as a new car prep which got the new cars washed and ready for delivery so sometimes people would want the car undercoated and or rustproofed which was also my job at the time. The car was put up on the rack and the frame and floor sheet metal was undercoated using an undercoat gun that would draw the undercoat material from a 55 gallon drum . We would avoid getting undercoat on things like the exhaust system or things that did not rust like the plastic parts. The inside panels ( doors, trunk lid, and hoods ) were drilled if necessary to coat with a thinner rustproofing material and plugged with plastic plugs . It creates a problem now for someone that wants to restore those cars because some want to remove the undercoat and paint everything but it did protect the original metal . But now you have to go through the time consuming job of removing it .
I don't think I would go so far as saying you have paper work showing it "belongs there". Same could be said about a $10 charge for some "paint glaze" a dealer might have applied. My 76 was covered everywhere with undercoating and I have removed as much as possible. Sure did not help stop the floor pans from rusting out as I have recently replaced both sides. The wiper cowl area was full of undercoating for who knows why. Factory body seam sealer was intact under there so no good reason for it.
[QUOTE=Swiftrider08;1589014108]I don't think I would go so far as saying you have paper work showing it "belongs there".
I have the original dealer order from December 1975, noting the under coating and the delivery documents from March 1976 noting the undercoating. As I am the second owner with the original title showing the original March 1976 date and the date it was transferred to me there is a clear chain of custody. The original owner didn't add any and the car is 100% rust free. So I would say it's documented.
Seems someone could apply it now, claiming it was done when it was new (therefore justifying why it was reapplied during their restoration), to hide less then desirable trouble/rust areas.
As a potential buyer, I would be skeptical, as well as turned away completely.
Ugly stuff, practical at the time, I guess, but no thanks.
I don't mind it. Especially since I have the paperwork showing it belongs there.
Originally Posted by Swiftrider08
I don't think I would go so far as saying you have paper work showing it "belongs there".
I have the original dealer order from December 1975, noting the under coating and the delivery documents from March 1976 noting the undercoating........So I would say it's documented.
The undercoating was "dealer installed", not installed by GM at St. Louis. From a judging or collector standpoint, something that's been dealer installed, isn't something that "belongs there". The collector world prefers cars that are as built by the factory, not a dealer.
The documentation proves that the undercoating was done to the car at the time it was delivered. At least this indicates that it wasn't done by a previous owner, to hide damage, rust or other issues.
It's good that you were able to check and find that everything was solid underneath it. Undercoating never really did much to prolong the life of a car. It really was just a profit center for dealers, and if it offered any advantages, it was as a sound deadener, not a rust preventer. Undercoating was only applied to an outside surface, but frames tend to rust out due to water and dirt being trapped inside of them, and floors rust out from water leaking into the interior, and being held there by the carpet. Junk yards are full of rotted out undercoated cars.
I worked at a Chevy dealer while I was in high school in the mid-70's. The guy who did the undercoating got paid by the job, so he did it as fast as possible. Rather than removing the wheels as he was supposed to, he sprayed around them. It was sprayed on with a pneumatic sprayer from a drum. One of my jobs was to clean the undercoating overspray with tar remover after he was done. Some of the cars were a total mess. I hated having to use all that tar remover on new paint jobs.
So the same "judging" criteria applies to floor mats, passenger side mirror, luggage carrier, CB's , etc..
Yep, that's what I was referring too. Pretty much the same situation.
Just have a solid low mileage survivor and the sloppy undercoat is part of its story.
Your car sounds a lot like a 77, a friend of mine has. His car has 17000 miles on it, with an L-82, 4 speed, AM/FM stereo and no other options. It was sold new in upstate NY, in the Lake Placid area. The underside of his car is buried in dealer installed undercoating, which is pretty typical of cars sold new in that area!