[bill ryder]

Chrisp, NO, It came from either our host or APE.

[Jake64]

Forgive me for posting here, but I am hard pressed for time and my 'Search' skills are lacking, and I believe we may have discussed the first topic somewhere in this thread.

The two bolts that secure the cable bracket to the intake manifold were not present when the engine was painted, and should be free of paint. I have seen about five vendors used in the manufacture of these bolts if the different head markings are indicative of the vendors. I had a 'U' and a 'TR' bolt tested today by my plater. It turns out that both of these bolts were provided with a dark zinc phosphate coating.

This was discussed in another thread. The carb bases were also provided with a dark zinc phosphate coating.

I will be making another visit to my plater next week, and again in April. Is there any item(s) we feel needs to tested for identification? I was thinking the master brake cylinder reservoir. Any others??

[dld]

Originally Posted by Jake64

dld:
I did not want to make a definite claim in my Post No. 70 without some type of confirmation. I did not feel that my observation over the years of rusted fire wall harness J hooks was proof that they were uncoated. It is my opinion that most if not all components used by GM on our cars had some type of protection.
It is also my opinion that the J hooks found on our firewalls are most likely supplied by a single vendor. However, not taking chances, I used several of the hooks from the various plants (except KC), and had them tested. My plater recently spent $80,000 on a new machine that will test components for prior platings and coatings. The testing produced tracings of zinc. This is not surprising, as zinc has less protective properties then cadmium, and will fail (resulting in rust) a lot quicker then the cadmium used back in the day our cars were made. Zinc it is - the proof is in the testing.

Hard to support my thought on J hooks being untreated to a coating. However I don't recall seeing the j hooks standing as bright as zinc in any of the old magazine pics of our cars in 64 65. Not to argue but In a effort to be corrected. I think lots of parts and or assembles are not coated. Maybe a phosphorus wash at best. Example could be drive shaft, u-joints, control arms, (bottoms) steering box, parking brake assembly, (top area) brake upper bracket, seat tracks, seat springs, steering linkage, backing plates, ball joints front springs, Note the steering linkage and related were only painted in a attempted cosmetically enhance from one side in most case (customer view) .

On the thought of items of concern as to the plating . The lug nuts used on the standard wheel. The ones that are selling now on e-bay that are OEM with the correct marking. Seem to me to be to bright maybe Zinc. Which takes me back to the j Hooks I did not think GM used Zinc in 64 65 ???

[64woodwheel]

The ones on my parts car are olive drab color. A few years ago I had some off another car refinished. My plater used olive drab zinc.

[goatman65]

I know the thread is 64-65 but here is a 66 with rubber coated hooks. One is directly behind the spark plug wire bracket.The other can be seen behind the vac advance.

[dld]

Originally Posted by 64woodwheel

The ones on my parts car are olive drab color. A few years ago I had some off another car refinished. My plater used olive drab zinc.

Now that I did not think of. My thought was bright zinc. Not zinc chromate

[bill ryder]

I know that was a long time ago, BUT I was a service mechanic in a Pontiac dealership in the early 70s to the early 80s. I had the good fortune to change SEVERAL heater cores. I don't remember the firewall clips being drab green and I think I would. But, it has been a long time!!!!!!!!!!! "Bill"!

[dld]

Looking at the thread on throttle cable tags in the forum. The pic that was posted of the 64 4v car does have a glimpse of the wire harness strap. does appear to be bare or plated with a silver finish.

[Jake64]

Originally Posted by dld

Hard to support my thought on J hooks being untreated to a coating. However I don't recall seeing the j hooks standing as bright as zinc in any of the old magazine pics of our cars in 64 65. Not to argue but In a effort to be corrected. I think lots of parts and or assembles are not coated. Maybe a phosphorus wash at best. Example could be drive shaft, u-joints, control arms, (bottoms) steering box, parking brake assembly, (top area) brake upper bracket, seat tracks, seat springs, steering linkage, backing plates, ball joints front springs, Note the steering linkage and related were only painted in a attempted cosmetically enhance from one side in most case (customer view) .

On the thought of items of concern as to the plating . The lug nuts used on the standard wheel. The ones that are selling now on e-bay that are OEM with the correct marking. Seem to me to be to bright maybe Zinc. Which takes me back to the j Hooks I did not think GM used Zinc in 64 65 ???

I had a spare master brake reservoir tested by my plater. They could find no plating/coating.

Also had several period lug nuts tested. To my surprise, they found traces of zinc. This was unexpected, as cadmium provides better protection than zinc, and back in the '60's, would have been no more expensive. I wouldn't say that no zinc was used back in the day, but its use was minimal. Even the MPC references some use of zinc plated hardware.
I discussed your concerns on brightness. They replied that back in the '60's as well as today, varying degrees of sheen can be produced in the various plating processes, typically determined by the customer.

[dld]

Jake64 Thanks for comments Don