healeys
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Healeys] Ah, the rivet...and the Assumptions Within

To: <healeys@autox.team.net>
Subject: Re: [Healeys] Ah, the rivet...and the Assumptions Within
From: "BJ8 Healeys" <sbyers@ec.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 17:10:24 -0500
My BJ8 (36666) was built 6 June 1966 and has the riveted headlamp rims.
They were on the car when I bought it in 1984, and since the car has not
suffered any accidents, I have no reason to believe they are not original.
They appear original to me.
 
The BMC parts manual for BJ7 and BJ8 specifies Rim Assembly P/N 57H 5018 for
all North American cars, while all other cars got P/N 37H 5530.   There is
no definition of what makes one part number different from the other.  It
seems sort of odd that a supplier would delete the riveted attachment to
save production costs, then add the dimple which would certainly add cost
for no benefit.
 
These kinds of configuration questions remind me of the issue with the
dash-mounted rear view mirror.  According to the parts manual, BJ7s and
Phase 1 BJ8s got the all-stainless/chrome rectangular mirror, while all
Phase 2 BJ8s got the more oval-shaped mirror with the black plastic back.
My car has always had the earlier style mirror (photos from 1969 show it
installed as early as that), and in the BJ8 registry I have a record of 160
Phase 2 BJ8s with the earlier mirror.  I only record the dash mirror type
when I see it personally on a car or in photos.  Some of those might be
replacements, but I think it very unlikely that all of them are.  Anyway, it
seems more probable to me that a replacement would be the same type as the
one that was there before if both are available.  On the other hand, I bet
there have been a lot of original early mirrors on Phase 2 BJ8s replaced
with the later style because the parts manual said the originals were
"incorrect".
 
Steve Byers
HBJ8L/36666           
BJ8 Registry
Havelock, NC  USA
 
From: healeys-bounces@autox.team.net [mailto:healeys-bounces@autox.team.net]
On Behalf Of Editorgary@aol.com
Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 11:56 AM
To: healey@hunterbane.com
Cc: healeys@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: [Healeys] Ah, the rivet...and the Assumptions Within
 

.. you make an interesting point regarding possibilities for changes in
the headlamp rim. If other changes were being made that might have permitted
the supplier to make a cost-saving change in the headlight rim during
production, then dimpled headlight rims should be found on all of the last
run
of
convertibles. All of them. So, the question to people who own phase II Mark
IIIs is: do you have dimples or real rivets with snap brackets on the back?

If we could establish that the all of the last convertibles produced had
the dimples rather than the rivets, then our question would shift to when
the
change point occurred, and we could modify the standards to indicate that
such a change appears to have taken place, but we don't know when.

Is there anyone on this list with a late unrestored convertible -- say,
built in 1966 -- that has riveted headlamp rims?
Thanks
Gary
_______________________________________________
Healeys@autox.team.net
Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Suggested annual donation  $12.75
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>