CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 02, 2014, 12:28:50 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the CRG Discussion Forum!
Forum registration problems: Make sure you enter your email correctly and you check your spam box first. *Then* email KurtS2@gmail for help.
103796 Posts in 12188 Topics by 4701 Members
Latest Member: rts
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  CRG Discussion Forum
|-+  Camaro Research Group Discussion
| |-+  Decoding/Numbers
| | |-+  Shat R Proof Front windshield with no DOT?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]  All Print
Author Topic: Shat R Proof Front windshield with no DOT?  (Read 1323 times)
firstgenaddict
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1203



View Profile WWW
« Reply #15 on: September 01, 2014, 12:40:22 AM »

Just a plausible explanation I will throw out here: Cars did get damaged in transit, that is a fact. Some where damaged before they left the plant parking storage. Some were damaged at the dealer lot too. Who knows, maybe GM supplied the cloth covered seals in those repairs... and those windshields have been on those cars since delivery to the 1st owner, so , since new. explains a lot. I have seen a lot of sheetmetal repairs and overspray on new cars as well. Also historically speaking, there was a lot of unrest during this time in our country (protests and riots) that could have interrupted usual supply chains.

So now there are 3 of them... no DOT codes... which consequently were implemented after these 3 cars were built.... hmmm
Still doesn't explain the windshields being installed with the factory glass adhesive sealer... that is the issue, if the glass were in there and it had an after market install their would be no question, however it is my understanding that it was not possible for an after market supplier to install glass by hand manually as it was done inside the factory with a machine. 
Logged

James
Collectin' Camaro's since "Only Rednecks drove them"
 
Check out the Black 69 RS/Z28 45k mile Survivor and the Lemans Blue 69 Z 10D frame off...
https://picasaweb.google.com/112392262205377424364/1969_Z28_Restoration
rick 67
Member
***
Posts: 34



View Profile Email
« Reply #16 on: September 01, 2014, 12:47:40 AM »

http://www.camaros.org/glass.shtml
 Well first I would read that report, very informative. But I can tell you that as a 30 year LOF/Pilkington employee there are some small mistakes in it.
Today GM can and do open contracts to other companies for Market tests and we have grabbed a few contracts over the past "8" years they have been doing it. They did not start doing that until this century.  Back in the sixties LOF Rossford Ohio and Lathrope Ca.  had the windshield, backlite and doorlite contracts for all Camaros.   We had all doorlite glass for the Firebird. PPG had the windshield and backlite glass for the Firebird. I think in 69 PPG got some of the Camaro also. All LOF aftermarket glass was stamped LOF and used no other name. I believe PPG had some aftermarket names none of which are Shat R Proof
  As someone who has monogrammed about 4 million pieces of glass back when we still sandblasted them on I can tell you the first example shown is a double struck piece of crap that couldn't have been repaired and in no way comes close to an OEM windshield. The second shows too much wear in the positive as the letters and #'s are filling in. Not OEM quality but ok for AGR. The third shows fade out top to bottom on the blasting, although by 60's standards passable for OEM not great. So I have seen 3 poorly monogrammed pieces of glass, screams AGR to me. But don't take my word for it I only do it for living !   Another detail missing is the LAMINATED part of the stamp.  The Sat r proof should also have a laminated stamp on it required by GM for OEM glass.
  Even if LOF or PPG were on strike during any of that time we are required by GM to increase our inventory dramatically when our contracts come up to cover labor disruptions and either company could probably pick up short term slack on top of that.
  Lastly do you not think aftermarket installers back in the day couldn't put in a windshield as well as the factory ? Every car on a new car lot today visits a local body shop for touch ups that you can't tell are there.
Anything else you need ?

Rick
 

 
« Last Edit: September 01, 2014, 01:07:52 AM by rick 67 » Logged
rick 67
Member
***
Posts: 34



View Profile Email
« Reply #17 on: September 01, 2014, 12:49:06 AM »

oops small mistake DOT codes came in the 70's
Logged
firstgenaddict
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1203



View Profile WWW
« Reply #18 on: September 01, 2014, 01:17:18 AM »

 
oops small mistake DOT codes came in the 70's

No I do not believe after market installers could install glass the same as the factory at that time.
It would take someone with a DOT coded glass installed with the factory seal in a pre DOT car for me to believe it.

Say what you will but the Shat-r-proof glass is going back in the car as everything found to this point indicates it is the ORIGINAL factory installed piece.

DOT markings may not have been required until the 70's however I had a 45 k mile april 1969 Z28 Legend certified original paint car with DOT bugs on every glass.
I have read the report many times I have also removed tons of glass and have never seen a factory type seal used in conjunction with an after market glass, as an aside I know what the abbreviated installation looks like and this seal was never cut.  

What is the earliest appearance of DOT coded glass in a 69 model year Camaro?
When glass was going from non DOT to DOT coded there are any number of things which could have happened.

BTW the report states LAMINATED was a STATE MARK from historic state requirements not a GM required mark.
Logged

James
Collectin' Camaro's since "Only Rednecks drove them"
 
Check out the Black 69 RS/Z28 45k mile Survivor and the Lemans Blue 69 Z 10D frame off...
https://picasaweb.google.com/112392262205377424364/1969_Z28_Restoration
firstgenaddict
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1203



View Profile WWW
« Reply #19 on: September 01, 2014, 01:41:24 AM »

GM Marks
Additionally, General Motors itself required several specific marks on OEM glass, including:

Shaded --Added to tinted GM OEM windshields when they included the upper, dark (non-AS1), tint band. For regulatory purposes these windshields are only AS1 glass below the tint band.

AS1 is defined... as Laminated, thus Laminated need not be spelled out. the AS1 classification already includes Laminated Windshield.

Seems to me all the above glasses exhibit all requisite markings...
Logged

James
Collectin' Camaro's since "Only Rednecks drove them"
 
Check out the Black 69 RS/Z28 45k mile Survivor and the Lemans Blue 69 Z 10D frame off...
https://picasaweb.google.com/112392262205377424364/1969_Z28_Restoration
rick 67
Member
***
Posts: 34



View Profile Email
« Reply #20 on: September 01, 2014, 01:48:06 AM »

 I can tell you that in 1973 at the GM car assembly plant in Oshawa Ontario they were still putting them in by hand. Guy on each side with suction cups .My aoto mechanics class was on a tour there and the guide pointed out that the windshields were from the plant in Collingwood where we were from.
  As well as late as 2009 the JEEP LIBERTY had what we called a racetrack on the inboard lite. Two parallel lines around the circumference of the windshield so that the guy putting the urethane on by" hand" didn't go outside the lines !  With the model change in 2009 the Liberty windshield had two small unpainted lines through both inboard and outboard lites near the bottom edge for the now robot to see to install the windshield. The Impala we have made since 2004 has none of these. The Chevy pick up which we have made since 76 still does not have any marks for a robot to identify. The Lexus SUV has identifiers (Cambridge Ontario)  I am pretty sure the 4th  and5th gen Camaros don't have any .Not sure about the 6th we are running it but I have not been over to see it yet.
Logged
rick 67
Member
***
Posts: 34



View Profile Email
« Reply #21 on: September 01, 2014, 01:57:22 AM »

 And since GM didn't know which state the car was going to all of them got it !
Logged
rick 67
Member
***
Posts: 34



View Profile Email
« Reply #22 on: September 01, 2014, 02:11:22 AM »

 If you believe its original put it back in the car by all means.
 I love these discussions. I know mistakes we made ended up and still end up in cars (pretty much all of them  get caught at some point nowadays) Nothing like a Camaro hud windshield getting out with the wrong plastic in it. But Shat R Proof is an Aftermarket supplier. You would have to get documents from GM to prove it ever got any OEM glass from them !
Logged
firstgenaddict
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1203



View Profile WWW
« Reply #23 on: September 01, 2014, 02:40:21 AM »

This is a discussion on a TRI 5 Forum....
Shat-r-proof and LOF marked on the same windshield -
Shat-R-Proof" Windshield?
My convertible has a windshield marked Shat-R-Proof in the lower passenger corner. I assumed the original had been replaced. Then I saw a friend's original '55 that also had one. Where these used by the factory in '55? It's also marked LOF and coded, but I don't know how to decipher. Thanks!
Logged

James
Collectin' Camaro's since "Only Rednecks drove them"
 
Check out the Black 69 RS/Z28 45k mile Survivor and the Lemans Blue 69 Z 10D frame off...
https://picasaweb.google.com/112392262205377424364/1969_Z28_Restoration
rick 67
Member
***
Posts: 34



View Profile Email
« Reply #24 on: September 01, 2014, 12:21:45 PM »

  So I spent some time doing some research. IS IT POSSIBLE for a Shat R Proof windshield to be installed at the factory ?? Along with the 3 Camaros and the 2 55's I  also found a 62 corvette that is supposed to be original. The  55 chevy is very telling as it has both the LOF and Shat R p Proof logos on it.
 Its possible that LOF had an agreement to produce and monogram AGR parts for Shat R Proof.  Although to my knowledge and history at our plant it was never done until recently for Belron. Also recently GM stopped letting us ship  AGR glass with their logo on  them. So we have to remove it and apply our own.
  How would it happen ? IF they had an agreement then during an OEM run parts that don't make OE quality are packed for AGR repair.  Also repairable OEM glass is packed or could be fixed at this time and put into a finished case.
  So you can have five or six part cases sitting around AFTER FINAL INSPECTION . To be repaired OEM glass and AGR logo to be removed and Shat R Proof logo added glass along with a part case of Finished glass. 
  So now you have 7 or 8 part racks sitting around to be fixed repaired and filled. Throw in a shift change or two and it is possible for a Shat R Proof windshield to get to GM and installed in a car.
  THIS IS ONLY POSSIBLE IF LOF SUPPLIED SHAT R PROOF with their windshields for these parts. If not You have an AGR windshield.
   There is one possible guy at work who would have an idea if there was an agreement but unlikely. You would have to find someone from Rossford or Lathrope from way back to find out.
 Hope we are being a little more constructive.

 Rick
 
 
Logged
JohnZ
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 4082


View Profile Email
« Reply #25 on: Today at 10:16:41 AM »


What is the earliest appearance of DOT coded glass in a 69 model year Camaro?

My all-original untouched Norwood 02D '69 Z/28 has all its original glass, and all except the windshield are DOT-marked. All the side glass is "XV" (February 1969), the backlite is "NV" (March, 1969), and the windshield is "XV" (February, 1969). Car came off the line on February 27th and was shipped on February 28th.
Logged

'69 Z/28
Fathom Green
CRG
KurtS
CRG Coordinator
*****
Posts: 3180


View Profile Email
« Reply #26 on: Today at 10:27:21 AM »

What is the earliest appearance of DOT coded glass in a 69 model year Camaro?

Jan 69 at both LOS and NOR. Could be earlier, but that's the earliest we've seen.
Logged

Kurt S
CRG
Pages: 1 [2]  All Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.348 seconds with 19 queries.