[bill ryder]

This is a box of worms!!! Were the assy. people doing wrong, or right. Were the Pont. execs. changing their minds about the look they wanted, or was it safety? Did they want the rh lense on the lh side and visa versa? Could the lense be installed upside down and reversed to get the same effect???? ALL THIS FROM A LITTLE PIECE OF PLASTIC.
I do know someone paid $560.00 for that NOS set the other day. Mine were $100.00 ea. 25 years ago. Maybe BOB V. is correct, we have very expensive parts cars!!!! bill

[Joe B]

Bill,
I know what you are saying. FYI the lens cannot be flipped only moved side to side. So with the reflective section in the middle (2nd design) it was the same lens left & right. With reflective section to the side (1st design) you had a left & right lens. That's probably why the change. The problem is if you put a left lens on the right and vice versa the single filament bulb could end up not behind the reflective section (1st design) or the reflective section could end up on the outside. We do not know if this was a U.S. Dept. of Transportation issue or just a Pontiac design issue, hence the letter.
Joe

[Keith Seymore]

By having a specific part LH vs RH you have to create a specific tool for each side (plus maintain two separate part numbers, stock two parts to the line, plus the opportunity to build it wrong, etc).

Making a single part that serves both sides cuts your tooling cost in half and eliminates the other logistical concerns (for both production and service).

K

[64woodwheel]

The statement by Mr. Roberts would make perfect sense in relation to the different position of the reflex portion if it weren't for the last phrase "the inboard end". If it had read "the center position of the lens", it would be perfectly clear what the intention was. I wonder if Mr. Roberts was informed of the change but did not grasp it or convey it accurately to Mr. Bates. "lamps are being changed at the present time" could mean that tooling is being made for the lens to be molded with the reflex portion in the center position.

[Joe B]

Chad,
maybe correct But I think that letter was out before the lens was changed. It was probably done because it was cheaper to manufacture one lens and to correct any confusion on which lens went on the L or R
Joe

[John V.]

Originally Posted by Joe B

Bill,
I know what you are saying. FYI the lens cannot be flipped only moved side to side. So with the reflective section in the middle (2nd design) it was the same lens left & right. With reflective section to the side (1st design) you had a left & right lens. That's probably why the change. The problem is if you put a left lens on the right and vice versa the single filament bulb could end up not behind the reflective section (1st design) or the reflective section could end up on the outside. We do not know if this was a U.S. Dept. of Transportation issue or just a Pontiac design issue, hence the letter.
Joe

Joe, this is my thinking also with respect to the 1st design lens.

Thanks for confirming that the lens cannot be flipped upside down.

Keith may be correct in his interpretation that the letter intimated a pending lens revision, implying the forthcoming lens that would have the center reflex section.

But I don't think so.

My car is built just as he suggests it would be with the change that he refers to "at the present time" to place the reflex section at the INBOARD section.

As you and I recognize, this COULD be accomplished by switching the lens right to left and vice versa.

There is a possible alternate possibility.

Unless the early installations inadvertently crossed the lenses this way, could it be that originally the lenses were marked right and left so that they were correctly positioned with the reflex section being the OUTBOARD section?

The change suggested on 9/26/63 then would mean switching the markings so that the right lens became the left.

Possibly the lenses were being installed incorrectly and the expedient "fix" was to plug the single filament bulb into the OUTBOARD position. That way they wouldn't have to disassemble and reassemble incorrectly assembled tail lamp assemblies.

And after recognizing the mistake, the permanent fix was to assemble the tail lamps properly with the RH lens in the RH housing and the LH lens in the LH housing and making sure assemblers and service people knew to plug the single filament bulb into whichever position the reflex section happened to be.

Most Pontiac applications had a RH and LH lens in those years. Tough to believe the 2nd style lens was a result of cost/inventory reduction. The '64 Lemans really was an exception when it went to the 2nd style lens, common for both sides. Whether it was to overcome assembly confusion or to change the tail lamp look is open for debate.

I agree, the 9/26/63 change may have been in response to Fed law. Could be Fed law required the stop/signal lamp to be lit closer to the outboard corner of the car. That might have driven the first change.

As I posted, I remember thinking the side by side double filament setup looked "funny" to me. I did then and still do think the separated double filament setup looked better when the stop or signal lamps were on.

Both the initial change indicated by this 9/26/63 letter and the 2nd style change whenever it occurred did put a stop/signal bulb in the outboard position if that was required by law.

But I'm not buying the idea that the 2nd style lens was already in the works on 9/26/63, not when my car built 2 months later has the 1st style lens installed just as Mr. Roberts described it would be.

Chad, consider that Mr. Roberts very clearly referred to the "lamps" and then to the "lens". I think he knew exactly what he was saying.

It is only one car, but my own Nov example not only matches what he wrote, but the lens AND the housing are appropriately marked for side.

Only thing unknown is how were the lens and housing marked prior to 9/26/63.

And I'm convinced the 2nd design lens came much later and was not addressed in this letter.

Consider if you had never iknown of a 2nd design lens, would you read the letter and think the reflex section was ever in the center of the lens? I can't see how.

Knowing there was such a thing is what made my first reading of the letter confusing. Only on a careful read did it become clear that he isn't talking about the 2nd design lens at all. My

[64woodwheel]

John, on your car the brakes light up the two outboard and the center sections? If that is the case, do the inboard lamps only come on when the headlights are on too?

[bill ryder]

Brakes and turn signal on the outside 2, headlight on the inner AND both outer. Outer and middle are duel element 1157s, inner is 1156 single element. That's how mine are. bill

[3 Deuce 64]

On my car the outboard and inboard are stop, turn and tail lights the center is tail lights only April 23 64 stamped on my build sheet and the cowl under the passenger side front fender.

[John V.]

Originally Posted by 64woodwheel

John, on your car the brakes light up the two outboard and the center sections? If that is the case, do the inboard lamps only come on when the headlights are on too?

Chad, my GTO is in pieces. But even if it was assembled, how the lamps light would depend on where any previous owner plugged in the lamp sockets to the housing. But assuming the single filament bulb was plugged in behind the reflex section as was identified as correct in the 9/26/63 letter, then the answer is yes, the stop/turn double filament bulbs would light up the center and outboard positions with taillights on (light switch set to park or headlights) and brightly light with brake on or brightly flash with turn signal on. The single filament bulb at the inboard position would only light up with taillights on but not brightly light with the stop or signal circuit.

I thought I might be able to figure something out from the wiring diagram in the Shop Manual Fig. 11-2 or from the revised diagram on page 43 of the Service Craftsman News Issue 3-1964. But it seems to ADD to the confusion. At risk of confusing everybody, here is what the diagram seems to show.

The standard car tail lamp wiring is shown for the RH side. The Lemans tail lamp wiring is shown for the LH side.

I am no electrical wiz, but what I see, seems to show the CENTER position socket to have a single wire to it that presumably would be the single filament bulb (on Shop Manual pg. 11-89, the bulb chart identifies the 22 series Lemans as using 2 no. 93 single filament tail lamp bulbs but does not identify the position). The INBOARD and OUTBOARD position sockets each have two wires to them, presumably 2 filament bulbs (Bulb Chart shows the 22 Series Lemans as using 4 no. 1157 Tail, Stop, & Sig lamp bulbs).

But I can't make the wiring schematic match to my actual tail lamp wiring.

Since the wiring is not installed, I haven't decided which is the RH and which is the LH.

But the wiring is as follows, with the socket nos. made up by me just to sort them, not to sugggest where they should be plugged in to the housing.

SIDE 1
Socket 1 - 1 BLUE wire
Socket 2 - 1 BLUE wire, 1 PURPLE wire
Socket 3 - 1 BLUE wire, 2 PURPLE wires

SIDE 2
Socket 1 - 1 BLUE wire
Socket 2 - 1 BLUE wire, 1 DARK PINK wire
Socket 3 - 1 BLUE wire, 2 DARK PINK wires

Notes:
1. Wiring is dirty where it has been long ago exposed. I first thought the BLUE wires were DARK GREEN. Best I can tell, they are all actually BLUE, but was hard for me to be certain without unwrapping them which I don't want to do at the moment. Perhaps somebody with cleaner wires can confirm.
2. DARK PINK may actually be RED, they look more pink than red to me, but can't be sure if they are faded.
3. Socket 2 on SIDE 2 has apparently been replaced at some point, the socket itself has 2 BLACK wires extending a couple inches out and spliced (poorly) to the BLUE and DARK PINK wires from the wire harness.

The wiring schematic does not indicate 3 wires to any socket so how does my actual wiring make sense?

The Shop Manual has a date of August 1963 on the Table of Contents page.

If the schematic indicates the single filament bulb socket in the middle position, does that contradict the 9/26/63 letter stipulating the single filament bulb to be positioned behind the reflex section, whether OUTBOARD initially or INBOARD when the reflex section was moved to the INBOARD position?

If it does contradict the letter, how do we account for the pictures in the magazine articles that show the stop lamps glowing side by side?

What would be the logic of NOT putting a double filament bulb behind the reflex section?

Assuming Mr. Roberts had the story straight, the reflex section was originally installed in the OUTBOARD position and then changed to the INBOARD position. Later, we know a 2nd style lens was introduced that placed the reflex section in the CENTER position.

Check the attached picture from the March 1964 Popular Hot Rodding. Doesn't it show the reflex section in the OUTBOARD position just as Mr. Roberts explained? No idea how early this car was built, but it has the same tag as the Blue car from the Car & Driver test (so likely the same car) and is believed to have been built very early.

Couple this photo with the positioning of the reflex section on my car, isn't this further evidence to support what Mr. Roberts wrote?

Can't explain the wiring schematic evidence. Not sure why it would show the single filament bulb in the middle, if that is actually what it is showing. Maybe that is what the stylists wanted but in execution, the early lenses did not permit it, until the 2nd style lens was released. The release of that lens being the main question here that has now evolved into what is the correct placement of the bulbs with the 1st style lens!!??

Originally Posted by bill ryder

Brakes and turn signal on the outside 2, headlight on the inner AND both outer. Outer and middle are duel element 1157s, inner is 1156 single element. That's how mine are. bill

Bill, another data point if I follow what you report. Can you confirm you have the 1st style lens, reflex (reflector) section is inboard section of the lens? When was your car built?

Originally Posted by 3 Deuce 64

On my car the outboard and inboard are stop, turn and tail lights the center is tail lights only April 23 64 stamped on my build sheet and the cowl under the passenger side front fender.

Don, that is another data point but need to confirm that you have the 2nd style lens, reflex (reflector) section in the center of the lens?

[64woodwheel]

I did some more digging and found another letter, basically just a reiteration of the topics of the first letter. It does clearly state the reflex lens will soon be moved to the inboard end.

I still think this was a misunderstanding on Mr. Roberts' part. I think Mr. Roberts was anticipating the possibility of the bulbs being in the wrong location when the cars arrived at the dealers and was informing the General Service Manager, Mr. Bates. Mr. Bates in turn disseminated the information down the line.

Since the change is described as happening "soon" that indicates to me there was more involved than swapping lens location left to right. If that had panned out could you imagine the confusion in the MPC listing for left and right lenses? It would have to read either lens could be used for left or right depending on when it was built, etc. That was not the case. New molds were made, (with the reflex in the center position) and existing inventory of the old L/R lenses presumably would have been used up or saved for service replacements.

So back to the original question. The only evidence I can find indicates that the change occurred "soon" after Oct. 21, 1963. I have combed through all of my references and these two letters are the only mention of it. It's too bad the '64 assembly manual is still in hiding.

[Joe B]

My first response to all this and I think everyone agrees the single filament bulb is installed behind the reflective section. But it would be nice to know for sure when Pontiac went from the 1st design to the 2nd lens? All we can confirm it was "soon" after Oct. 21, 1963.
Joe

[Tom Wood 64]

I have the first type with reflex inboard, if i were to switch sides the reflex would be outboard. I could install them upside down, but they would not follow the contour of the housing. I have a 64 Motor Trend where they road test a 64 vert. Reflex outboard, in another magazine the red car and driver 64 has the reflex inboard. Could the above notice been sent to clarify where the reflex should be located?

[64woodwheel]

Here are the shots from C&D, MT, and Popular Hot Rodding. They all have the reflex on the outboard side. Tom, do you have a different magazine that shows the tail panel?

[John V.]

Originally Posted by 64woodwheel

I did some more digging and found another letter, basically just a reiteration of the topics of the first letter. It does clearly state the reflex lens will soon be moved to the inboard end.

I still think this was a misunderstanding on Mr. Roberts' part. I think Mr. Roberts was anticipating the possibility of the bulbs being in the wrong location when the cars arrived at the dealers and was informing the General Service Manager, Mr. Bates. Mr. Bates in turn disseminated the information down the line.

Since the change is described as happening "soon" that indicates to me there was more involved than swapping lens location left to right. If that had panned out could you imagine the confusion in the MPC listing for left and right lenses? It would have to read either lens could be used for left or right depending on when it was built, etc. That was not the case. New molds were made, (with the reflex in the center position) and existing inventory of the old L/R lenses presumably would have been used up or saved for service replacements.

So back to the original question. The only evidence I can find indicates that the change occurred "soon" after Oct. 21, 1963. I have combed through all of my references and these two letters are the only mention of it. It's too bad the '64 assembly manual is still in hiding.

Chad, pic is too small, very tough to read and no zoom feature. Can you attach as a jpeg directly here?

You didn't comment to the evidence I gave.

If this new document dated 10/21/63 also says the reflex lens would be moved from OUTBOARD (as seen in the pic I posted) to INBOARD (as assembled on my late Nov car) soon, why do you think Mr. Roberts got it wrong?

I understand what you mean for the MPC.

BUT...there is picture evidence of an early car with OUTBOARD reflex lenses and actual evidence of my car & I think Bill's car with INBOARD reflex lenses.

The change of reflex lens position from OUTBOARD to INBOARD is noted in the two documents that you've found.

So evidence exists that the change which you think might have been confusing in the MPC actually DID pan out. At least I'm convinced that it did based on actual evidence.

We can speculate that the early LAMP ASSEMBLIES were either assembled wrong or that they simply decided to reverse the reflex positions for the reasons suggested earlier (llaw required it or somebody thought it would look better). Unlikely they would have tried to address an assembly mistake (if that is what it was) on early production cars in the MPC.

No actual evidence has contradicted Mr. Roberts.

The evidence actually supports him.

Joe B, might be useful to know how your NOS lenses are marked.

Did some searching, found this:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1964-Pontiac...p2047675.l2557

The p/ns match to the MPC listing for the 1st type lenses, 5955621 for LH and 5955622 for RH. But the seller states both lenses are identical and marked "STDB 64".

At first, I suspected he had boxes for the 1st style but 2nd style lenses, taking him at his word that the lenses are "identical".

But I decided to pull out BOTH my Lamp Assemblies just to check.

Turns out, mine are marked the SAME as he says these are marked.

There is NO Right and Left marking on the lenses. Perhaps there is a marking on the backside of the lens, but nothing external that I saw when installed in the lamp assembly.

So they are NOT really identical, reflex sections are at opposite ends.

But the choice to reverse them side to side would be a no brainer.

And yes, there would be the potential for confusing them in production of the lamp assemblies. For service, it would have been a problem for anybody replacing just one lens, as it depended on whether the originals used the OUTBOARD or INBOARD installation.

My guess, PMD ignored that problem. For the rare case where the "wrong" one was supplied, either it could be swapped or more likely, nobody noticed if you had one OUTBOARD reflector and one INBOARD reflector after a repair.

I am 95% sure my lamp assemblies are original and so are the lenses in them. No indication they've ever been taken apart.

Regardless of whether Mr. Roberts was correct or mistaken, seems to me the 2nd type lens did not enter production until after my car. I realize this may have been a transitional change and actual initial installations of the 2nd style lens might have varied by Plant.

But I don't think we have found enough evidence to say even approximately when the 2nd style lenses started to appear.

And unless contradictory evidence is found, I'm convinced the 1st style lenses were still correct at least a month after the 10/21/63 document. Gotta believe the 2nd style lenses would have entered production a lot earlier than late Nov. if they were already being prepared for release when the 9/26/63 letter was written.

I just can't agree that Mr. Roberts was most likely misunderstanding the issue.

If anything, I would think Mr. Bates was slow in disseminating the info he got from Mr. Roberts. His idea of "soon be moved" might have been flawed. That change may already have been accomplished around 9/26/63 when Mr. Roberts stated "at the present time", doubt that it took 4 weeks or more to accomplish reversal of the lens positions.

I agree that the primary service intent at that point was to confirm that the single filament bulbs were in the appropriate location regardless of whether the reflex section was INBOARD or OUTBOARD.

It is easy to imagine that if the lenses were crossed up as an early production error, PMD may very well have decided to simply solve the problem by changing bulb socket positions at the dealer level, for which I doubt they reimbursed the dealer.

If they had decided to have the dealer swap the lenses around instead, they surely would have had to pay for the dealer labor.

Rather than speculate back and forth, what we really need is actual evidence.

Just need to tell us whether the lens is INBOARD, OUTBOARD, or CENTER, Plant where assembled, and the build date of the car per the Data Plate would be easiest way to try and pin down the approx date of introduction of the 2nd style lens.

[John V.]

Originally Posted by Tom Wood 64

I have the first type with reflex inboard, if i were to switch sides the reflex would be outboard. I could install them upside down, but they would not follow the contour of the housing. I have a 64 Motor Trend where they road test a 64 vert. Reflex outboard, in another magazine the red car and driver 64 has the reflex inboard. Could the above notice been sent to clarify where the reflex should be located?

Tom, now we're getting somewhere. The C&D Red car was built early Nov at Pontiac. I assume you can confrim to Chad what mag shows the reflex inboard on it?

Where and when was your car built please? That would be another data point, hopefully later than mine.

Originally Posted by 64woodwheel

Here are the shots from C&D, MT, and Popular Hot Rodding. They all have the reflex on the outboard side. Tom, do you have a different magazine that shows the tail panel?

As I mentioned earlier, the C&D & Pop Rod shots most likely are of the same Blue car, since they have the same license plate on it. It is NOT the Red car.

What issue of MT was the convert tested? Or when? Probably won't tell us when or where it was built, but the outboard reflectors at least tell us it was a pretty early car and chances are it was a pretty early in the model year test, no?

[Joe B]

conclusion:It seems Pontiac never had a specific location of the reflective part of the lens, The only request by them is that the single filament bulb went behind the reflective section and try to put the reflective section towards the middle of the car.
Joe

[3 Deuce 64]

Originally Posted by John V.

Don, that is another data point but need to confirm that you have the 2nd style lens, reflex (reflector) section in the center of the lens?

John, I have the second style lens with the reflective part of the lense in the center

[Joe B]

Don,
what month was your car built?
Joe

[Tom Wood 64]

The MT issue with the vert is Jan 64, the Red C+D car is from March of 89 mag. My car is a late Jan car put together from scratch. I was told at the time ( I don,t remember by who) said the car probally had the first type. Both type lenses have the same lettering on the outside, but in different locations. In the letter 64WW shows 64 early model tempest problems. It states that the reflex is outboard and when servicing make sure the correct bulb is in that location. Under that is a note that states the reflex will be moved inboard. I don,t know the rhyme or reason of said moves, but you think somebody up top said, fix this effffing thing, it,s costing us money?