• 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
incorrect Ram-Air hood paint
The problem with most factory-painted hoods being used as templates is that the factory rarely, if ever got this detail "perfect". On the paint line, hoods destined for ram-air were shunted to the "two tone line", a smaller side-line area for optional two-tone paint.
The front section of the design was a stick-on paper template paint mask. It wrapped around the front of the scoops and extended as far back as appoximately where the back edge of the scoop inserts were mounted on the hood.
The strsight stripes from there to the trailing edge of the hood were simy laid out with pre-cut strsight paper temlplates.
So, the factory mask was a 3-piece affair. If you look closely at ANY original factory painted hood you will most likely see a small glitch in the paint on both sides of the hood where the templatee pieces come together.
The problem with measuring a factory hood is that many the examples still left are different from esch other due to sloppy line work at the factory. Many of the templates were not as carefully located they should have been from the fsctory. Many who have measured a factory car make thier measurments from the edge of the hood to the edge of the paint stripe. If the template was placed incorrectly, then that factory measurement will be "off".
Before there were aftermarket templates available, I wanted to get it "right", so I made some educated assumptions:
First, I assumed that the template was naturally intended to be applied to the hood exactly centered, left-to-right. That only makes sense to me. On my factory painted car, there was a 3/4" difference on one side as to the other in the apparent placement of template. So my original home-made template was measured across the desjgn, not from the edge of the hood. I felt that no matter how poor the placement of the template may have been, the shape and measurement of the design itself would always be the same. I measured it meticulously, and traced it full size on butcher paper.
When I centered the new template on the hood, I saw that the edge of the design was nust about exactly 2" inches from were the outside edge of the scoop was,( on both sides of the hood, so I knew it was centered ckrrectly)
The curved shape of the template follows EXACTLY the curved character line molded into the outside edge of the forward scoop area.
I again assumed that 2" was a uniform measurement and made adjustments fore-and-aft of the template and it fit PERFECTLY, following the 2" rule I adolted. The curved shape of the template maintained 2" from the curved character line percectly. My third assumption was that it was intended tbis way.
This gave the template a distsnce of ( surprise) 2" from the leading edge of the hood.

For the straight sections up to the widshield, I followed the 2" rule, not thinking there would be any reason for it to be different.

The issue with many "know it all experts" ( myself included, unfortunately!) is that we sometimes fkrget that what the factory intended ( the correct way) is not always the way they were assembled. This means there are factory-produced cars that are legitimaley "right" because the factory made them that way, but are also " wrong" because they don't conform to official factory documents!

My determination of the "right" way to paint a ram-air hood is really just extrapolation and a little math. But since there are no factory instructions for the placement of the template, no one can say fkr 100% sure.
But...I think it is accurate to assume the design was planned to be symetrical. So that is where I headed.
Excellent post Kit! Thanks for the write up. Now about those pics...

[Image: 386_07_10_13_5_58_42.jpeg]
My Mustangs:
71 M-code Mach 1, Medium Blue/White Sport, 4R70W, 3L50, Factory Ram Air.
72 Q-code Mach 1, Pewter/Black Sport, 4-spd, 3L25.
65 Convertible, Britney Blue/White/White, more modified than original.
05 Convertible, Legend Lime/Tan/Tan, future classic??
Yeah,, all my mustang resto stuff ( pics included) are somewhere in my warehouse. ( no computers for pics back then!). I will look for them and post asap.
I always found Mustang Monthly to be wrong more often than me. Never knew an article to be complete.

[Image: 11jmcuc.png]
351C Bold Manners, Brash Attitude
Favorite Teams: Michigan Wolverines and Whoever Is Playing Ohio State.

When I drive past a herd of cows, the cows MOO at me
.jpg   mach1 hood.JPG (Size: 99.51 KB / Downloads: 256) Here is a hood that was at a Ford display a few years back.
Did they get it right? I would say not exactly.

Here's a picture from about 1985 before my Mach1 was painted.

Vamach1 - 72 Sprint conv & 72 Mach1
Nope - it's missing the 'XXX Ram Air' decals - and they hung it sideways. Big Grin

Who knows what else they messed up? rofl


[Image: mach1sig2.gif]
Nope, that blackout is very wrong. Front angled sides do not follow the curve of the character lines, the front edge is too far back from leading edge of hood and the corners are too sharp
Here you will notice the uniform 2" distance form the shape around the outside character lines in front of each scoop. Also the front edge is 2" from the leading edge of the hood...not 3" as "MM" stated.

Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
Edit: We all have learned Kit worked with Graphics Express. Not Phoenix Express!!! Here is the Graphics Express website:

Here is another bad (terrible)example of incorrect hood paint on a 73 convertible on CL ( big thx Dana (rpmcarter) for posting in another thread! )


.jpg   73 conv bad hood paint a.jpg (Size: 52.32 KB / Downloads: 206)

.jpg   73 conv bad hood paint b.jpg (Size: 8.81 KB / Downloads: 203)


1971 Boss 351  
1972 Q code 4 speed convertible 
1971 Mustang Sportsroof  351-2V FMX 
1971 Hardtop (parts car)
1973 Mach 1 (parts car)
Yeah, that's terrible...not even reasonably close. Even if the masker/ painter was attempting to come up with his own unique scheme, it has no coherent design...very incongruous.
Share Thread:  

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)