[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index][Thread Index]
Print this message
Email this message
Go back
sequential mechanism?
- From: aeyn <mr85000@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2007 16:42:11 -0700 (PDT)
- DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=6qa3/5blO1S6HsClgX5D/noJTNAoAHr01xh8r+DWgQHLK8y4kGdzspGvNbbwwhOMTJ8V5+xVORg6ekifKYG6EHDJAsKgwBq+940Dn5ibWA8x8JIuNf0hGJGnWe5/f78ViNny8VCr3MX+ePhqmskNWupZKo8tO/tocaLss6eVqCo=;
Fred (et al),
You are correct. The headrests were mandatory on Jan 1, 1969;
however, were optional prior to that date. To obtain the relays
and Cam motor/Solid state Sequencer for a 1969 Imperial look for
the items from a 1968-1970 Cougar or Thunderbird. The car before
I bought my 1969 Imperial in 1971 was a new 1970 Cougar. I
studied the Sequncer system in it and also in the 69 Imperial and
they are identical. It must have been made by a 3rd party for
each company.
Æyn
--- Frederick Joslin <fljoslin@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Aeyn:Yes, it is a 69 Lebaron coupe.The rear turn signal control
> parts
> were removed by a previous owner. I was not even aware that
> this car had
> sequential rear signals until I read it on the club web site.If
> it makes
> any difference I believe that this is an early car. Assuming
> that the
> front seat is original, it does not have the head rests which I
> believe
> were mandated Jan 1st 1969.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: aeyn
> To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: IML: sequential mechanism?
> Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2007 09:47:48 -0700 (PDT)
>
>
> Fred,
> I take it the you have a 69. Do you still have the original
> parts? If so, was it solid state or Cam motor? Also, are the
> relays still in place?
>
> Æyn
> Had 69 from 1971-1980
>
> --- Frederick Joslin wrote:
>
> > Hi Dwain:On my car the heat riser valve was quite loose,
> hench
> > the
> > rattling, and having the counterweight rotated clockwise
> > against the stop
> > was the cold engine off position. The sequential mechanism
> has
> > been
> > entirely removed from my car. It is on my list of things to
> do,
> > but
> > pretty far down.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Kinkodw@xxxxxxx
> > To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: IML: Heat riser rotation?
> > Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 22:32:42 EDT
> >
> > Fred, Thanks for the quick reply. I have the counterweight
> > rotated all
> > the way clockwise against the stop looking at it from the
> top.
> > I guess
> > this means the valve is then closed and directing exhaust
> thru
> > the intake
> > manifold. Luckily I just did this "correction" as some of
> the
> > letters
> > stated that the counterweight needs be rotated clockwise
> toward
> > the front
> > of the vehicle. Luckily I've only had it out once since
> > rotating it,
> > maybe 40 miles worth. I'll rotate it towards the rear of
> the
> > vehicle in
> > the morning. hopefully this will lock the valve open
> bypassing
> > the intake
> > manifold. Thanks. By the way, do your sequential turn
> signals
> > function
> > correctly? I'm having a bear of a time with mine.Only two
> of
> > the three
> > taillights sequence on either side when activated and the
> > emergency
> > flashers just stopped working.. Thanks again, Dwain'69
> > Lebaron..
> >
> >
> >
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com.
> >
> >
> >
> > Fred Joslin
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>