Factory undercoating question / opinion

[vintage chromoly]

hello all.
Here are a few pics of my 68 coronet (lynch road car) bottom.
I was told by the guy who found the car in the early 90’s that it was undercoated when he found it. He is not the guy I bought if from.
The car was garages from 1971ish until the early 90’s.
Was a drag car that got put up and sat for years.

Anyhow, I’ve always wondered if it was truly factory done or maybe was an aftermarket job after the fact.

Car has no broadcast sheet.

Can any of you guys who have experience with what factory undercoating jobs looked like give me your opinion?

Thanks

 

[dadsbee]

Looks a lot like my Superbird.. factory Lynch Road undercoat car..

 

[R413]

I say not factory. Look at the parking brake cables. They should not have any undercoating on them, and they are covered.

Same with the leaf spring, should have no undercoat on them.

 

[dadsbee]

Possibly, but tell that to the drunk with the gun in the pit. They were undercoated after assembly, not when coming out of paint.

 

[vintage chromoly]

Just to be clear, I’m talking about the rustproofing option, not normal sound deadening / blackout that all cars got in the wheelwells.

 

[R413]

Possibly, but tell that to the drunk with the gun in the pit. They were undercoated after assembly, not when coming out of paint.

No they did not spray undercoat on a complete car at the factory. At the factory the car was minus engine, trans, rear end, and seats. So the seat bolt holes had tape over them which left no undercoating on the floor where the tape was.

The car did have brake lines, fuel lines, gas tank in it.

The dealership sprayed the complete cars with undercoat as a paid service by the customer, not included,

 

[dadsbee]

Build sheet coded J55 full undercoat was not done at the dealership..

 

[R413]

Just to be clear, I’m talking about the rustproofing option, not normal sound deadening / blackout that all cars got in the wheelwells.

There is no rustproofing option. All cars went into a dip tank and it went part way up. You can see the line when removing the interior kick panels, or with the firewall bare of heater and insulation.

Yes they all had undercoating in the wheel wells. Full undercoating was a factory option J55 on 1969 and newer.

 

[vintage chromoly]

I’m aware of the dip primer line and that process.
So, if no factory rustproofing until the 69 model year, mine must have been done at the dealer or a local rustproofing shop.

Thanks for the replies fellas

 

[MoparBill]

I don't mean to hijack this thread, but does anyone have any pics or drawings for the undercoating in the wheel wells?

 

[moparnation74]

I don't mean to hijack this thread, but does anyone have any pics or drawings for the undercoating in the wheel wells?

In my build thread.....Use the restoration tool.....

 

[moparnation74]

I’m aware of the dip primer line and that process.
So, if no factory rustproofing until the 69 model year, mine must have been done at the dealer or a local rustproofing shop.

Thanks for the replies fellas

My Opinion is NO it is not a factory undercoat job....

To give you an idea....Here is Brians' Pop's well known low mileage vert......Lots of original details here and a fine job he did preserving them...
https://www.forbbodiesonly.com/moparforum/threads/bringing-it-back-to-factory-specs.67715/

 

[Demonic]

Any trace of a Ziebart sticker in the doorjamb, or even the back window? Little yellow plugs in the doorjamb? My Charger was Ziebart'ed at the dealer.

 

[vintage chromoly]

No trace of anything other than the bottom being sprayed.
There is nothing forward of the firewall and nothing inside the doors.

Any trace of a Ziebart sticker in the doorjamb, or even the back window? Little yellow plugs in the doorjamb? My Charger was Ziebart'ed at the dealer.

 

[69hemibeep]

I just went back and looked at my disassembly pictures and it looks factory to me. And drunk with a gun is a good description LOL J55 at a cost of $16.60

 

[moparnation74]

I just went back and looked at my disassembly pictures and it looks factory to me. And drunk with a gun is a good description LOL J55 at a cost of $16.60View attachment 876053 View attachment 876054

Your pics I agree with.....

The OP’s has several things done differently than any factory job I have seen...those areas were noted by another poster...

 

[69bfan]

If you look at cars with original undercoating, it is much more porous appearing vs the aftermarket undercoating which typically lays down flatter. Even the current high end restorations have a very difficult job of duplicating factory undercoating as it is very difficult to get it to build up as thick as the factory material. The porous pits with the newer materials is much less defined.

If you view the pictures in post number one, the view of the rear leaf spring shackle shows signs of undercoating being sprayed on both the springs, the shackles and the body itself. On these areas and many other areas of a factory undercoated car, they used some type of mask to prevent those areas to being covered.

The car may have been sometime in its life sprayed with a fresh coat of a undercoating material to freshen up the appearance. Unless your the original owner, there is no way to know the history from day one. As Morgan mentioned, dealers and aftermarket vendors back in the day would further undercoat the cars as per owners request.

I have not looked into the factory option codes and I feel that back through the years, that undercoating has been available for many years prior to 1969. I know my 66 Plymouth is a factory undercoat car. Just as in 69, there was a code for the sound deadening option as I have never seen a car with a hood insulation pad that did not have the factory undercoating. I am sure that some might have gotten into production, but very few. I am saying this as if your car had a factory hood pad, then it is very likely to have been a factory undercoat car as well.

 

[vintage chromoly]

I do have a pad under the hood.

So is the assertion that no cars prior to 1969 were factory undercoated incorrect?

My car is incredibly clean metal wise. The car has almost no rust and there doesn’t appear to be any intent of covering up problems with what’s there as far as undercoating goes.

That said, it’s fairly apparent that what’s there now isn’t a factory result. Must have been touched up at some point.

Could be that someone touched it up during the cosmetic restoration it received in the early 90’s.

 

[R413]

In my post #7 I listed the J55 in 69 and newer. I didn’t mean to say they didn’t have factory undercoating before that. It’s just not as easy to state the code for 68 and older for all years and car lines.

They definitely had factory undercoating before 1969. It looked the same for many years. I have many 1967 b-bodies and a few from 1970 and they were done the same way.