healeys
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: chnage in seat frames and patterns

To: <djjob@noos.fr>, <healeys@Autox.Team.Net>
Subject: Re: chnage in seat frames and patterns
From: "Rich C" <richchrysler@quickclic.net>
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 16:43:22 -0500
Hi Derek,
See below......
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <djjob@noos.fr>
To: <healeys@autox.team.net>
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 3:06 PM
Subject: chnage in seat frames and patterns


> Hello all,
>
> The early 100-Sixs had seat frames and patterns similar to the 100s.
>
> I have 2 questions
>
> 1 I believe the seats changed with the introduction of the BN6 or the 2nd 
> batch of 100-Sixs produced from Sept 1958 which had  interiors similar to 
> the later 3000s. Is this the case or were the thin seat frames introduced 
> only with the 3000?

1(A) From what I've observed you are correct in your assumptions. The new 
seat assemblies seemed to happen with the introduction of the BN6 and the 
later series of BN4.
>
> 2. The same question applies to the change in the seat patterns. At some 
> point the white piping which comes down each side of the seat back, 
> changed. On early cars it carried on around the ears, but on later cars it 
> cuts inside and finshes behind the seat squab. When was this change made? 
> Logic says it was at the same time the seat frames changed , but then 
> logic doesnt always work with Healeys

2(A) The pattern changed at the same time because the very design of the 
earlier configuration carried the piping around to the back where the ends 
finished at the middle bottom position. Then the hidem strip covered the 
trimmers tacks that held all the lower back materials smoothly and securely. 
No doubt the later configuration with two rows of barbed clips holding 
forward and back side materials onto twin parallel flanges was a cost and 
labour saving move.

You are quite right in not trusting the artists pictures.

Rich Chrysler




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