CRG Discussion Forum
Camaro Research Group Discussion => Originality => Topic started by: jeff68 on January 21, 2008, 01:29:07 AM
-
I have a set of NOS 68/68 winshield header moldings that have the satin finish on them. The only part of the moldings that is bright chrome is the short 'leg' where the moldings turn to meet up with the wide side moldings. I though that this was correct. However, this past summer I found a car with some unusual moldings, and the owner said that they were original pieces. See the attached photos. Talking to my father (who bought my car new), he said that he remembered his looking like the ones in these pictures as well. Are these original moldings?
(http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j126/jac04/000_0158.jpg)
(http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j126/jac04/000_0159.jpg)
(http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j126/jac04/000_0160.jpg)
-
Jeff, I'm not sure what why that one is different, might just be wear marks from the seal. The NOS ones sold by GM were later service parts, where the whole thing is chromed and the satin was painted on except for the leg (I have a set from the 80s). Factory satin headers were not painted. From the factory, the surface was not polished (except for the leg) prior to chroming. The unpolished section almost looked like it was glass beaded then chromed.
-
The line between the satin and bright chome was very sharp, so I don't think it was wear from the seal. My chrome shop is very good and they can duplicate the satin plating pretty well and my NOS moldings really need to be refinished. So, I'm trying to decide how to have them plated; all chrome, satin chrome except for the 'legs', or the way they are in the pictures. I really dislike the look of the chrome on the 'legs' only, so I was hoping that the pictures represented a correct alternative. I guess that I can always just go with all chrome, then paint the satin parts.
-
Old thread, however what is the story on header molding finish?
I remember the 68 Firebird conv we had in the 80's wore Satin finished header moldings (don't remember if it was split like the one shown), our 67 Camaro conv had bright chrome, the 69 I am doing now has bright chrome, what is correct?
-
I read within CRG a while back that in '68 there were new DOT safety laws passed that made it necessary for the satin moldings. I think the wiper arms were included in that too but I am not 100% sure. '67 was bright trim.
Maybe John Z. can verify that.
Mike
-
I wish I had pics handy but the 2nd pace car my father restored. It had the satin upper header pieces which were NOS pieces in the boxes. Just cant remember where the satin began and chrome ended.
-
All of the 68's I have seen with original header moldings have looked like the ones in the first post.
Shiny chrome in the front, and satin chrome in the back.
Not sure about the 69's, but if it was a DOT thing, they are probably the same as 68.
-
I read within CRG a while back that in '68 there were new DOT safety laws passed that made it necessary for the satin moldings. I think the wiper arms were included in that too but I am not 100% sure. '67 was bright trim.
Maybe John Z. can verify that.
Mike
On Corvette convertibles, the header stainless moldings remained bright into the early 70's; however, MVSS Specular Gloss regulations changed the Corvette wiper arms and blades in late '66 from bright chrome/stainless to "Satellite", a dull chrome and stainless finish that wouldn't reflect light in the driver's eyes, and the painted inside lower garnish molding at the base of the windshield glass had flattener added to the paint to minimize its reflections. The side and upper moldings were outside the vision zone specified in the Specular Gloss regulation.
-
Just checked my 68 have owned since 1980 pretty sure header molding has never changed it is all chrome. Hope this helps!
-
My original header molding. 12E date code car.
(http://y2camaro.com/img/header3.jpg)
-
Thats how I remember our 68 Firebird conv header moldings to have been finished.