correct 289 COBRA "impact" / "ray brown" seat belts

[csx700?]

just to clear up the mystery
the proper seat belts for a 289 cobra is the "impact" brand that was manufactured by "ray brown" (see photo of tag). the proper plating on these belts was a cad plating (dull silver, not chrome), the proper leather pad was of natural leather (brown) and the pad was secured to the link side of the hardware using 2 piece rivets (copper). not trying to start a gripe session but if you contact jim cowles or look in the rinsey mills book this can be confirmed...............

[computerworks]

Originally Posted by csx700?

just to clear up the mystery ... not trying to start a gripe session but if you contact jim cowles or look in the rinsey mills book this can be confirmed...............

Presenting you input does not mean replies are a gripe session.

Several things need to be clarified and since you have researched this..perhaps you have the answers.

I have seen variations to indicate that there were several configs of the belts.
The cad-plating seems to be uniform. The leather color...and which side the leather was installed on...seems to be a variable.

Attached is a pic of original belts in unrestored car, showing black leather, not natural.

All belts had the Ray Brown label...did all belts have the large Impact label?

[Dan Case]

American Safety was selling "IMPACT" brand belts at least as early as 1963 and into 1964 and they were MIL SPEC units.
The belts in my car, believed to be originals since most everything else is, are marked.

Cloth Tags
G2275 (latch side) or ?2275 (tang side)
American Model No.
Safety GB 500
IMPACT

Metal Latches
A.S.E.
MS 22013• (driver's) and MS 22013-1 (passenger's)

Metal Tang
A.S.E.
MS 22002-1 (driver's) and MS 22003-1 (passenger's)

Note: These parts carry Military Specification numbers.

Somebody selling some old belts had these, claimed to be a 1965 model.

Cloth Tags
G2275 (latch side) or A32275 (tang side - three may be a typo)
American Model No.
Safety GB 500
IMPACT

Metal Latches
A.S.E.
MS 22013-1 (same design as CSX2310's)

Metal Tang
MS 22044-1 (AMCT) 65 (I am guessing that 22044 is a later revision than 22013• and 22013-1 AND that "65" might be the year of manufacture.)

Note: These parts carry Military Specification numbers. Also note that the design number change on the tang from MS 22002-1 and MS 22003-3 on my car to a higher number reported for a 1965 car MS 22044-1.

Back before Cobras and GT350s started getting rebuilt at every owner change the American Safety marked belts were common. By the time GT350s came along (I use to have a low mile very unrestored car SFM5S142). It seems the Military Specification designations were no longer used. Over the decades since circa 1972 I have handled American Safety only marked belts, American Safety tagged belts with Ray Brown labels sewn over them, and belts only marked Ray Brown all in Cobras and GT350s that had not been show restored.

There is a caveat here. Any car used for any type organized competition probably got belts replaced every season or two. I took one of my cars to an SCCA event in Huntsville Alabama once and I was not allowed to run because my seat belts were not new enough for the inspectors.

Like most things Shelby there appears to have been an evolution in seat belts, most likely driven by costs just like today’s manufacturing world. Maintaining Military Specification required status for seat belts would have added to the cost, it adds cost big time today. Ray Brown non-Mil Spec assemblies were probably cheaper I would guess. Most big manufacturers will switch suppliers for something like a penny a pound on commodities and ten cents a part for assemblies. We do where I work so often there is a separate organization just to handle quoting and managing the changes vendor to vendor.

(American Safety is a very large largest seat belt manufacturer. Most of the Fords I have had used assemblies supplied by them and the Boeing planes I was on last week had American Safety belts for passengers.)

[computerworks]

...and if you hang a sec, I'll post a pic of Dan's belts.

[computerworks]

Dan's belts

[Dan Case]

I wasn’t there in 1963 of course but I have worked for one of the world’s largest manufacturers just short of 30 years now. Here are scenarios that play out dozens of times a year for us.

First there is a need for a part or assembly. We find what is available in the market. We usually pick the one that is (a) recognized as the best and (b) the largest capacity supplier. Picking the best and largest keeps warrantee concerns to a minimum and large companies usually won’t fold up and strand you.

Second we enter into a short term supplier customer relationship no matter what the cost is.

Third, almost before the ink on the supplier contract has dried we start hunting lower cost alternatives. Here is where it starts getting messy.

1 ) We might just find another product from the same supplier.
2) We might find a similar part from the supplier’s competitors(s).
3) Or we might cut a deal where the supplier provides private label parts, parts without their identification, parts that are identical functionally and quality wise. Private label parts can cut costs 20-30%.
4) If we don’t need things like Mil Spec certifications we ask to get that dropped off for lower cost.

In this third bullet, the customer just sees one service part number. At the engineering level they have just one need to fill. All kinds of combinations in-between will get the job done but would give anybody on the outside a hard time sorting out what is what.

The fourth common scenario is one supplier can not or will not for any reason supply everything you require. In this case you get what you can wherever you can. We have “1” plastic part we use 37,000 a day of. No one supplier can or will supply them all so we have “2” suppliers. There are “2” plastic resins approved for use and both suppliers are free to use either, usually price and availability drives this. The service parts group just has “1” service part number so customers see only “1” part.
1 = number of parts engineering sees
1 = number of parts service organization sees
4 = number of parts our assembly operators see, and because the resins are slightly different and molds are different they try very hard to keep only a single version in any of our units heading out the door.
If you try to compare your machine to one made hours earlier or later you might notice your parts are not exactly like your buddy’s. If you get one service part it may or may not exactly match the “originals”.

The fifth most likely scenario is to use parts or assemblies from two or more suppliers at the same time to keep them competing on cost and quality. We do this a lots and it means many millions of dollars in savings a year for us.

Finally, as a sixth change method the design is just made lower cost just for the sake of lowering manufacturing costs.

I for one can see how so many variations exist in old cars.

[sportyworty]

65/66 GT 350's are chrome finished, later in 66 were impact tagged. No clue on CSX cars.

[computerworks]

Right...Both my early '66 GT350's were Ray Brown-tagged...no Impact label

[1985 CCX]

Was PYROTECT an oiriginal supplier at any point in the 60'S or were they a remake in the 70's and 80's?

Thanks guys for the information!

Great discussion! Jeff

[csx700?]

computerworks
1) the photo of the belts that are in the photo with the red seats appear to be brown (natural) not black as you say? they appear to be the correct pieces but if the pad is black i would be suspect as to the leather having been replaced at some point, no copper rivets either? unless the supplier had indeed used a black pad, anything is posible.
2) the secont photo appears to posibly be from a 427 car. the leather is on the opposite side and is black in color.

dan case
you are correect in stating that military hardware was used to make the sert belts. there were many suppliers of th hardware so there could be some variation in the parts supplied to "ray brown" or "impact".

[A-Snake]

Originally Posted by computerworks

Attached is a pic of original belts in unrestored car, showing black leather, not natural.

CW: Unless my monitor color is way off, the color of the belt leather in your picture is natural.

[csx700?]

A-snake
thanks for confirming the color of the leather pad in the photo, i thought my eyes were going bad..........

[Nedsel]

Ron - would it be correct to guess the shot of the red seat with the belt over it is Hank Williams' 2227? The red looks more like nauaghyde than leather and that fits his car.

[A-Snake]

Originally Posted by Nedsel

The red looks more like nauaghyde than leather and that fits his car.

It certainly doesn't look like 40+ year old leather.

[computerworks]

Originally Posted by Nedsel

Ron - would it be correct to guess the shot of the red seat with the belt over it is Hank Williams' 2227? The red looks more like nauaghyde than leather and that fits his car.

Right...that is Hank's car.