1969 Riviera Fan Shroud Issue

[ABear]

1 hour ago, Ferris said:

I do have the original spare in the trunk. If the guy who I bought it from still has the tires he took off of it that would as you say tell a lot. 

Folks rarely trade spares around and they typically look factory fresh because of that.which is why I thought of that.  Others poo pooing the tire theory, well as I mentioned, tire manufacturers have changed tire size markings not once but twice since the beginning of 1970's. The tire sizes were phased in, not sharply cut off as the manufacturers had to change their molds which is a very costly and time consuming process, As they replaced molds, they would run out of the old tires and you would have to buy new tires with the new sizing.

 

OPs car was spec'd for 8.55-15, that size would most likely have been still available up to at least 1972-73 or a bit more depending on popularity and timing on that size.. After that inventory ran out, one would have to move to alpha numeric sizes. which by 1972-73 all car manufacturers were specifying alpha-numeric sizes.

 

The next change which was to metric P sizes happened after 1980, by 1983, it was pretty much impossible to find apha-numeric tire sizes and everyone transitioned over to metric P sizes.

 

This of coarse was for passenger tires, light truck and heavy truck tires still held on to older tire sizes for longer time.. Wasn't until sometime around 2000 all tires were moved to metric sizes.

 

And yes, fair chance the tires on a 1969 vehicle with 19,000 miles most likely would have been changed once, but, keep in mind that 19,000 miles over 6 yrs is 3,000 miles per yr, even bias ply tires could easily get 9K or 10K.. That still puts this in the realm of still having 8.55-15 or equivalent of the alpha-numeric tire size..

 

Although I am intrigued and puzzled as to why anyone would have spent money on brand new metric P tires with a broken engine (IE non working) as a project and then let it sit for 6 yrs.. Typically one will ignore the tires (air them up and if one doesn't hold air, change it with another used tire), fix the problems, shoot fresh paint, fix the interior and when car is ready for the road put new tires on.. Putting new tires on first is sort of backwards.. Tires do age out, typically for passenger use, not recommended to use tires with more than 10 yrs of age so 6 yrs of practical use was burned up by aging out.

[gungeey]

Although the car in question is surely not 19k, the thought of a 50 year old car still wearing original tires as a testament to its low miles is just as far fetched. 

 

With all that said, tires prior to radial were typically rotated not in sets of 4 but included the spare in a tire rotation so all 5 wore as a set. Based on that even if I see a new "never hit the ground" spare in the trunk of a given car my thought is that it, too, has been replaced.

 

[ABear]

2 minutes ago, gungeey said:

tires prior to radial were typically rotated not in sets of 4 but included the spare in a tire rotation so all 5 wore as a set. Based on that even if I see a new "never hit the ground" spare in the trunk of a given car my thought is that it, too, has been replaced.

Far fetched?

 

Sure.

 

Lots of far fetched stories out there, just takes one person to believe the story and repeat it.

 

Granted it was "ideal" to rotate all 5 tires in the rotation, replace all 5 tires at the same time. In practice, that seldom or rarely happened so in reality there IS the possibility that the car "could" have had the OEM tires or one tire change from the original set.

 

What generally happens in real life even back then, folks would often drive them until no tread existed, replace only what needed replaced and moved on.. more often just buying two tires at a time as needed and more often than not, tires were not rotated.

 

I know the OP is pinning a lot of hope on the brake pedal not showing any wear.. Yeah, no, brake pedal covers were easily replaced. Used to be able to go into any KMart, find new replacement one that fit the size and shape of the pedal, remove the old stretch the new one on and "Bob's your Uncle", brand new car. Have done that personally to a 70's car which when I bought it with 77K the pedal cover looked like it came off the show room.. After I put almost 200K on that car, I had worn a hole through the cover.. Replaced it and brand new car!

 

Basically unless the OP has definitive hard written proof like service receipts with mileage and date,  there really isn't anything on that car that can indicate that the 19K miles are all it had..  The body is very nice condition considering the age, almost too good for sitting in the sun for 50+yrs.. Even the vinyl roof tells a tale, it is in much better shape than I would expect for sitting outside all of it's life.. On models that came with vinyl roofs that paint layer was almost non existent, just thick enough to cover the primer coat.. The vinyl roofs would tend to collect moisture under it which pretty much always leads to rust holes busting out.. It led a sheltered life under the cover of carport or garage.. This comes from a person who did indeed own a 70's car with a vinyl roof..

 

And anyone that says a southern or southwest cars never rusts.. Yeah, I have one in my garage the came from the southern states with floor boards, truck floor, and both quarter panels rotted out so bad that they looked like swiss cheese.. The only thing that kept your feet off the road was the carpet and it was rotted. The owners left it sit out in the sun over plain dirt and all of the window seals cracked and leaked..

 

OP is fortunate enough to find a 69 car that really is more of a mechanical issue than body issue also making restoration a lot easier and less costly than having to full body repairs on top of the mechanicals..

[Ferris]

9 hours ago, ABear said:

Folks rarely trade spares around and they typically look factory fresh because of that.which is why I thought of that.  Others poo pooing the tire theory, well as I mentioned, tire manufacturers have changed tire size markings not once but twice since the beginning of 1970's. The tire sizes were phased in, not sharply cut off as the manufacturers had to change their molds which is a very costly and time consuming process, As they replaced molds, they would run out of the old tires and you would have to buy new tires with the new sizing.

 

OPs car was spec'd for 8.55-15, that size would most likely have been still available up to at least 1972-73 or a bit more depending on popularity and timing on that size.. After that inventory ran out, one would have to move to alpha numeric sizes. which by 1972-73 all car manufacturers were specifying alpha-numeric sizes.

 

The next change which was to metric P sizes happened after 1980, by 1983, it was pretty much impossible to find apha-numeric tire sizes and everyone transitioned over to metric P sizes.

 

This of coarse was for passenger tires, light truck and heavy truck tires still held on to older tire sizes for longer time.. Wasn't until sometime around 2000 all tires were moved to metric sizes.

 

And yes, fair chance the tires on a 1969 vehicle with 19,000 miles most likely would have been changed once, but, keep in mind that 19,000 miles over 6 yrs is 3,000 miles per yr, even bias ply tires could easily get 9K or 10K.. That still puts this in the realm of still having 8.55-15 or equivalent of the alpha-numeric tire size..

 

Although I am intrigued and puzzled as to why anyone would have spent money on brand new metric P tires with a broken engine (IE non working) as a project and then let it sit for 6 yrs.. Typically one will ignore the tires (air them up and if one doesn't hold air, change it with another used tire), fix the problems, shoot fresh paint, fix the interior and when car is ready for the road put new tires on.. Putting new tires on first is sort of backwards.. Tires do age out, typically for passenger use, not recommended to use tires with more than 10 yrs of age so 6 yrs of practical use was burned up by aging out.

Wow that's some really great information on tires. That would be helpful if I could find what was originally on there but it's not looking good.

 

 

I am more than happy with this car regardless of miles. Its super straight and your right there will not be as a great cost in a restore. I am not convinced its 19k original miles either so I dont want anyone thinking I am so naive. However, I put some stock in oral history and the story seemed interesting at the time. Also to be clear, the tires on the car now were put on it as temporary tires from the guy I bought it from. There is a full tire spare in the trunk that is definitely original but the trunk lock is out and I cannot open it easy but I will again time permitting. 

 

So, I finally called the guy today to refresh my memory. I had my story mixed up a bit. I thought the original owner bought the car and parked it because of a bad engine. Apparently not the case according to my seller. Unless he's mixed up.  He tells me the people he bought it from  lived out in the country in mid-arkansas. Had a farm. The guy bought a 68 and loved it and then bought a 69 to invest in so he would have two. Yes, I agree, makes no sense since that is a lot of money and there is nary a difference between the two. He ended driving the 68 a ton and ignored the 69. That was the story the widows nephew told my seller. Yeah again, makes little sense. The garage it was in was falling apart and water was getting in from the roof. I asked what happened to the original tires. He said they were flat and dry rotted when he purchased it. He put some used tires he had from another car on them when he purchased it and tossed the old tires. I asked for a pic of it with the old tires and he said he would look. The only thing he remembers about the tires was that they were white walls. I will also see if the one in the trunk was a whitewall. 

He's going to see if he still has their number. He bought it in 2021 I think. 

 

One last thing. If that story were actually true (and it's hard to believe that's actually the story. I think something got mixed up but there's got to be some basis in truth to it) then that means the engine didn't blow. The story was that he just never really used it and it sat too long because he drove the other one. Then how likely is it that the motor would have seized just from sitting there. I know it could happen but I didn't know it would happen after 50 years. Tried numerous things by numerous people and eventually had to do a rebuild because it could not get unstuck. 

 

Had he saved the tires, then we would likely know the answer. 

 

Oh well. I am happy either way with it. I will keep looking into it until I can't look into it anymore. 

 

 

[ABear]

Cool backstory.

 

I would have loved to been able to buy my one project car with a body in the condition, but, was having difficult time finding one that the frame was not rotted out. Was being pretty specific because I needed a body with frame in good condition to repair my first car I bought when in High school almost 40 yrs ago.. Drove that car up until 1999 and parked it with 297,000 miles on the clock when I discovered both front torque boxes had rusted through and were on the brink of failing.. Been keeping it for yrs outside (bad, bad thing but didn't have garage space to keep it inside) but work and family life put the brakes on having time to restore, by the time I got to rebooting and repairing my first car was beyond repair frame wise.

 

Once again, your car once you get the mechanicals sorted will make restoring a bit less costly and easier without major body work to do.

[Robere210]

I'll post a close-up of the brake pedal soon. 

Ferris had a '72 Riv that his wife drove for some amount of time, years ago.  Then it sat for many years in Ferris' driveway.  We got it started and drove it out to a guy who does remarkable bodywork and restorations.  The guy is extremely talented and makes many of his own patch panels.  I drove the '72, Ferris rode shotgun.  The car got up to 90 with ease and seemed to drive well.  A few days later the bodywork guy called and asked us to come take a look.  Seems the frame in front of the rear tires was almost non-existant--as in rusted almost in two... only small sections of rusty "lace" were holding the frame together.

 

Well, Ferris also had another '72 Riv (He likes Rivieras) that a limb had fallen on, and ruined the roof.  So we took that one out to the same restoration guy and he cut the good roof off the rusted-frame '72 and put it on the '72 that the limb had ruined. 

 

In contrast, the '69 frame looks pristine.  I'll post some pictures.  I've been hot-rodding my whole life.  First rod was a '46 Chevy panel truck that I built in High School Ag Shop in 1964.  I ran a Pontiac V8 in it with three deuces.  I'm convinced the '69 does indeed have 19 thou original miles.

[ABear]

4 hours ago, Robere210 said:

In contrast, the '69 frame looks pristine. 

Not to argue, Ferris did mention that the story he was told has "changed" some..

 

On 4/7/2024 at 10:28 PM, Ferris said:

That was the story the widows nephew told my seller. Yeah again, makes little sense. The garage it was in was falling apart and water was getting in from the roof.

Basically the car Ferris bought, sat in a well protected space within a garage for many, many yrs and it does make sense that the exterior and the frame floor boards are in good shape.

 

Knowing that, pretty much eliminates the notion of the drivers side seat being destroyed by the sun, it couldn't have been because it wasn't sitting out in the sun.

 

I would also add, the dash is in "perfect" condition, that too is because the car was not sitting in the sun all of its life. If the car sat out in the sun, I would expect sun damage to not only the front seat, but the top of the dash, the passenger side of the seat AND the rear seat not to mention the rear parcel deck.

 

Then there is the vinyl roof, yeah, it is in too good of shape for the age to have been sitting out in the sun and weather for all these yrs. If it had been, not only would be the vinyl damaged, but the paint and sheet metal under that vinyl would be damaged to the point of swiss cheese.

 

Then I look at the under hood part, take a good hard look at the paint on the radiator around the pressure cap.. If indeed that vehicle was only drive 19K miles, the paint around the radiator cap would be 100% in tact and pristine new condition. But it doesn't, the paint is well worn off to the point I see the brass of the radiator tank, someone has done a lot of maintenance (checking and adding coolant) to wear almost a circle off around the cap.

 

Then there is the sale price of $2K ish, if the car truly is 19K miles, I suspect the sale price would have been astronomically higher, more in line with $20K plus..  $2K range is pretty much scrap value.. If the seller really thought it was that low of mileage, he wouldn't have parted with it that cheap.

 

I don't wish to dispute, but in reality, the evidence I see does not support the notion of rarely driven 19K 55 yr old car. I enjoy your optimism but there is way to many signs that do not support the theory.

 

Even IF it was true, the reality is, EVERYTHING will have to be gone over, you have 55yr old rubber bushings that will be hard as rocks, 55yr old shocks that will need replace, 55yr old rubber brake lines that will be hard and brittle and should be replaced before putting it on the road. You have 55yr old oil in the rear end that should be replaced, 55 yr old rear end seals that may start leaking once you start driving. You have 55 yr old brake system (master cylinder, wheel cylinders and brake fluid) that should be serviced and brought back to new condition).. You have a 55yr old automatic transmission that most likely should at a min have a flush and fill but fair chance may end up with a rebuild due to hard as rocks seals.

 

As I said, very nice to see a vehicle of that age that is not 90%-95% rotted out, it is more about restoring mechanicals and perhaps some cosmetic work instead of major body and frame work on top of all that.

 

 

[Ferris]

 

3 hours ago, ABear said:

Not to argue, Ferris did mention that the story he was told has "changed" some..

 

Basically the car Ferris bought, sat in a well protected space within a garage for many, many yrs and it does make sense that the exterior and the frame floor boards are in good shape.

 

Knowing that, pretty much eliminates the notion of the drivers side seat being destroyed by the sun, it couldn't have been because it wasn't sitting out in the sun.

 

I would also add, the dash is in "perfect" condition, that too is because the car was not sitting in the sun all of its life. If the car sat out in the sun, I would expect sun damage to not only the front seat, but the top of the dash, the passenger side of the seat AND the rear seat not to mention the rear parcel deck.

 

Then there is the vinyl roof, yeah, it is in too good of shape for the age to have been sitting out in the sun and weather for all these yrs. If it had been, not only would be the vinyl damaged, but the paint and sheet metal under that vinyl would be damaged to the point of swiss cheese.

 

Then I look at the under hood part, take a good hard look at the paint on the radiator around the pressure cap.. If indeed that vehicle was only drive 19K miles, the paint around the radiator cap would be 100% in tact and pristine new condition. But it doesn't, the paint is well worn off to the point I see the brass of the radiator tank, someone has done a lot of maintenance (checking and adding coolant) to wear almost a circle off around the cap.

 

Then there is the sale price of $2K ish, if the car truly is 19K miles, I suspect the sale price would have been astronomically higher, more in line with $20K plus..  $2K range is pretty much scrap value.. If the seller really thought it was that low of mileage, he wouldn't have parted with it that cheap.

 

I don't wish to dispute, but in reality, the evidence I see does not support the notion of rarely driven 19K 55 yr old car. I enjoy your optimism but there is way to many signs that do not support the theory.

 

Even IF it was true, the reality is, EVERYTHING will have to be gone over, you have 55yr old rubber bushings that will be hard as rocks, 55yr old shocks that will need replace, 55yr old rubber brake lines that will be hard and brittle and should be replaced before putting it on the road. You have 55yr old oil in the rear end that should be replaced, 55 yr old rear end seals that may start leaking once you start driving. You have 55 yr old brake system (master cylinder, wheel cylinders and brake fluid) that should be serviced and brought back to new condition).. You have a 55yr old automatic transmission that most likely should at a min have a flush and fill but fair chance may end up with a rebuild due to hard as rocks seals.

 

As I said, very nice to see a vehicle of that age that is not 90%-95% rotted out, it is more about restoring mechanicals and perhaps some cosmetic work instead of major body and frame work on top of all that.

 

 

Dont be stompin on my dreams! No I agree, I am leaning towards 119k. Now my theory is that it was outside for a while. The vinyl top was very weathered and shredding. I got most of it off as you can see. The vinyl upholstery is extremely brittle for what its worth. I see your point on that radiator. Still overheating by the way. Took the thermostat out and ran it and it got way hot. Going to do the thermometer gun thing you mentioned here in a couple of days and see what that tells us about the radiator. Water is circulating at the top.  Ive heard to boil the radiator etc could cost $300 assuming it is the radiator. Then I see aluminum ones for almost half that price. If its the radiator, what is the downside to buying one other than it is no longer original?

 

Also, the Rivs that Robere is referring to are actually 71 models. The first one was bought in 94 because my wife saw one and totally loved it. I though it looked like as some have described it, "a flying cockroach". Anyway, a one owner came up for sale for $1300 and I bought it for her. She actually would drive 50 miles per day to college. She loved that it would pass other cars. I grew to love it. She's a keeper for lovin a boat tail Riv. Not many women do. Anyway, a tree branch fell on it during an ice storm. Bought another 71 out of state of CT. Started doing a restore, but abandoned it cause of the frame issues. Thats when we had the top cut on the second riv and put on the crushed first riv. Below is a pic of the crushed riv (silver then) and then the black one from CT after it became a convertible (ha), and then the silver one restored to black. Then there is another 71 Riv which is another story for another time with a horrible ending.

[ABear]

11 minutes ago, Ferris said:

Took the thermostat out and ran it and it got way hot. Going to do the thermometer gun thing you mentioned here in a couple of days and see what that tells us about the radiator. Water is circulating at the top.  Ive heard to boil the radiator etc could cost $300 assuming it is the radiator. Then I see aluminum ones for almost half that price. If its the radiator, what is the downside to buying one other than it is no longer original?

Yeah, the problem with cross flow radiators is you only can see the water on the top flowing, can't see what is happening further down which could be multiple plugged tubes. Radiators with top to bottom tubes and you can at least look at 1/3 of the tubes in the center and see water flow a bit better.

 

Downside to a new one is it isn't original, most likely will be aluminum or worst a composite aluminum body with plastic ends crimped on, may be universal fit if you can't locate one specifically for your model and yr..

 

Upside to new is you could get one with more tubes deep than the original, can be very helpful if the original is 2 tubes deep, all new, no worries about a 55yr old brass radiator springing a leak for a long time (brass gets work hardened from vibration and solder tends to crack with hot/cold cycles over time).

 

For the most part, a quick spritz of BBQ black, can sort of hide the new radiator look so it will blend in a bit better than raw aluminum.

[Ferris]

56 minutes ago, ABear said:

Yeah, the problem with cross flow radiators is you only can see the water on the top flowing, can't see what is happening further down which could be multiple plugged tubes. Radiators with top to bottom tubes and you can at least look at 1/3 of the tubes in the center and see water flow a bit better.

 

Downside to a new one is it isn't original, most likely will be aluminum or worst a composite aluminum body with plastic ends crimped on, may be universal fit if you can't locate one specifically for your model and yr..

 

Upside to new is you could get one with more tubes deep than the original, can be very helpful if the original is 2 tubes deep, all new, no worries about a 55yr old brass radiator springing a leak for a long time (brass gets work hardened from vibration and solder tends to crack with hot/cold cycles over time).

 

For the most part, a quick spritz of BBQ black, can sort of hide the new radiator look so it will blend in a bit better than raw aluminum.

Okay, that really helps with the decision making. We will see if the heat gun thing tells us something first. You are a wealth of knowledge sir.

[EmTee]

I'm amazed that the side glass didn't shatter!