 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Antique and Collectibles / Antique Cars / February 2006Seatbelts for a Sweetheart of 1963 Mercury Comet
Greetings. Well, I'm finally follwong my heart! A litte Valentine's Day present -to me! I'm about to buy a 4-door 1963 Comet in really great condition and recent overhauls. I know that since it's not required to be equipped with a seatbelt, I don't have to have them. But I'm concerned about driving around without them. I don't want any of my passengers hurt. Can anyone offer me some words of wisdom? Would it damage the value of the car too terribly much if I have someone install shoulder straps? The auto parts place says waist straps will be easy to do; How difficult and costly would/should it be to have shoulder straps for the front seat (driver and front passenger)? Finally, if anyone has any thoughts about owning one of these, for better or for worse, I would be happy to hear from you! (The elderly man who is selling it to me says that the engine was rebuilt, -new brake shoes, new belts and hoses, transmission repair, new apolostry, new ignition, new paint 5 years ago, and only 55, 000$ miles. No chassi rust. Dash features are original and new apolostry is very vintage in look. He's asking 3,000. How does that seem?) Thanks to any one out there who reponds! ; -- ThatGirll > Greetings. Well, I'm finally follwong my heart! A litte Valentine's Day present -to me! I'm about to buy a 4-door 1963 Comet in really great condition and recent overhauls. I know that since it's not required to be equipped with a seatbelt, I don't have to have them. But I'm concerned about driving around without them. I don't want any of my passengers hurt. Can anyone offer me some words of wisdom? Would it damage the value of the car too terribly much if I have someone install shoulder straps? The auto parts place says waist straps will be easy to do; How difficult and costly would/should it be to have shoulder straps for the front seat (driver and front passenger)? Finally, if anyone has any thoughts about owning one of these, for better or for worse, I would be happy to hear from you! (The elderly man who is selling it to me says that the engine was rebuilt, -new brake shoes, new belts and hoses, transmission repair, new apolostry, new ignition, new paint 5 years ago, and only 55, 000$ miles. No chassi rust. Dash features are original and new apolostry is very vintage in look. He's asking 3,000. How does that seem?) Thanks to any one out there who reponds! ;) > > -- > ThatGirll Sounds like a cool ride, have fun with it. You should have factory provisions for lap belts, front and rear, already in the floorpan. My '62 Lark had the mounts already there and IIRC they were actually federally mandated to be there, although the belts themselves were optional. So lap belts are easy. You might want to post to one of the Ford groups and see if you can get an answer there about the shoulder harnesses; I am not sure when those were introduced but likely not until later. The oldest car I recall seeing them on was my ex-GF's '69 Valiant. So if you want 3-point belts there may be some custom work involved. Since this is a 4-door I assume it has a "post" between the doors, which would be the logical place to put the mount for the shoulder portion of the harness. This would involve removing the trim and/or peeling back the headliner and having someone weld in a reinforcement plate and a nut to provide a place to screw the mount on each side. Keep in mind that while this is arguably a good idea it still won't be as safe as a modern car; you probably don't have a collapsible steering column and your brakes won't be quite as good as modern ones. If you're very safety minded, you may want to consider, in the following order: 1) modern radial tires. Forget what people say about old suspensions not being "tuned" for radials, if you can find ones that fit they will still be an improvement over the old bias plys. 2) a dual reservoir master cylinder. These were not mandated back in '63; they may have been available but they weren't mandatory until about '67 or thereabouts. Check and make sure, if you have an old "fruit jar" if you bust one brake line or hose you have no brakes. This is Not Good. But before you run out and get one think about... 3) converting to front discs. If you plan on driving this car a *lot* you may want to add disc brakes. Now some drums are pretty good (the 11" drums on my Studebakers are easily capable of handling normal driving) and some are not so good. If you decide to do this, there are companies that specialize in this stuff. Again, posting to a Ford specific group may help here. I've seen "kits" with most of the stuff you need to do this, including lines and hoses and a new master cylinder (may require a different MC than the drums did.) This is why I said to think about whether you wanted discs or not before running out and converting to a dual master cylinder. Not sure about whether you're getting a good deal or not, but in my area any car that runs and drives and will pass safety and emissions (the latter isn't an issue with a '63 model) is worth at least $2K so if you like it and have the $$$ I say go for it. If you're really worried about the value - i.e. this is your first old car and are trying to leave the option of selling it later open - check the NADA old car price guide and see where you're at. good luck and have fun! nate > Since this is a 4-door I assume it has a "post" between the > doors, which would be the logical place to put the mount for the > shoulder portion of the harness. This would involve removing the trim > and/or peeling back the headliner and having someone weld in a > reinforcement plate and a nut to provide a place to screw the mount on > each side. This would involve a greast deal more than that. The posts on the Comet were very "stylish", which means that they were about an inch wide. Just big enough to mount the weatherstripping. You can see one here. http://www.angelfire.com/blues/merc/index.html If it can be done, you're probably going to have to mount the shoulder belt reel on the floor and run the harness up over the back of the seat. As Nate says, it won't be as strong as those in modern vehicles. > 1) modern radial tires. Forget what people say about old suspensions > not being "tuned" for radials, if you can find ones that fit they will > still be an improvement over the old bias plys. Radials have weaker sidewalls than older designs. The old Ford products lean pretty badly in turns with radial tires. I would put fiberglass belted tires on (just like I did in the 70s). If you decide to mount radials, you will want to add some aftermarket anti-sway bars. > 2) a dual reservoir master cylinder. This site has some info on that conversion. http://www.geocities.com/kimscomet63 > 3) converting to front discs. If you plan on driving this car a *lot* > you may want to add disc brakes. Now some drums are pretty good (the > 11" drums on my Studebakers are easily capable of handling normal > driving) and some are not so good. The brakes on the Comets and Falcons were excellent in this period. The only real advantage that discs would give you on these cars is the ability to handle water. Take one of these cars through water that reaches up to the axles and you will have no brakes at all. Drivers of the period knew this and would ride the brakes to dry them out if they got wet. You'd get the brakes back in 100 yards or so. Other drivers of the period simply avoided deep puddles. As for value, it may be a good deal. There's a 2-door on Ebay right now. The bidding has reached $3,900 with about a day to go. Another 2-door is up over $1,500, with over 5 days to go. This site has a bunch of links that look promising. http://q.webring.com/hub?ring=mercurymagic George Patterson Coffee is only a way of stealing time that should by rights belong to your slightly older self. > > Since this is a 4-door I assume it has a "post" between the > > doors, which would be the logical place to put the mount for the [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > on the floor and run the harness up over the back of the seat. As Nate says, it > won't be as strong as those in modern vehicles. Could still be done. Or she could swap to some seats that have built-in seatbelts, but then they would look less "correct." > > 1) modern radial tires. Forget what people say about old suspensions > > not being "tuned" for radials, if you can find ones that fit they will [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > (just like I did in the 70s). If you decide to mount radials, you will want to > add some aftermarket anti-sway bars. Not a bad idea, either. I forget about all the little "tweaks" I've done to my cars... my '55 Stude has a front bar off a '63 Hawk and a rear bar off a '55 sedan, as well as heavy duty springs all around. Definitely some work involved, but definitely worth it. IMHO most American cars of the time could benefit from sway bars and HD springs - the stock suspensions were way too compliant for good handling, and the ride isn't that great either ("floaty" cars make me nervous.) Still and all, given the choice, I'd probably run radials, even if I didn't have the $$ to upgrade the suspension. I'd be planning on doing it anyway, so... nate > IMHO most > American cars of the time could benefit from sway bars and HD springs - > the stock suspensions were way too compliant for good handling, and the > ride isn't that great either ("floaty" cars make me nervous.) The low end Fords weren't floaty, and the Falcon/Comet series were relatively light. Leafs on the back and coils on the front. The Fairlane of that year came stock with a front anti-sway bar. Don't remember if the Falcons did or not. If the front springs are original, they should be replaced. They carry the engine load and get soft after 15 years or so. The rear springs are fine until you get a couple of adults in the back seat with perhaps a bit of weight in the trunk. Heavy-duty rear springs will jolt your teeth out when there's no load back there, though. George Patterson Coffee is only a way of stealing time that should by rights belong to your slightly older self. > > IMHO most > > American cars of the time could benefit from sway bars and HD springs - [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Coffee is only a way of stealing time that should by rights belong to > your slightly older self. I will have to defer to you on this one; I have no experience at all with the car that we're discussing. As an aside, however, I have had good luck with the Gabriel "Classic Gas" series of shocks; a set of four for a Studebaker is about $60 from AutoZone and I've used them on several cars with good results. I don't really have a choice in the matter; they're the only "direct fit" shocks available, but they work very well considering the price. I have only had to return one shock and I've used them on all of my cars as well as several others. (it was "locked up" which caused an odd corkscrewing under braking... not cool...) It was no hassle; I actually returned the pair and got two new ones a week later with no trouble. To get a little off topic, I've been told that one can modify shocks for a 70's Camaro to work fairly easily, if I desired to go to Konis or similar, but the price difference is enough that I haven't bothered to try. nate Your car is on the cusp of era of ubiquitous lap belts. Considering what a plainly good idea they are (they actually predate the automobile), it's amazing that it took so long, but they're really a 1950s innovation. I think that anchor points were required in 1962, should you want to install your own belts or order them as an option -- a requirement driven by a few states, long before the Feds really got into the game. The actual belts became more or less a standard feature over a couple of years though -- I'm a bit murky on this one -- they might not have been strictly required nationwide until as late as 1967. My long-gone '63 Comet had front belts; my '66 Thunderbird has them front and rear, although any poor pilgrim consigned to the rear seat of that car isn't going anywhere. I'm pretty sure shoulder harnesses weren't mandated until calendar 1968, though they were available on some cars starting in the late 50s. The car would definitely have a single brake circuit with drums all around, which is fine as long as everything's in good shape. The disadvantages are: 1. As others have mentioned, you have to dry out your drums by light braking after going through water. 2. Although well-adjusted drums can give you a few good stops in succession, they soon fall victim to brake fade -- the drum expands with heat faster than the shoes can keep up. Don't expect to drive this vehicle to forgive hard and/or thoughtless driving the way a modern one would. 3. As others have mentioned, one leak anywhere can drain the whole system, unlike the 1967-up dual-circuit scheme that leaves you with some hydraulic braking unless some catastrophe takes out some major common point in both systems. Of course the handbrake has a mechanical connection to the rear brakes, so you do have some emergency stopping power left even after the hydraulic system goes dry. Other things to know: Some Comets and Falcons had somewhat underprivileged engines (as small as 144 cubic inches!), and the two-speed (lugging or valve float) Mush-o-Matic tranny didn't help. Manual transmissions and the larger engines or preferably both were better. That Ford inline Six was certainly smooth and durable. The electricity probably comes from a generator -- the more modern and generally satisfactory alternator was phased in (no pun intended) somewhere around 1964 or '65. One can live with a generator, certainly, but the voltage is bound to sag at low revs and high demand (ever notice how the headlights in cars in old movies get dim and yellow under those circumstances? That's what's going on.) Now for some good news: The Comet of that era, along with the Ford Falcon, is essentially Mustang 0.9 Beta and a lot of the repair parts and possible upgrades and knowledge gom that community should be applicable. Cheers, --Joe > The actual belts became more or less a standard feature over a couple > of years though -- I'm a bit murky on this one -- they might not have > been strictly required nationwide until as late as 1967. Lap belts were optional equipment on Ford products in 1963, so front and rear attachment points will at least be in there. Attachment points were not present in the 1961 vehicles. Dunno 'bout '62 (never owned one). > Other things to know: Some Comets and Falcons had somewhat > underprivileged engines (as small as 144 cubic inches!), and the > two-speed (lugging or valve float) Mush-o-Matic tranny didn't help. > Manual transmissions and the larger engines or preferably both were > better. That Ford inline Six was certainly smooth and durable. The 144 was a decent engine, as long as you didn't have a slush pump. It will be pretty hard to find parts for one of those, though. Hope it has something larger. > The electricity probably comes from a generator -- the more modern and > generally satisfactory alternator was phased in (no pun intended) > somewhere around 1964 or '65. Alternators came in in 1965, IIRC; in any case, the '63 products had generators. The main problem with a generator at this point is that you may have trouble find replacement parts. At some point, the cars get old enough that specialty shops start making parts for rebuilds. Dunno if that's happened with that era of Fords yet. About 15 years ago, you'd be hunting through junkyards if the armature died on an early 60s Ford generator. George Patterson Coffee is only a way of stealing time that should by rights belong to your slightly older self. > About 15 years ago, you'd be hunting through junkyards if the > armature died on an early 60s Ford generator. If one's lot in life includes the mixed blessing of living in a big city, you can usually find a place that does really low-level reconstruction of the innards of electrical machinery. I've had such places do power window and power-seat motors for me on occasion; bet they could tackle a generator, and if they're oriented toward the old-car market it might even be a familiar task. It's marginally more expensive than getting a drop-in rebuilt unit from a mainstream auto parts store, and it definitely keeps the vehicle out of commission longer, but the results tend to be good. Plan B, if you like electrical work, is to convert to an alternator (hopefully using some cookbooked help from the old-Ford community), but a lot of people who are comfortable with the hairiest kinds of mechanical work are uncomfortable doing more than the most basic electrical things (and some of the ones who are comfortable with it make the next owner wish they hadn't been!). Of course, the original poster (for whom I'm primarily writing; you and Nate know at least as much as I do about these things) should consider all such modifications in the context of the fundamental decision about a vintage car: how original should it be kept? Everybody's got their own comfort zone on the continuum between an excruciating restoration with an invisible concours judge looking over their shoulder, to a Discovery Channel degree of customization (I exaggerate only slightly when saying that some of the Mustang aftermarket seems to keep only the VIN plates and the chrome horse!), with most people doing various intermediate concessions to modern living that get lumped together as "restification." Cheers, --Joe > Greetings. Well, I'm finally follwong my heart! A litte Valentine's Day present -to me! I'm about to buy a 4-door 1963 Comet Ah, I like Comets. Of course, the Comet was supposed to be a model of the Edsel division, but when they killed the line in late '59, the Comet became Mercury's. I've seen pictures of Edsel dealers where they converted "EDSEL" to "COMET", with the big green "E" becoming a big green "C". As for belts... I'd settle for lap belts. A lot easier to install, and will work as they should. I'd be a little concerned that rigging a shoulder point might be false comfort, since the car wasn't designed with those in mind. I know my '58 Edsel offered lap belts as an option (wish the original owner would have ordered them!), so I'm positive your Comet won't be hard to add them too either. Heck, even my '53 Caddie has them. I plan on adding some to my Edsel this spring. Enjoy your Comet! -- ~~R.Banks |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.