1973 Mach 1 Interior Seat Material Oddity?

[jb73Mach]

So, how do we get the MCA judges to acknowledge or least not deduct for original seats that don't fit the conventional wisdom about comfort weave?

 

[Kit Sullivan]

The MCA is never going to acknowledge this or anything else without rock-solid proof that it is OEM.

Where have you seen factory 73s with chrome fender and hood moldings that are factory-installed? I seem to recall that the 73-year fender moldings are slightly different from 71-72 and would not fit properly with a 73 bumper. Does anyone know for sure about this?

 

[sm3570]

I have a 73 fender with 71/72 fender extension. It does not fit correctly.

 

[Kit Sullivan]

So...that would seem to reinforce the statement that no 73 Mustang came factory-equipped with 71-72 chrome fender moldings. Especially if they don't even fit correctly.

I have contacted a couple of concours Mustsng restoration specialists I know, just to gdt thier opinion on this upholstery question.

71-73s are not really high on the collectibilty scale for Mustangs, but maybe we'll get some more info.

 

[73vertproject]

71-73s are not really high on the collectibilty scale for Mustangs, but maybe we'll get some more info.

Kit - not trying to start anything here ( ), but do you know if there is anything out there that supports this claim? I would think that in the Mustang collectability world we would be right behind the 64 - 70's, followed perhaps by the Fox bodies or newer Machs, with the '74+ era in last place? Just looking for some documentation if it exists.

 

[jbojo]

The comfortweave was notoriously fragile, especially on a car left baking in the hot sun every day. Many owners had thier seats repaired with smooth vinyl inserts after only a few years of ownership. Thd cracked door panels on the white interior above suggest this car may be an example of that.

I am still of the opinion that these smooth-vinyl oddities were modified after initial delivery.

I bought the car off the showroom floor in 73 with 5 miles on it and the seats that are in the pic are the original ones. I can not believe that they were changed out after manufacture as there would have been no reason for that. As for the door panels this car sat since 1990 in the AZ sun so all the plastic door trim cracked. I am no expert here but I indeed know that this is the way the car came off the lot.

-jbojo

 

[Kit Sullivan]

I was referring to the "original" Mustangs: 65-73. In that group, the 71-73s are probably the least collected. Not anything more than just my opinion, not trying to start a pising match or anything. I like the 71-73s the best, so it's not that I look down on them or anything!

I know people are "collecting" fox-bodies, but to me they are just used cars that came after the classic wave.


jbojo,

If you bought the car new from jumpstreet, then you definitely have a bonified example. I am now very curious to know just exactly what the circumstances are that led Ford to use that style of seat in such miniscule numbers.

 

[jbojo]

I was referring to the "original" Mustangs: 65-73. In that group, the 71-73s are probably the least collected. Not anything more than just my opinion, not trying to start a pising match or anything. I like the 71-73s the best, so it's not that I look down on them or anything!

I know people are "collecting" fox-bodies, but to me they are just used cars that came after the classic wave.


jbojo,

If you bought the car new from jumpstreet, then you definitely have a bonified example. I am now very curious to know just exactly what the circumstances are that led Ford to use that style of seat in such miniscule numbers.

Mike (hyena429) came by today and we talked about the seats. I have them stored away so I didn't have them available to look at. I am going to pull them out and see what markings if any that they may have on them. The drivers seat has a rip on it so it's going to have to be replaced during my build.

-jbojo

 

[OMS]

So, how do we get the MCA judges to acknowledge or least not deduct for original seats that don't fit the conventional wisdom about comfort weave?

Good luck with that

Want a good laugh go see the judging test for 71-3's

There are several " mistakes "

Kit 73 fender extensions are and inch or more longer than 71-2

JBOJO - I have many core seats - maybe you should save those

and recover a core set

I can also see about doing custom center sections on new seats - just need to figure out what Ford used

Don

 

[bkdunha]

Just to chime in late on some great information gathering. It sounds like the evidence across multiple cars reflects a change late in 73 production. Sounds like many possible ideas as have been exchanged regarding how this may have occured. I for one think we should approach MCA and provide the facts gathered in this forum. I know a couple of current MCA board members and would be glad to contact them and see what data is required to affect a note of this in the judging rules. I would hate to see someone get penalized in a concourse restoration for this issue when dealing with a judge literally interpreting the score sheet comments. Thank you to everyone who exchanged the information they had regarding this issue and keeping everything above board. Another reason why I really like this site; it allows for respectfull exchanges by all of the information we have without any personal attacks. Everyone Here is Great!

 

[hyena429]

Just to chime in late on some great information gathering. It sounds like the evidence across multiple cars reflects a change late in 73 production. Sounds like many possible ideas as have been exchanged regarding how this may have occured. I for one think we should approach MCA and provide the facts gathered in this forum. I know a couple of current MCA board members and would be glad to contact them and see what data is required to affect a note of this in the judging rules. I would hate to see someone get penalized in a concourse restoration for this issue when dealing with a judge literally interpreting the score sheet comments. Thank you to everyone who exchanged the information they had regarding this issue and keeping everything above board. Another reason why I really like this site; it allows for respectfull exchanges by all of the information we have without any personal attacks. Everyone Here is Great!

::goodjob:: Great post.

 

[imusa76]

I have an Uncle that worked in the Ford Plant in Lorain Ohio from the Late 60's throught the late 90's.

I have heard some Assy line horror storied, and some funny things.

he will be visiting this weekend, I show hin this thread and see what he has to say.

 

[mweeps]

The MCA is never going to acknowledge this or anything else without rock-solid proof that it is OEM.

Where have you seen factory 73s with chrome fender and hood moldings that are factory-installed? I seem to recall that the 73-year fender moldings are slightly different from 71-72 and would not fit properly with a 73 bumper. Does anyone know for sure about this?

Who cares about MCA judging? Can we agree to say it more than likely was a factory anomaly? I enjoy this site and this back and forth on this thread is beginning to annoy me.

 

[Kit Sullivan]

I don't think there is enough evidence to make that claim that it is definitely a factory anomoly. It seems odd to me that in the last 42+ years, this has never come up anywhere until now...and only on this forum.

More resesrch is needed.

 

[hyena429]

I think it does need more research.

This forum has been good at spotting out a few factory anomolies not talked about ever....Like Jim's non staggered 4v mach 1...According to records, all 4v Mach 1's should have them...His does not...Matching number body with no evidence of it being changed...He has pictures and evidence to prove it..

With no back and fourth how will we ever figure something out?...that is what a forum is for sometimes..Specialy when you have evidence that things mite of been a little dif .....Long as it don't get nasty ..This could be a big deal to a person that pays for his car to be restored original, And to some one tring to sell a low milage late stang and it happens to have these seats ....I know some people do not care one way or another....Mine is a late model ....Incase i ever decided to go back to what she was...I would like to know what was correct for it.

 

[bkdunha]

To follow on the coat tails of Steve amd JB73mach1 I made contact with an MCA Board member I know and he has forwarded the information on to the Assistant National Head Judge for the 71 - 73 class. I am going to invite him to the forum as an opportunity for him to see the post regarding this matter and hopefully join as a member to share and learn his MCA knowledge with us. We will see what we can do. All of this discussion could really add up to a benefit if we can obtain an MCA connection related to our cars. I clearly understand that some may not be interested in originality for their personal car and I am not trying to pursuade anyone regarding that. For those who are interested in originality and being judged under those strict rules this will hopefully be great information to have and share with the MCA.

 

[Kit Sullivan]

It seems the more accurate and "exacting" the specs are for MCA judging, the more opportunities for an incorrect judgement arises. Kind of odd.

For years there was an issue regarding mounting bolts on 69 428 SCJ oil coolers. Mounted from from to back, or opposite? After much research, turns out both ways are correct.

The black paint on the back panel/ trunk corners of Mach 1s is also different according to which plant it came from.

Some 71 fastbacks with factory-optioned rear spoiler had prop rod, mkst MCA judges have no knowledge of that.

Early sportlamps on 71s were very different and there was extra woodgrain trim on early 71 interiors.

Early 71 Grandes had 3-piece chrome trim at the REAR of the hood...this was dropped early on.

There were black plastic inner fender inserts at the top rear of the fenders on some cars, and not on others.

HVAC panels said "defog" on some, "defrost" on others.

There were many seemingly-random build characteristics of these cars when new, and even the most knowledgable and well-intended MCA judge is not what I would consider the ultimate authority on the subject. We are all of us fallable.

 

[Steve73QMach1]

To follow on the coat tails of Steve amd JB73mach1 I made contact with an MCA Board member I know and he has forwarded the information on to the Assistant National Head Judge for the 71 - 73 class. I am going to invite him to the forum as an opportunity for him to see the post regarding this matter and hopefully join as a member to share and learn his MCA knowledge with us. We will see what we can do. All of this discussion could really add up to a benefit if we can obtain an MCA connection related to our cars. I clearly understand that some may not be interested in originality for their personal car and I am not trying to pursuade anyone regarding that. For those who are interested in originality and being judged under those strict rules this will hopefully be great information to have and share with the MCA.

BK - I really appreciate you taking the time to engage MCA on this issue! I have had several people look at my car and tell me the seat material has been replaced. That is frustrating when I know that the seats I have are the ones that left Dearborn in 1973. JBojo's comments as an original owner bolster my assertion, as well as the comments from other members that have the same material. The purpose of this thread was to raise awareness that there are some Mustangs out there that have differences from the accepted norm that are not necessarily documented anywhere (at least not that I have found yet). That does not make make the cars with those differences incorrect or modified from original. For members HighOctane, JBojo, and JB73Mach - keep those all vinyl interiors! I think when all is said and done, these interiors will be considered factory correct for late production cars and our Mach 1's will be in a very small group

 

[OMS]

Steve the 73 Grande parts car with 4/73 tag date has the pinto D4 slotted seat backs - I think thats a month earlier now ?

Don

 

[Steve73QMach1]

Steve the 73 Grande parts car with 4/73 tag date has the pinto D4 slotted seat backs - I think thats a month earlier now ?

Don

Thanks for that info Don. That seems odd that 1974 parts were being used in April of 1973. I'm wondering why 1974 Pinto parts were even manufactured in that early 1973 - let alone being used in the Mustang line.