Bee-Oh-Pee

Howdy.... Can anybody post a pic of their (or any other) 64 Starfire convertible trunk w/ original cardboard installed? Also, I see Fusick sells:

TM634CV Trunk Mat (die cut black felt material) 1963-64 Starfire Convertible

Was something besides the carpeting and cardboard used in our trunks from the factory?
What do we use for a reference when restoring to "factory original"? When I was doing my 72 Buick GS, we had the advantage of a factory Assembly Manual. Is there anything besides the 5-volume factory service manual we would use as a reference for the "old Oldses"? The service manual is marginal at best as a restoration aid. For example, is it documented anywhere where or how the clips for the trunk cardboard were installed?

Bee-Oh-Pee

I've been having this done awhile, but haven't taken any pic's lately... This is about as close as I can get to the way I belive my trunk looked when new. I know everybody else's has the cardboard dividers on the sides, but if this is my original trunk carpeting (which I think it is), I don't think it had the cardboards.
But a pic is worth a thousand words, and I guess the only time I'll really have to worry is if I get serious in some sort of AACA competition or something, which ain't likely for a while....
Thanks to y'all for the help and tips over the last couple years.

trackz man

If you text me at 541-678-0606 or email me at demammothman@live.com I can send you pictures of my 63' Starfire trunk with the original cardboard in.

dutch injun

I also have a 63 with cardboard my guess would be a 64 had them too if Fusick says so. You could get the Fusick boards and paint them the correct color. On mine the carpet doesn't go up on the inner trunk keylock panel, to me that doesn't look correct but I'm far from an expert. Otherwise that trunk looks great.

Bee-Oh-Pee

Dutch and trackz, yeah, I did quite a bit of research, and managed to get pictures of a few original '64 Olds convertible trunks before I came to my conclusion. I actually did procure blue cardboards from Fusick (by special request) and I'm sure they were cut perfectly. But the way you see my trunk is the way it was at the factory.... I'd say with 95% certainty. (I still have the cardboards I didn't use.)

My carpet on the sides of the horizontal trunk bottom is completely different from the pictures of the carpet I saw of cars that had the cardboards. My carpet was cut to bond to the insides of the side wells, whereas in the pictures I got of the "cardboard" trunks, it wasn't. I tried for days to figure out how to reconcile this, and I concluded that the car came without them.

I think the carpet in the trunk is original (the interior carpeting is not); and I think the way it was bonded to the trunk surface was also original. Another thing I'm basing my conclusions on is that the car simply sat for years and years. To me, it appears (especially judging by the crazy things I found when I first got the car) that nobody ever took time in the car's history to do any real detailing work (e.g., carpeting the trunk latch striker support the way it is). The only cosmetic things that had ever been done are paint, chrome, carpet, top, and seat covers. Under the hood is a prime example of this. Practically nothing had been replaced or restored... still has original battery cables (with fiber sheath over positive), wiring, etc. Body has original weatherstripping, fuzzies, body rubber, etc.

This is good and bad.... good because I think I have a pretty clear picture of the "way it was," but bad because I think some basic maintenance items were definitely overlooked over the years. Remember the car only has a tad over 44k miles.

Granted a lot can happen over 50 years, but you just have to go with the preponderance of the evidence ... so I'm good.... at least for now.

Thanks again for the compliments and suggestions!

dutch injun

Then it seems like your car is an original one, the way of bonding should be an indicator, like you say...All it takes is finding someone with an original 64 Starfire convertible, hopefully someone chimes in or you could try the ACA forums, there seems to be some knowledge there..

Bee-Oh-Pee

Hi, Dutch. I visit the AACA board from time to time. I did a lot when I first got the car. Thing is, unless I got a hold of somebody who worked on the assembly line, I'm not sure that anything I'd hear would provide more value than what I've already uncovered.... I don't think anybody else has ever encountered what I've found on my car. Maybe I'm off base; but as I said, I'm just going with the prepondenance of the evidence.

I played with old Buicks in a previous life long enough to know that you can "never say never" when it comes to the assembly facilities. I had a '72 GS455 made in Fremont, and all the info that came out in the 80s and early 90s about restoring the GSs was based on Flint cars, which is where all the pre-'72 Stages (and all the convertibles and GSXs) were made. There were actually a bunch of differences between Flint and non-Flint Buicks, however... and believe it or not, most were actually documented in the '72 assembly manual.

That's why I tried desperately to get my hands on some sort of assembly manual for the '64 Olds; but I don't know if one even exists, or ever did .
But even the documented differences are not written in stone. If there was a shortage or problem with a component or piece, they would seldom if ever cease production until that part was replenished or the issue was resolved, unless they had no other choice. They would either substitute or do without, and sometimes hire a new vendor to supply the item in question.

It would certainly be interesting (and fun!) to hear of somebody else who believes his (or her) '64 SF 'Vert came w/out cardboards . But with such low production numbers and with relatively little interest in the marque (as, say, compared to Corvettes or W-30 442s), it's a pretty remote possibility after 50 years.

p.s.: That's a my-tee-fine lookin' '63 you got there.... I've been following your saga in other posts.... love those disk brakes and the TH-400 conversion.... I detest the shifting of the Slim Jim, too.... but I guess it goes with the territory, and I have just resigned myself that I'm not going to be doing much drag racing, the way I used to flog my '73 Delta 88 455 when I was a young 'un ....