hemigeno's Daytona restoration - a few more tweaks... again!

[hemigeno]

Hey Geno...
Awesome................ I have a question though... The picture of the backing plate, I notice that your rear wheel well doesn't have undercoating and I thought the dipstick tube was routed to the outside of the exhaust manifold

Troy, good eyes.  The car's rear end undercoating hasn't been installed yet.  Vance needed to get the fuel filler tube seal situation all squared away before applying the undercoating, and the seal was being installed today (I think).  The exhaust will have to come back off for undercoat, but that's not a huge deal.  He will need to do the undercoating before mounting the wing braces for good, since those were bolted to the trunk floor after Hamtramck was done - which means no undercoating on the bolt heads or threads/nuts.  Same goes for the jack hold down bolt.

As for the dipstick tube, it could technically go either way.  There are many examples of outside the exhaust manifold as you've mentioned, but there are also original cars done the opposite way.  The A12 guys have had some spirited discussions in the past on this topic if I remember right.  

[hemi68charger]

...

As for the dipstick tube, it could technically go either way.  There are many examples of outside the exhaust manifold as you've mentioned, but there are also original cars done the opposite way.  The A12 guys have had some spirited discussions in the past on this topic if I remember right.  

Awwww.. Cool. I thought I might be going crazy not knowing something that would have been obvious to me...  

Good news on the dipschtick.. I have both routed between my cylinder head and manifold on my Daytona and C500....  Good news for me  

[hemigeno]

Speaking of undercoating, I took the first picture to point out something that Vance is planning to fix in the front wheelwell.  We didn't have the correct emergency brake cable installed when they did the front wheelwell undercoating, and that cable would have been installed when they did the original u/c at Hamtramck.  So, the grommet and perhaps a little of the cable itself should have undercoating present.  How much undercoating got on the cable varies wildly from car to car, as some were gooped up qute a bit while others have just a little coverage beyond the grommet.  This will require a re-application of some "Creative Industries" body color overspray as well, but none of these are big problems to solve.

The second picture shows the master cylinder studs, and the lowest one has at least some pitting on the head.  Vance sourced some unpitted studs, and has replated another set.  These had a strike mark (indented on the edge of the head) where the stud was driven into the master cylinder base.  He's going to try and replicate the way that struck surface would look, since when you replate the studs those coloration distinctions are lost.  Details, details.

The picture of the taillights serves as a reminder to me to discuss getting different foam gaskets.  Originals were about 1/2 the thickness of the replacements, which end up getting distorted when the taillights are snugged up.  Dave Walden is producing correct open-cell foam gasket sets for elsewhere on B-bodies, and I am hoping he can provide some bulk material from which we can cut out our own gaskets using the originals as a pattern.

The last pic shows the nosecone wiring harness, with its integral "T" anchor.  The Charger forward light harnesses (which were modified into Daytona harnesses according to the paperwork) had this "T" anchor still left in place, and I've always wondered if any cars out there had a hole drilled on the Z-brace where this anchor might have been installed.  

[hemigeno]

The first two pictures show an experiment in progress.  As mentioned before, Vance has been working on a process that can make cast parts darker than stamped steel parts - even within assemblies like these lower control arms (this isn't from the Daytona, this is a test piece).  By having RPM at our disposal, we can drop back and re-do the lower control arms a bit more accurately.  Up to this point, my car's LCA's had been covered in cosmoline from top to bottom.  Vance's reasoning for this was he did not want the end to rust if it were left bare, and he didn't want to paint part of it with a faux finish and then try to do the cosmoline dip.  The arms were originally dunked in a vat of cosmoline up to a point (the depth of which varied depending on how recently the vat had been topped off).  There's no consistent line of where the cosmoline ALWAYS came up, but they were not coated all the way.  Now, Vance can treat the LCA's to bring out the dissimliar color distinction visible in the first two photos (not to mention the weld burn marks that will be present at the sway bar mounting bracket), coat the LCA's completely with this RPM product to seal everything up permanently, and then dip them in cosmoline up to a line and let them drip down like you see.  The finished product will be both durable and correct.

I took the last picture to remind me about getting a section of washer hose for moparjohn.  A sad testament to my memory (or lack thereof) is that even though I remembered to take the picture, I promptly forgot to measure out and bring back the hose.  I'll try not to forget next time.  

[hemigeno]

The last picture for this batch is related to a topic I've wrestled with for a while now.  Earlier in the thread I pointed out the latch tray mounting bracket which is spot-welded to the radiator support is the original piece.  Vance discovered early on during his disassembly work that this bracket was not painted on either the top or bottom sides, which fit the other forensic evidence of missing blackout paint on the inner fender shields or any other location inside the nosecone.  We've tried to maintain that distinction - not just to be different (which has never bothered me before), but because that's the way this car was built by Creative.

Unfortunately, the lack of any paint finishes also meant this bracket had a fair amount of pitting.  The assumption up until now was that it is better to keep the original piece in place, just fill in the pits and give it the usual faux paint finish to make it appear "bare".  I've finally decided it is better to replace this piece with a new one which can properly show the distinction we're trying to make.  

As a result of this change, several details can now be brought out... first, when Creative's workers were prepping the lip of the radiator support for spot welds, chances are extremely high they used a grinder to remove paint for a good spot weld.  They also, more than likely, left a few grinding wheel marks on the vertical face of the radiator support as they went along.  We can do something similar.  

The original bracket is still in excellent shape to serve as a pattern for another piece.  Vance has access to shearing equipment which can be used to punch out a part in a fashion much like they were done originally.  That should give us an exact replica, without any pitting in the metal surface.  Treating the part on top & bottom with RPM will keep it looking pristine, and the spot welds can be put back in the same locations as before - complete with very visible burn marks.

I think the end result is worth the effort, but it is a step down from the standpoint of replacing an original part with a reproduction (albeit just a piece of flat metal).

That's all the update photos for the moment.  It may be a while longer before more progress is documented due to some upcoming family issues.  Slowly but surely things are coming together.

[moparstuart]

...

As for the dipstick tube, it could technically go either way.  There are many examples of outside the exhaust manifold as you've mentioned, but there are also original cars done the opposite way.  The A12 guys have had some spirited discussions in the past on this topic if I remember right.  

Awwww.. Cool. I thought I might be going crazy not knowing something that would have been obvious to me...  

Good news on the dipschtick.. I have both routed between my cylinder head and manifold on my Daytona and C500....  Good news for me  

with the heat I would think you would want it on the outside 

[hemi68charger]

...

As for the dipstick tube, it could technically go either way.  There are many examples of outside the exhaust manifold as you've mentioned, but there are also original cars done the opposite way.  The A12 guys have had some spirited discussions in the past on this topic if I remember right.  

Awwww.. Cool. I thought I might be going crazy not knowing something that would have been obvious to me...  

Good news on the dipschtick.. I have both routed between my cylinder head and manifold on my Daytona and C500....  Good news for me  

with the heat I would think you would want it on the outside 

Being that the tube isn't painted, it will not burn any paint off and secondly, the tubes are already installed...

[FJMG]

What a pleasure to view these pics Gene, thank you! Regarding your fuel tank I just checked mine and the two corners on the passenger side are just like yours, crossed welds (the tank is stored in such a way that I need to move other large items to see the drivers side). I am pretty sure mine is the original tank as the straps were undercoated right over. Interestingly enough, I purchased a replacement tank from Chrysler in around 1984 or so and IT has the welds rounded. Go figure?

[hemigeno]

What a pleasure to view these pics Gene, thank you! Regarding your fuel tank I just checked mine and the two corners on the passenger side are just like yours, crossed welds (the tank is stored in such a way that I need to move other large items to see the drivers side). I am pretty sure mine is the original tank as the straps were undercoated right over. Interestingly enough, I purchased a replacement tank from Chrysler in around 1984 or so and IT has the welds rounded. Go figure?

Thanks, Robert - both for the comments and for checking out your original tank for the seam detail.  I appreciate you taking the time to do so, and it is interesting to see the differences in what you have.  I think there's another NOS tank floating around at Vance's shop with an inkstamped date on it's bottomside from the mid '70s.  I'll try to remember to check it out next time up (or ask Vance to do so).

with the heat I would think you would want it on the outside 

Being that the tube isn't painted, it will not burn any paint off and secondly, the tubes are already installed...

Maybe the concern is about singing your fingers on an exhaust manifold while checking the oil?   

[maxwellwedge]

Dipstick tube should be on the outside on a 69, tube unpainted, dipstick dipped in black. I have never heard about any controversy on this unless someone (or a few people) had it on the inside (70-up style) incorrectly and felt they needed to argue about it....which is a normal day on Moparts...

Geno - Is your car a factory undercoat car?

On non-undercoat cars the undercoating was pretty well the last thing that was put on (and the pinch weld balack-out if the car originally had it). The cars were fully assembled before it was put on. This explains undercoat on the fuel and brake lines, gas tank, inner fender shields etc.

[paul jacobs]

Geno,
The tank in your car is 100% correct. NOS tanks starting in the early 80's had rounded seams, I have had a bunch over the years.  What are Vances thoughts on the bare steering shaft with no black paint?? Frank Badalson says that ALL steering shafts are black...Car looks great!

[hemigeno]

Dipstick tube should be on the outside on a 69, tube unpainted, dipstick dipped in black. I have never heard about any controversy on this unless someone (or a few people) had it on the inside (70-up style) incorrectly and felt they needed to argue about it....which is a normal day on Moparts...

Geno - Is your car a factory undercoat car?

On non-undercoat cars the undercoating was pretty well the last thing that was put on (and the pinch weld balack-out if the car originally had it). The cars were fully assembled before it was put on. This explains undercoat on the fuel and brake lines, gas tank, inner fender shields etc.

Thanks for the feedback (as usual) Jim!  Even if you hadn't mentioned anything regarding the dipstick, I was planning on bringing the topic up to Vance soon.  Why?  Because I went back and checked the photo of my car from 1977 (after the engine fire) and it shows no dipstick between the valve cover and exhaust manifold.  That's an even better reason for having it outside the manifold, but I really appreciate the confirmation of why that's the case (i.e. a 1970+ thing).  I'll find the crispy engine picture here in a bit, it's already posted earlier in this thread.

My car isn't a s/c J55 undercoat car.  If it was, the restoration might have been done by now -- since it took a long time to fix all the sheet metal pitting on the underneath side from exposure to the elements.  IIRC, the exhaust was not installed when undercoat/deadener was applied, but just about everything else, correct?  That's why I mentioned needing the fuel filler tank seal installed.  Vance was able to put in the OE seal this past week, and most of the other parts refinishing or change-outs have been made with the possible exception of exhaust tip hanger brackets.  Whether he waits to do the undercoat until those brackets materialize or not is up to him (assuming those were even installed when the undercoat/deadener was applied).

Geno,
The tank in your car is 100% correct. NOS tanks starting in the early 80's had rounded seams, I have had a bunch over the years.  What are Vances thoughts on the bare steering shaft with no black paint?? Frank Badalson says that ALL steering shafts are black...Car looks great!

Paul, thanks for chiming in - I appreciate the compliment, and especially appreciate the input on tank seams!  It was great chatting with you and Troy at MMW this year.  Thanks for humoring all of my questions and letting me trash through your photo albums.  Good times...

I will have to ask about the steering shafts, and will also try to go through a few archive photos myself.

Thanks again - and I intend to contact you soon about the hairbrained idea of mine on battery cables we discussed last month.  

[nascarxx29]

Nice workmanship and incredible detail My daytona dipstick was outside the exhaust manifold

[hemigeno]

Nice workmanship and incredible detail My daytona dipstick was outside the exhaust manifold

Thanks, Dave!

The pic below from 1980 shows no dipstick either.

[maxwellwedge]

A12 New - No tube on the inside

[hemigeno]

Here's another A12 reference pic, you can see the dipstick/tube at the very bottom outside the manifold.  I have several other original pictures showing the same trait.  The other pictures I have with inside-the-manifold handles might be restored cars whose handle position was relocated, not sure.

[hemigeno]

Vance did have the dipstick located outside the manifold on this engine.  At some point prior to dyno'ing the engine it was moved inside the manifold (the pictures at the dyno shop show it inside the manifold).  No big deal, this is an easy change to make.

First picture taken December, 2008

Second picture taken July, 2009

[maxwellwedge]

Dipstick tube should be on the outside on a 69, tube unpainted, dipstick dipped in black. I have never heard about any controversy on this unless someone (or a few people) had it on the inside (70-up style) incorrectly and felt they needed to argue about it....which is a normal day on Moparts...

Geno - Is your car a factory undercoat car?

On non-undercoat cars the undercoating was pretty well the last thing that was put on (and the pinch weld balack-out if the car originally had it). The cars were fully assembled before it was put on. This explains undercoat on the fuel and brake lines, gas tank, inner fender shields etc.

Thanks for the feedback (as usual) Jim!  Even if you hadn't mentioned anything regarding the dipstick, I was planning on bringing the topic up to Vance soon.  Why?  Because I went back and checked the photo of my car from 1977 (after the engine fire) and it shows no dipstick between the valve cover and exhaust manifold.  That's an even better reason for having it outside the manifold, but I really appreciate the confirmation of why that's the case (i.e. a 1970+ thing).  I'll find the crispy engine picture here in a bit, it's already posted earlier in this thread.

My car isn't a s/c J55 undercoat car.  If it was, the restoration might have been done by now -- since it took a long time to fix all the sheet metal pitting on the underneath side from exposure to the elements.  IIRC, the exhaust was not installed when undercoat/deadener was applied, but just about everything else, correct?  That's why I mentioned needing the fuel filler tank seal installed.  Vance was able to put in the OE seal this past week, and most of the other parts refinishing or change-outs have been made with the possible exception of exhaust tip hanger brackets.  Whether he waits to do the undercoat until those brackets materialize or not is up to him (assuming those were even installed when the undercoat/deadener was applied).

I would say everything but the wheels were installed when the undercoat/deadener was applied......I have some good pics of a few cars that shows this - I'll go through the pics I have at home.

[hemigeno]

I would say everything but the wheels were installed when the undercoat/deadener was applied......I have some good pics of a few cars that shows this - I'll go through the pics I have at home.

My R/T is a J55 undercoat car with most of it's original gunk still in place, and there's no evidence of shadowing around where the mufflers, etc. would be.  It's a St. Louis car - are there differences with Hamtramck in this area?  Didn't think so, but have been wrong before...

[maxwellwedge]

Funny thing - On factory u/coat cars the stuff was applied earlier. On non u/coat it was the last thing. I have some good pics of both wingers.

[jonw29]

Geno.I was just re-reading over this whole thread.In your opening statements you said "around 8 months" for the restoration.I had the same hopes with my Talladega.While my car is not done to the level that your car is,it is the best that I could afford and it was about 5 years.I applaud the attention to detail that Vance and yourself have.Anyone that knows anything about this hobby or sickness that we have knows that you don't do one of these cars in a Chip Foose Overhaulin episode.I think that in the restoration circles,your car is going to be the bar to which other restorations are compared.Good job.Jon Wood

[hemigeno]

Geno.I was just re-reading over this whole thread.In your opening statements you said "around 8 months" for the restoration.I had the same hopes with my Talladega.While my car is not done to the level that your car is,it is the best that I could afford and it was about 5 years.I applaud the attention to detail that Vance and yourself have.Anyone that knows anything about this hobby or sickness that we have knows that you don't do one of these cars in a Chip Foose Overhaulin episode.I think that in the restoration circles,your car is going to be the bar to which other restorations are compared.Good job.Jon Wood

Thanks a lot, Jon, for that reminder about how long this resto would take  



I really do appreciate your comments, although I know for certain there are other high-level restored cars which can lay claim to the best-restoration title.  I would quickly point to Dave Walden's 1970 Valiant as the likeliest standard-bearer for factory correct Mopar restorations.  If you haven't seen or heard of this car, check out a couple of threads on Moparts:

http://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=6156475&page=0&fpart=all&vc=1

And for the predecessor to that thread, sit back and get a load of all the info (with the usual Moparts bickering) in this one:
http://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=best&Number=4753588&page=0&fpart=1

Dave was phenomenally successful in getting a lot of correct parts for his car(s), and able to accurately reproduce many others which could not be sourced.  Not to mention, they went to incredible levels of documentation and painstaking replication efforts along the way.  Paul Jacobs & Troy Angelly have also done multiple cars to an extremely high level (such as moparjohn's B5 Daytona for one), Ken Mosier's work is well-received, and there are several other top-name restoration shops who have cars that could rival anyone's claim to being "the best."  I'm not hung up on titles, and usually prefer not to be involved in controversial topics like which car is better.  Thank you very much for the compliment nonetheless.

Back to my car's resto... even though I never expected this resto to take as little as 8 months, I had no idea it would still be ongoing after 4 years.  Early on, it seemed like a slam dunk that the car would be done long before Talladega '09.  I also had no idea we would be focusing on all the little details to the degree you see on the car now, or if some of the parts searches would end up producing many of the things we needed.  That being said, it would probably get done about the same way if the opportunity was given to do everything over again.  Much of the delays were of my own doing, as are the reasons some of the completed work has been re-done.  In large part, Vance has been hampered by the original and other parts I've given him to work with.

This entire restoration has been a learning process for me - not only in the details themselves (recent example is the dipstick location), but also in the methods and materials used (e.g. discovering some great rust removal products and more recently, RPM).  My guess is that parts refurbishing on another car could be done to this level in a much shorter time period if the lessons we learned the hard way were applied.  However, the major hurdle to someone trying to totally restore a car in this fashion is obtaining correct replacement parts where needed.  I am incredibly glad to have followed Roger Gibson's advice from many years ago, to buy every part I could find while the stuff is still out there - and even still I'm far short of what's needed for a "totally correct" restoration.  Some good stuff can still be found here and there, but unless someone had the foresight to squirrel away a boatload (or poolhouse, right Jim?) full of primo parts, it may be difficult to replicate many of the top-level restored cars seen today without a near-perfect-condition low-mileage survivor to start with...  and then the better question is - why restore a car like that?  I didn't have that dilemma with my car, as it was a near-basket case to start with.

My stated goal from before remains my goal now:  to do the best restoration we can, with the best parts that can be found.  Thus far that goal has been met in spades, and I'm happy as can be -- even if everyone else hates the finished product.  I don't know if my car is worthy of the accolades you've given it, Jon, but I sincerely appreciate them.  Just don't tell my wife that this "hobby" is actually a sickness, or she'll have me institutionalized for treatment...

[maxwellwedge]

Geno You write reel good!  

Sorry hit the button too early.

All joking aside Gene - You went to the wall and agonized more than a sane person would on the details - And the details, added together are what separate a great job vs an average job.

Sanity has no place in the OEM resto world! 

Congrats on doing the research and sweating the details!   

[hemigeno]

Sanity has no place in the OEM resto world! 

Ain't that the truth!

Thanks, Jim - you've been through a lot of these issues before with your own cars, and know even better than I do what a struggle it is to get them "right".

[hemi68charger]

Geno..
The newest addition to your signature is very cool.......