[John V.]

Don, mine looks like yours from inside the trunk. But doesn't have 1" thick compressed cotton insulation and the upper layer has the black vinyl facing the window.

I went to the MPC and then the Body Shop Manual. From what I can tell, this piece was alternately called the "folding top compartment bag" or the "dust boot" (not to be confused with the boot that covered the top when it was down or the boot bag that was used to stow the boot in the trunk.

From what I can tell, the "compartment bag" was not separately serviced, it was part of the "folding top back curtain" and serviced with a complete back window. 99.9% certain my window is not original, so almost certainly my "compartment bag" is also not original.

Refresh my memory, since my car is apart. Isn't there a piece that slides on the top of the rear seat with velcro (loop half) on it and the other side of the velcro closure (hook half) is on the forward edge of the "compartment bag" and the "compartment bag is then "sealed" to the top of the rear seat back by this velcro closure?

No velcro on my "compartment bag", so that would be pretty conclusive it was not original.

[bigpop]

John V that piece is for the boot to fasten tightly when the top is down. The boot has ,in 65 ,snaps and metal fasteners that hold the boot down everywhere around but the front where it meets the back seat.That is where the Velcro strip comes in.The boot has the correspnding Velcro sewn to it. Larry B.

[John V.]

Larry, that's right! Been too long ago since mine was together, I'm really starting to lose it.

Still figure my "compartment bag" was probably replaced at some point with the back window, so not original. Definitely different from what Don described.

The leading edge of mine is not attached to anything, is that the way it was originally installed then? My top is folded down into it so it is tough to study the thing, but you essentially are able to lift the leading edge and access the top motor and/or the trunk.

The '64 boot (as I've always known it) only has the snaps on the side panels, otherwise uses the clips that attach under the stainless moldings.

About 35 years ago, at a wrecking yard, I saw a '65 convert that was the same as my '64 except in the rear corners on each side, there was a snap on the molding. I always figured that was an improvement used for '65 as the '64 rear corners had nothing to hold the boot down, looked a little sloppy if the corners curled up.

Is that how all '65s are? Or was that perhaps a home made "fix"?

Speaking of boots, my first '64 had a dark blue interior. No boot in the car when I bought it. I snagged a black one in a wrecking yard, that worked for me back then ('70s), although I knew it was wrong, figured it looked better than no boot.

The car I have now has a black interior. Came with a brand new white repro boot. When I asked the Seller how come he bought a white boot, he said because the top was white. I was dismayed, but said nothing. I managed to buy what I believe is an original black boot a short time later from a guy, so I have a correct boot.

[bigpop]

John, you are correct in seeing a 65 with snaps at the back corners.That is what I have on mine,and other 65 'verts I have seen.

I have sen Chevy's with snaps all around on the stainless.I always wondered if GTO's had this available for the Tonneau Option in 65.It covered the whole inside less the drivers area of the car.I have seen only one Tonneau cover,and it was on a 65 Lemans 'vert here in Westmont years ago.It was a Teal Turquoise car and interior,with a Teal Tonneau installed.I wish I had asked how it fastened down,with snaps only,or a combination,like the 65 boot.??? A very rare opton. He said he bought it from Bill Merrick in Michigan,it was a mint one,too. I would offer the guy good money for it but,he hasn't been to car shows in ages!!

One last question,my 65 boot is supposed to be date coded with a design in the inner canvas reinforced section.The pattern is a series of geomeric patterns,with Naughahyde65 printed in an unusual lettering,with the geometric patterns connected by single straight lines.These were done in ink,and when new,where difficult to read.(My buddy Kip's car) My question,do you remember any coding or the such on you "snagged boot from the yard" or have you seen an original that is minty?? Just curious. Don,perhaps if you see this,you could chime in. thanks Larry B. .

[John V.]

Larry, no way can I remember the one I found in '73/'74 or so. I knew nothing about codes and such back then. I think one or more of the clips may have been broken, but that is just a vague memory.

But turns out, the Black Boot I now have is apparently for a '65. I assume I realized that when I bought it since I already knew about the '64/'65 difference, and it has the snaps on it in the rear corners. No problem, looks like they would be easy enough to remove and will suit me fine one day on my '64.

As far as markings, I did not pull it all the way out of the packaging I have it in, but it shows a pattern of circles on the underside and in the circles are the letters "GS". I did not see any other coding but I only looked at a portion of it. The circles were pretty close together, going by memory, just a few inches apart, so there were lots of them covering the entire underside.

I bought this used more than 15 years ago but I cannot swear it is original. It definitely was not brand new. I'd have to guess "GS" is the vendor's marking, but don't know how you could research who they were.

[bigpop]

I have a 65 boot I bought on eBay,mint,and original,a few years back.I was going to dye it,as my car came sans boot.I also have GS with a pattern on it.I think it stands for a Buick-Grand Sport! Those are interchangable with Pontiac of the same year.
Larry B.

[3 Deuce 64]

Originally Posted by John V.

Don, when you mentioned the PS pump pulley, you got my head spinning! Natural cast? Don't remember that being the case either. Do you have any of the early '64 double groove PS pump pulleys? I'm going to need to start pulling parts out to check. Pretty sure I painted my double groove pulley, don't recall what condition it was in before painting it though. But I think I also have a '64 PS pump pulley from an AC big car, I'm thinking it was original and painted too. I'm going to have to start checking, can't rely on memory.

I did learn something. I always thought the 9778808 was the same geometry as the '64 8" 2 groove pulley. When I was searching for an original '64 water pump pulley, I kept coming across the 9778808 pulleys, always thought they would work, just wanted a '64 p/n. That's when I discovered the '64s didn't seem to be p/n stamped.

But here's a question. What changed from '64 to '65 that required a different geometry? Were the balancer pulleys also aligned further forward in the engine bay in '65? I assume they must have been but never heard of this in the past.

I've answered lots of belt (mis)alignment questions thru the years, I never thought the '64 had a unique balancer pulley geometry. Always focused on the WP and accessory pulleys.

John
I do have a double pulley Feb. built hadt. unfortunately I painted it black because at the time I was told it should be black. It did look natural like the other single ones I have before I painted ,but I can not say for sure it had no signs of being black originally. the best place to look for signs is under the washers that hold and space the pulley because that area is protected and will usually reveal the original plating color. Don

[3 Deuce 64]

here is another picture of a 65 originally purchased new by a local guy in Binghamton original protecto plate is still with the car which was built in Baltimore . Has the numbered pulley and is cad coated. This was in another posting but also notice the bent tip fan not notched. the car does have power steering .my 64s and 5 have the same style fan with power steering not notched. Don

[64woodwheel]

Here is what I have observed. 64 double groove WP pulley T8 Black, P8 silver cad.

64 GTO



64 Tempest



64 Catalina

Here's one more. 64 Tempest w/AC, PS pulley. I took this picture and remember the pulley not being painted.

[Tom Vaught]

Originally Posted by Keith Seymore

I can also check the car in Henry Ford museum, which is a later build and is a PS/PB/AC car.

K

This is a 4 year old thread but was rereading some of the posts and the comment above caught my eye.

I restored the carbs/Tri-power on that Henry Ford Museum 65 GTO and will say that I found several issues with the person who originally "restored" that GTO before the HF Museum bought it. I would not use that car as a perfect example for anything Keith.

I don't even believe that my stuff was always perfect for a 65 GTO as I am not a 65 original owner.

Tom V.

[bill ryder]

Hi Tom, Did you have the carbs dichromated in the Rochester vats as mine were?? Seems maybe Tim did them. Almost 25 years and mine are still looking great!! THANKS "Bill"!