New Trunk Weatherstrip Install
 

But before I install the new, I have to safely remove the old W/S. The paint is nice so can't use any chemicals too strong. Any recommendations as to what methodology has worked well for you guys?

Try Goo off

Use a heat gun from the underside

3M makes a product specifically for this, doesnt harm paint & will soften up the old glue so you can wipe it off with a rag or usually a little more effort with a old toothbrush or nylon brush. Should be able to just pull off the old W/S or try heat from underside but be careful, too much heat will damage the paint.

I have some of the 3M left and can get the part# if needed.

Would love to get the part number. Thanks.

Please , please, Verify the Shape ( cross section) is the exact same, and same size. There are a ton of not so good repops, including late 80's GM stuff.

And make sure it installs the correct way, don't trust what just came out as being correct.

The can I have is 3m general purpose adhesive cleaner #08987. That # might be older, the current stuff I see online is part# 08984, probably have it in smaller cans at local auto stores or auto paint suppliers.

Follow instructions on the can & it works great & should not damage the paint, Ive used it on numerous trunk weatherstrips as well as T top channels.

Wondering what the factory spec was for the location of the trunk weatherstrip seam (where the ends meet)? My seam is located at a 2 o’clock position, which so far has avoided moisture accumulation at the typical 6 o’clock location. Anyone have a picture of an original seal installation for reference?

I'm finding that out. I currently have 3 potential replacements; 2 different brand repros and 1 NOS I bought either in the late '80's or early '90's, GM #9825829 (box dated 1982?). The only one I can tell for sure is a latex covered one is the GM item. But it's considerably larger in every dimension.
I was able to cut some clean cross sections from my old molding and only the Ames FK201C matches pretty closely, but is a simple extrusion, not coated and noticeably less soft.
Any more ideas on finding a more accurate product?

For 2nd gen firebirds I recall reading the seam was a couple inches to the left or right of the trunk latch. thats where I put it on a few cars with no leaks.

If not doing a NOS type resto, Ive had very good results with the Metro brand trunk seal, door seals too, looks & fits nice & has held up for almost 15 years & counting.

My experience is primary with 'F' and 'A' bodies, so may be different for your app. However in every case the end seams have been near the 6 o'clock position. And by 'near' I mean usually a bit to the left of center.

It appears that my 2 o’clock seam location may be a bit high. I have noticed that most replacement trunk seal seams are located at the 6 o’clock position. I have seen some very nice rides with a few inch offset in either direction from 6 o’clock. I have the flexibility to move or replace my trunk seal at any time, as I did not glue it in place during my last restoration. I have not experienced any water leaks so far, so my only concern is shrinkage over time. I am not the least bit concerned with any points judging repercussions..

As mentioned, original join location was just offset to side of latch.

I am subscribing to this thread from this post...

In terms of removal, it's been a decade - or almost four - since I did mine on my '63, but I used 900 PreKleano (RM wax & grease remover). Over the years, I found that it worked better than Ditzler's or DuPont's stuff. It didn't melt what was left of the original weatherstrip, didn't hurt the paint (okay, I had to re-wax, but hey...), and did a nice job of releasing the adhesive. ISTR that I used a plastic filler spreader to work the thing loose.

The other advantage to this method is that assuming you have no paint work to do in or around the groove, you should end up with a surface which is well prepped for new adhesive. Mine has held for 38 years so far.

Oh, and I'd have to look, but I think I laid the seam at about an inch off 6 o'clock.

GL HTH

>>>> VIDEO BELOW <<<>>>Ames stopped selling the "skinned" with latex many years ago due to their being fragile.
One day a friend, who has a couple Formulas, and I took at look at cross sections and installs ( dry)
between us we had 4 seals to try.. one was late 80's generic .
The ONLY seal we found that has the correct profile, and is SAME dimensions , is the one sold by 1 a auto.
This video shows the part number AND he installs it in his own Pontiac.
This seal passed the dollar bill test, and doesn't make the trunk too tight to shut easily.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikBDF4xRdw8

Then I could always splurge on this one!! No doubt it's correct.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/176220573076

Hey rick, I have some NOS if you’re looking for that

PM sent. Tell me more.

incase it bears repeating:

Yes, I've learned that. Also I have my original '70 & '72 to compare the W/S with. The 9825829 GM part I bought eons ago is latex covered and is nice and soft, but is taller than the original item. The Ames part is close to correct dimensions but is a simple extrusion, no bottom end stiffener or latex coating. Most importantly it is not as soft (compressible). Keep those helpful comments coming in. I'll make a final decision one of these days (soon).

I've learned of Fairchild Industries brand, so I ordered one to compare with these others I have.

The search goes on!! Maybe Tfor5 can help me out.

The GM seal changed over they years, possibly supplier rather than improvements, but even while it was rubber, latex coated, hollow in different areas, solid sponge or rope core, it still had the same part number, often a couple depending on length of seal. As in, it still didn't tell you what version you were getting, or what was used during production line use.

Hollow seals have benefits but haven't seen anyone actually give feedback on a comparison to the regular rubber seal they are still slamming to try and close.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...b25071dc00.jpg

Not sure where this fits in?

3060942 is the shorter version of the 9825829 seal, 13' vs 25'.

Shorter version, no string, plastic lower stiffener and much taller than the original assembly line part. Still better though than some of the repros.
IIRC, that number was made in Canada.

Watch the 1A auto video I mentioned / linked above..
Cross section and exact height is crucial.

Precision trunk seal is what 1A use in video. It is the same seal supplied to Classic, OER and similar places. The bags are labelled everywhere about being registered in the US, it is made in Taiwan.....or TW, as it says in tiny letters.

This is the type used, it is not F-body type/size being sold by others, they all seem to fit the same 1/2" channel so swapping around works.

https://catalog.prp.com/images/Websi...1_SA_LGE-2.jpg


This is the listing for Precision 70-81 F body seal.

https://catalog.prp.com/images/Websi...0_SA_LGE-2.jpg

And then many others list either and to suit all models GM. I have the Precision K3020 here, same that is labelled for Classic or OER etc, and is the standard 1" tall type, taller than both of the other versions. So rather than selecting a brand or shop that says it fits your model, you may need to request a particular part number. How tall was stock GM, production era? How easily did it compress, or seal? These seals are probably all fine, in their own application, but if hard to close the lid on these vehicles you generally need a softer version of same, or shorter version in height, or combination of both.

Just to remain confusing, here's another cross-section that claims to be the same thing. 1" tall which is fairly standard and generic. But 3/8" base. What's the channel size on a Firebird? I don't have access to one here. Is it meant to be a snug fit or are the larger sizes perhaps compressed slightly to fit? The K3020 bag I have here is halfway between the 3/8 and 1/2" wide at base, but also tapered as it goes up.

https://www.steelerubber.com/trunk-w...rip-82-0028-84

Requesting a specific part number? Thats a crap shoot as many numbers are homogolated into a " one size fits all"
To avoid all this confusion, and others " trying" out misc seals, which I did do, the OER we tested was Not the same. I know, personally I am done trimming the bottom, because the seal is to tall, or trying to cram a seal thats not correct shape into the gutter.
The 1A auto seal is cheap. And fits. You can watch it installed in a vintage Pontiac.
This really need to be "blueprinted" ??

If you actually read my reply you'd see I was clarifying the details that were in the video, the brand and the part number used. Or just guess since part numbers don't matter. The crucial height, wasn't even crucial enough to mention, so I did.
That's where it is pointed out that the seal used was not even one for F bodies. So again, a part number is handy or you won't find it. That is assuming you only want it based on the height.
So I added their other 2 common sizes as well, the last of which is used by everyone. Or just rely on vague suggestions of limited detail but still expect an exact and calculated result.

Once I get the Fairchild W/S in few days, I'll take a cross-section pic showing the differences between all the brands I've assembled. You guys can then take advantage of my research and make your own decisions.

BTW, my understanding is that, if any vender has 3020 as a part of the part number, that's manufactured by Metro, regardless of the name on the packaging.

Is Fairchild the one with 2 hollow sections? I nearly bought a pack in my last order but it bumped up shipping to double, had to remove again, not urgent.

I couldn't find any link to Metro US rubber and a bag from Taiwan. I wouldn't be surprised if they also shared or repackaged some products, or used the same supplier in US or elsewhere with their own packaging. Happens with other brands. The comment was in regards to many resto shops that don't list a brand name, or list their shop as the brand, but also some common names likes OER and Classic (one and the same anyway) are usually the same stock with different labels. And that being the standard 1" and hard to close solid rubber seal. The one guys want to avoid.

No offense was meant. I tested and found what they sell fits well.

None taken, was just trying to clear up the fact that if that's the seal you found worked then others can track it down and know that it isn't one normally specified for F body. As we know, those ones usually comes with dramas.

I appreciated seeing the cross sections;
The one used in the video was 101, the one they sell for the F-body is 100;
I had assumed that the 101 was the same as the 100 but a different length.

Still following...

Weatherstrip Comparison Pics
 

I finally got the last weatherstrip brand in, to compare the 6 different styles I now have. I only am showing the 4 main "competitors" that were my top choices.

From the left; my original (Van Nuys installed) W/S from the TA. #2 is the Ames item. #3 is the Precision Industries offering and 4th is the GM Service Replacement part #9825829 I bought in the '80's.

Softest one is the old original in spite of it being 53 years old. The GM SR molding is next softest,. but is 1 1/4" tall. The correct 1970 - 72 dimension is 1". some info I read says that 1973 started the factory installation of the 1 1/4" W/S.
There is no #3 in softness (compressibility) since all the others are quite firm, basically identical. Those would be the "non-holed" Metro, the Precision (appears the same as the newer Metro with 2 holes) and the Ames. Didn't include a pic of the older design Metro since there was no visible difference.

BTW, only the 2 GM items were latex coated. I found no aftermarket stripping that is coated. All are extrusions.

I'm leaning towards using the Ames part since it matches the original appearance the best (IMO). But am concerned about the low compressibility. GM SR part though tall, compresses better than any of the others.
(Can you believe anyone could be so obsessive that they'd sweat this detail??)

To use the GM version you must slice some ( evenly) off the bottom, been there.
Your original has a Flat bottom, the size of the gutter. That one, and the 3rd one are the ONLY ones that will sit FLUSH to the Bottom, yeah been There.
Too firm, they will pull out of the gutter, and cause issues closing.
# 3 passes the dollar bill test. gets a grip, but can pull out without ripping.
#3 has a perfect SHELF to fit under the gutter lip.
1A auto FTW.... next?>
Let You and the garden hose be the judge...

it's really interesting to see the differences here;
the Ames part looks to have the closest cross section to the original.

I wonder if there was intentionality on the Ames part not having the same bottom so that it might sit nicely/unmodified in a factory gutter...??

I would guess, after looking at these, that the SR GM part was a profile made for another application, which could be made to work - ergo, it became the replacement part so that there would be no justification to continue making the original style (for a car model that was presumably out of production for many years).

I like that the 'precision industries' has added hollows to aid in compressibility;
I wonder why they deviated so greatly from the original cross section - was this done because this "new" type would work for multiple applications (versus the original stuff only working for 70-81 F-bodies).

That would seem to be good reasoning based on simply looking at my pics. However the denseness of the foam even with the two holes (tunnels?) ends up with it being no more compressible than the Ames part without holes.

Interesting to note as I was setting up these pieces to take a pic in the vise and rag, that the two stiffest ones kept wanting to "roll over" sideways while the two GM parts stayed put and compressed easily.

That one looks like it has begun to crack. I used Soft Seal first, then removed it and put one from Metro in place.


Ken C.

I assume you removed the SoffSeal because it wasn't?

It was so tight my trunk wouldn't open. Being a solid profile vs. the Metro profile with air spaces, it wasn't compressing enough.

Time for an update/progress note. Decided to refinish the trunk gutter area due to many paint chips around the inner edge. Got a good paint match considering the rest is factory sprayed orig paint. Plus that gives me more time to mull over which weatherstrip I'm going to settle on. I make up my mind and then change it again. Now have a GM NOS strip coming that is not quite as tall as the later service replacement part I currently have.

Good input from all of you,...thanks!

Took these pics in a hurry just to show progress is being made. (Hard to take good pics of white & black with flash under fluorescent lights!)

Now on to the cleaning & restoring the taillights & installing the light harness (which is amazingly perfect).

File this under "better late than never"! Finally posting some pics of the completed project on the trunk end of the '71 TA. Chose the Ames weatherstrip due to its being the closest in size/appearance to the original. It's a bit firmer than the latex coated GM part, but the lid still closes pretty well. No harsh slam needed, just a firm push.
Decided to use a repro mat even though my factory piece is intact. Just too worn looking to install with everything else being freshened.

BTW, criticisms welcomed for "incorrectness". We can talk about it. :thanx:

I can't comment as to correctness, but it is certainly a beautiful job. Kudos.

i only want my doctor to be correct .looks great

Looks like it turned out well. i put my wife in the trunk for the water test....she's still my wife so i guess it went well lol jk

I’m giving this thread a bump;
at a glance when comparing against the cross sections Rick shared in post #36, it appears as though steelerubber has made a direct replacement (this was in the back of the final issue of Hemmings Muscle Machines);
If anyone more knowledgable than me buys this, I’d love to hear how it is (in fit and function) against the original stuff.

The only comment I can make on this advert, is that is says 1967 - 81, as if those two gens were the same originally. They were not. Similar though. That wording makes me a bit cautious of the items profile, etc.
Also, I'm assuming it's not latex coated since that's not mentioned.

unless I’m mistaken;
the profile matches what you pulled, and the spot says it’s supposed to be a “reproduction and direct replacement of GM part 9825829”.