HBergeron

For the convertible. I have searched high and low - does anyone know about anyplace making a replacement Upper Quarter Trim Panel Cap that is either chrome or brushed alum? I restored an old 60s conv in high school and I've always liked the big-chrome look of a mid 60s conv with the top down. The UQTPC is the weak point in the interior appearance with the top down - just a big flat piece of plastic, and would really shine (pun intended) as a chrome piece accenting the interior.

It's also justifiable from a wear point of view, as it is the piece most exposed to wind/sun with a lot of top down driving - I can't imagine the plastic will wear well over time. Any thoughts on this? I don't want to put any kind of laminate on - it won't look genuine, and, after having seen them in action, I am generally against the faux metal look.

Now, if they had offerd a chrome windshield header...

HBergeron

I guess the answer is no?

To be clear, if less exact, I am talking about the piece at the top of the rear interior trim that looks like just a flat expanse of cheap plastic with the top down. It extends about an inch down to meet with the main rear trim piece - hence the "cap" name. It should be easy to pop out and replace, and it really is the ugliest reminder that this is a modern product of bean counting, rather then a piece of rolling fine design (which I feel it is the rest of the time)

HBergeron

Ok, one more try.

While I'm at it - what would it take to chrome the windshield surround/header ala the S4 Convertible or Solstice (or every convertible made in the '60s) and is anyone doing/offering it?

Torch_Vert

I understand your suggestion, but I'm a little confused, as I'm not aware of 60's Mustangs having a mass of chrome in that area? Was the convertible you restored a 'stang? If so do you have a picture of the look you're trying to echo?

In any event, I think replacing the rather large quarter trim cap with a chrome one would look pretty gaudy, and would only even slightly work visually in a car with the IUP dash.

Going "retro" is a balancing act. You want the car to be grounded in it's roots, without trying to duplicate every last detail and losing all character of it's own.

HBergeron

Sorry, don't have the old car anymore.

The trim area behind and next to the rear seats, essentially surrounding the folded top, was chrome in every mid-60s convertible I can think of. The windshild header was also chrome, ala the current audi a4 conv and some other current convertibles.

When it comes down to it, I would replace all of the (rather cheap) looking belt-line plastic (running along the door tops, the UQPTC, the side mirrors) and maybe the windshield header. Gaudy? Maybe, but that was the style of the 60's convs (and by 60's I don't mean the 68-69 monstrosities chevelles, cutlasses, etc) The 64 cutlass 442, gto, 65 stang and 64 corvair convertibles are all good examples of this look. Some of the trim pieces were big chunks of chrome - they looks like sculpture without being the massive overdone pieces of the late 50s.

The fact that a number of modern manufacturers are going back to this look makes me think ford missed a step by not bringing it back to the mustang

mustangjack

Have you noticed that the Crossfire's windshield header is just painted silver. It looks pretty good. I wonder how that would look on the stang.

HBergeron

I have now, looked at one parked in my garage. That is an option, but I always prefer actually metal to the look. Per the earlier question, sitting in the car last night it struck me that replacing all the beltline plastic with chrome would look great with the IUP, at least with the top down - a continuous circle of metal at the same height all the way around. Really, the reason for wanting to replace that UQTPC in particular is that it allows the opportunity for one of those almost sculptural pieces of metal like you saw on the old cars. The rest is just trim.