Virgil & Sue Klein

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 158 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Translation of the Trim Code #5340

    You can find data plate info on the internet by “googling” the make and year and data plate info. For your ’59 I got the information from the Spring 2001 issue of Quicksilver. Trim code 326 is medium blue metallic vinyl and medium blue box weave cloth. There are also trim codes 326A through 326D listed with minor differences in the material used but all medium blue metallic.

    Also, if you get a shop manual for your car they usually have data plate decode information in them as well.

    in reply to: What do you use for tires? #5171

    Ed,

    I do use the original wheels without any problems whatsoever. I have heard that the flexing of the radial could cause problems especially with hubcaps staying on the wheel but that has not been an issue either.

    Any wheel that can be used with a tubeless tire should be adequate. You referenced wheels from the 40s and most of those required a tube. Not a good thing with a radial tire.

    One other comment: do not get tires that are too wide as they will not fit between the rear brake drum and the body of the car when you try to put them on.

    in reply to: What do you use for tires? #5169

    Originally a ’54 Merc had 7.10X15 tires with a recommended tire pressure of 23-25 lbs. When the “alphabet” sizes came along the 7.10X15 was a G so a G78X15 tire was the proper size. These were all bias ply tires. Tire conversion charts for the metrics show a 205/75R 15 as the same size.

    I have a ’55 with the same tire size recommended. I use a Firestone FR721 (their name for the tire has nothing to do with size) in a 225/75R15. This is of course a radial tire. I do not personally care for the wide whites on these cars which was original style equipment and this is why I purchased the Firestones. They have a white wall that is 1.5″ wide. I like the black between the wheel and the whitewall. Your personal preference for originality is very important.

    As I recall they were not overly expensive. If you go to Coker tires for the original wide white and tread design in a radial tire they will be very expensive.

    There is no doubt that the radial tires will make for a MUCH better handling car. The choice is yours: stick with bias ply and keep the originality but give up handling; use an original type tire in a radial and spend a bunch of money; go to a later model radial that gives up the originality.

    If you are concerned about judging of your car, IMOA does not do “Concourse judging” at its events so as I long as the tires are clean and the proper size it is not a problem. If, however, you are going to events that do concourse judging then whitewall width, tread design, and construction can become an issue.

    Hope this helps.

    Virgil Klein
    Head judge IMOA

    in reply to: Road America #5092

    Oops, forgot to mention the race is on Sunday, the 25th.

    in reply to: 1953 Mercury Horn Insulator #4961

    Check with C&G Early Ford Parts in Escondido, CA. They show a horn ring insulator for ’52-’56. They show part # B5A-3672-A. Their phone number is 760-740-2400. They are open from 8 to 5 PST. I have worked them in the past and they know these cars very well.

    in reply to: April 18, 1966 Loraine, OH Question #4949

    Suggest you might call Carlos. I’m not sure he ever looks at his email.

    I am not at all familiar with Rush Gears.

    in reply to: April 18, 1966 Loraine, OH Question #4946

    Anything is possible at an auto manufacturing plant so your explanation could be one possibility. Usually though the parts for a car are beside the assembly line in racks that are programmed to be in the right place at the right time. I have seen cars with Maverick grills and Comet badging, Cougars with Mustang emblems, etc. Another might be someone trying to clone a GT Pace Car. You don’t say if you are the original owner so anything is possible.
    As to your windshield wiper motor issue, contact Carlos Vera in Colorado. You can look up his info on this website by going to the “member directory”. He has a ton of Comets and even more parts.

    in reply to: 2003 Grand Marquis #4854

    I “googled” 2003 grand marquis owners manual and came up with a list of sites. A site came up titled “Mercury Grand Marquis Owner’s Manual”. I opened that site and a list of Grand Marquis owner’s manuals came up by year. I opened the one for the 2003 Grand Marquis. There are 248 pages for the manual on the site. On page 165 and for a few pages after is the listing for, what Ford calls, the “power distribution box”. It looks a heck of a lot like a fuse panel to me. Fuse 15, according to the chart, is for the speed control module along with some other stuff. I couldn’t find any service intervals in the manual either. Assume a Ford/Lincoln dealer could help with the door code issue.

    These are great cars unrecognized by the general public for how good they really are. Looks like you have bought a gem. Hope it treats you well.

    in reply to: 2003 Grand Marquis #4853

    I “googled” 2003 grand marquis owners manual and came up with a list of sites. A site came up titled “Mercury Grand Marquis Owner’s Manual”. I opened that site and a list of Grand Marquis owner’s manuals came up by year. I opened the one for the 2003 Grand Marquis. There are 248 pages for the manual on the site. On page 165 and for a few pages after is the listing for, what Ford calls, the “power distribution box”. It looks a heck of a lot like a fuse panel to me. Fuse 15, according to the chart, is for the speed control module along with some other stuff. I couldn’t find any service intervals in the manual either. Assume a Ford/Lincoln dealer could help with the door code issue.

    These are great cars unrecognized by the general public for how good they really are. Looks like you have bought a gem. Hope it treats you well.

    in reply to: 62 Monterey convertible door mirrors – help!! #4645

    John,

    I would think one of two things is occurring. If the screws that you are using to tighten the mirrors are too long they will bottom out and feel tight before they make contact with the mirror bracket and then cannot hold the mirror itself tight. The solution here would be to purchase new shorter screws (am not sure of thread count difference and screw size differences between the US and the UK) or to very carefully hacksaw the ends of your current screws being sure not to foul the threads. This can be tricky as the screws typically are fine thread for this application. Take real care if you attempt this. In many instances a washer would do the trick but I think the screws are countersunk and a washer cannot be used.

    The other issue could be threads that are stripped either in the mirror itself or in the screws. That would require new screws and a tap and die to make new threads in the mirror itself.

    One other solution would be to purchase new mirrors. Many of IMOA’s suppliers carry mirrors that would be appropriate for your car.

    Good luck with your car. ’62s are pretty rare (love the taillights) but are gaining in popularity especially the convertibles.

    in reply to: Who is our '55-'56 expert. #4631

    Jack,

    Contact Gary Richards in Sun City, CA. You can look up his contact info in the “member directory” on the website. Just click on the “access the member directory” line in the box to the right.

    Good luck with your project.

    in reply to: Rear shocks 56 Montclair #4615

    I’m not so sure that the shocks are the issue for your bottoming out. Shocks are there to dampen the travel of the springs so that the car does not bounce continuously after hitting a bump. They are not designed to affect ride height unless of course you are using air shocks. I have ridden in a car with no rear shocks in place and it is a very scary ride. My ’55 also has issues with being “too low” in the back. It probably wouldn’t hurt to add one more leaf spring. That worked wonders on the ’53 I used to own.

    in reply to: 62 Meteor Seats? #4614

    Just look to the right on this web page. There is a link to LeBaron Bonney Company who specializes in automotive interiors. I am sure they can answer your questions or may have available the seat covers you are looking for.

    in reply to: About the Medalist model #4524

    Joe,

    Thanks for the link to the ad for the car. For a bunch of easily seeable reasons that is NOT a ’55. The grill is from a ’56, the “MERCURY” lettering on a ’55 is on the hood, not the bumper as on the car pictured. The quarter panel molding is definitely a ’56 and it is a Medalist model which was not made in ’55. Also, as stated above, the serial number of 56SL is for sure a ’56.

    I have seen this come up before on these older cars. When the car was an early production (for the model year) and it was registered for the first time, many motor vehicle departments (the local county in my case in Nebraska) registered the car for the year it was built but not the model year of production. Remember, back in the 50s the new cars were almost always introduced in September or early October. The confusion can arise from that. It could also be a simple typing error on the title or registration as well.

    in reply to: About the Medalist model #4522

    If the serial number begins 56SL that is a ’56 built in St Louis. There were no ’55 Medalists according to my shop manual which lists all of the ’55 models. I believe in ’55 the “cheap” Merc was a Custom.

    As to why there are no ’57 Medalists, who knows.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 158 total)