Dobster's 1965 FJ40 Soft Top Resto (1 Viewer)

[MitchFJ]

Looking Great Dobster. Is the Judson Green the same as my 63?

 

[Dobster]

Off a 65 How about some better pictures of both sides Rob? I guess both sides being amber would make sense since the turn signal had to be amber the front turn signal would have to be amber on the back side as well as the front.

Here you go - hope these are a little better. - Not sure if I got everything you were looking for.

Pretty sure these were original on the vehicle from new. The PO was the first owner and said the only change was the motor and gear box and most things still appear to be fairly original.

Mitch I thing the Judson Green on mine is a little different to yours but might to spend a little more time comparing photos.

Cheers Dobster

 

[MitchFJ]

Here you go - hope these are a little better. - Not sure if I got everything you were looking for.

Pretty sure these were original on the vehicle from new. The PO was the first owner and said the only change was the motor and gear box and most things still appear to be fairly original.

Mitch I thing the Judson Green on mine is a little different to yours but might to spend a little more time comparing photos.

Cheers Dobster

It seems like mine has faded a fair bit. I think i might be a little colour blind because to me it looks blue but to everyone else it looks green!

 

[Living in the Past]

Here you go - hope these are a little better. - Not sure if I got everything you were looking for.

Pretty sure these were original on the vehicle from new. The PO was the first owner and said the only change was the motor and gear box and most things still appear to be fairly original.

Mitch I thing the Judson Green on mine is a little different to yours but might to spend a little more time comparing photos.

Cheers Dobster

Curious that these are original. Mitch's early 64 has the style we got here in the US. I hate to bother you Rob but could you get a picture of the backside but not straight on but angled so we could see the threads? Which one is the one in better shape, front or back? Does the back lens have a screw on top of the housing holds it in place? I can see what's left of a O-ring, which is something we are going top have to figure out. But that should be pretty simple compared to just getting the lenses.

John

 

[west aussie]

i find it odd these lenses would be new in 65. perhaps an assembly was damaged in shipping or somesuch and the dealer had these earlier replacements gathering dust. or they were replaced early in the vehicles life for some reason and the PO just forgot. it doesnt matter anyway nice to have them in such good condition.

my 62 fj45 skeleton has double sided assembys but both lenses held in with 3 screws and not threaded in. and all 63 or 64 fj45s i have seen have the standard single sided directional. and of course my fj25 has that sexy aussie pop out indicator!

that tail light lense does look fj45 ish. most 45 taillights have been smashed to pieces many times over though think i may have a survivor here somewhere i will have to double check. you welcome if its of any use. im quiet sure 45 rear lenses were fitted according to the whim of the tray manufacturerer in the early days and many never had koito items from new.

speaking of koito i believe the shape of the headlight koito script changed (perhaps around 1964?) anyone have an opinion on this? what script original on fj25?

anyway hows this fj40 project going dobster? was looking like you were making good progress.

 

[Dobster]

Curious that these are original. Mitch's early 64 has the style we got here in the US. I hate to bother you Rob but could you get a picture of the backside but not straight on but angled so we could see the threads? Which one is the one in better shape, front or back? Does the back lens have a screw on top of the housing holds it in place? I can see what's left of a O-ring, which is something we are going top have to figure out. But that should be pretty simple compared to just getting the lenses.

John

John I'll try to get another photo or two in the next day or so. I'll try and photograph the housing also.

You know way more about the niceties of original equipment than I, but looking at everything else on it including the tail lights it seems to be very un molested. It has the orginal rims, glass bowl fuel filter, and other little things.

Cheers Dobster

 

[Dobster]

i find it odd these lenses would be new in 65. perhaps an assembly was damaged in shipping or somesuch and the dealer had these earlier replacements gathering dust. or they were replaced early in the vehicles life for some reason and the PO just forgot. it doesnt matter anyway nice to have them in such good condition.

So when did these indicators (dual lens) appear and what years and countries should they be on?

that tail light lense does look fj45 ish. most 45 taillights have been smashed to pieces many times over though think i may have a survivor here somewhere i will have to double check. you welcome if its of any use. im quiet sure 45 rear lenses were fitted according to the whim of the tray manufacturerer in the early days and many never had koito items from new.

Pretty sure JohnnyC found the documents and part number that identified them as specific to Aussie 40s of about 1965.

anyway hows this fj40 project going dobster? was looking like you were making good progress.

I was making great progress for a while - but right now she is exactly where the last update left off. Hopefully get a little more movement on her in the next 6 months.

Cheers Dobster

 

[Living in the Past]

So when did these indicators (dual lens) appear and what years and countries should they be on?



Pretty sure JohnnyC found the documents and part number that identified them as specific to Aussie 40s of about 1965.

I have micro fiche film for 62/63/65 FJ40s. I know I seen the Australian tail lights in the 65 fiche. I will get the part number if you would like. If the dual lens turn signal were still in Australia the fiche should show it since it's show the correct tail lights for your market. Hoping at some point to be able to find the 61/64 and some later sixties micro fiche. Not just for the part numbers but to see what changes were made during the early years. The 61 micro fiche wouldn't have the ten digit part number but would help with what changes happened between 61 and 62. 61 had more carry over FJ25 parts then 62.

 

[west aussie]

had a closer look at your taillights. they are identical to the lights on a couple of my old fj45 wrecks. i guess a couple of local tray manufacturers just went with them. another 45 has identical loking lenses but they are branded EVER WING made in japan instead of koito. my ever wing lenses have R23 branded in the round reflector piece instead of R24 in the koito ones.

 

[west aussie]

i not up to spead with quoting snippets in my replys but someone recently asked if the double sided directionals have a screw in top to hold rear lense in place; believe this can be seen in the photos of post #2 in this thread

 

[Dobster]

I know that we are doubling up here with

https://forum.ih8mud.com/fj25-owners-group/174609-dual-turn-signal-lense-colors-4.html#post6513336

but here are the requested photographs of the lens thread. I take this confirms you were looking for these?

Cheers Dobster

 

[67azcruizr]

that is the magic lens

pm sent

 

[Ken White]

I know that this is an old thread but after reading it decided to answer a question from Living in the Past about why the spare tyre carrier is on different sides between a RHD and LHD. I believe that the reason the spare tyre carrier is on the passenger side of the vehicle on a RHD is if you get a flat and need to get the spare tyre off you are standing almost on the kerb as opposed to standing out on the actual roadway. Its a safety principle.

 

[pardion]

I know that this is an old thread but after reading it decided to answer a question from Living in the Past about why the spare tyre carrier is on different sides between a RHD and LHD. I believe that the reason the spare tyre carrier is on the passenger side of the vehicle on a RHD is if you get a flat and need to get the spare tyre off you are standing almost on the kerb as opposed to standing out on the actual roadway. Its a safety principle.

Safety yes, I thought that when you are backing up in reverse you can see without a tire in your way.

 

[Dobster]

I'll investigate that theory further. I think there are examples of both sides in Aust.

Just to update the build there has been very little change although the motor was tested a few months ago in anticipation of a rebuild but found to be in excellent condition.

It's been removed now in the hope the firewall will be sprayed sometime soon. I've said it before but there is a glimmer of hope it will all be back up and running in Six months. I'll add some photos later in the week.

Cheers Dobster

 

[Living in the Past]

I know that this is an old thread but after reading it decided to answer a question from Living in the Past about why the spare tyre carrier is on different sides between a RHD and LHD. I believe that the reason the spare tyre carrier is on the passenger side of the vehicle on a RHD is if you get a flat and need to get the spare tyre off you are standing almost on the kerb as opposed to standing out on the actual roadway. Its a safety principle.

Safety yes, I thought that when you are backing up in reverse you can see without a tire in your way.

If it was for safety that doesn't why with the 75 model it moved to the driver's side on LHD. As time went by for safety items like roll bar, padded dash and three point seat belts were added. If had it on the inside for safety why switch it. Both being on the back are safer than changing a tire on the road side.

As far as backing yard pre mid 65 didn't matter on the hard top. Unless the back hatch was open vision out the back was awful. The same with the early soft top. The LC I've owned the longest is 68 hard top. For driving the spare on the passenger's blocks my vision out the back. For safety I would rather know if there was something in a blind spot. Remember it wasn't until the 68 model a mirror was added to the passenger's side. I'm sure Toyota had a reason for which side they mounted the spare but not sure will ever know for 100% sure what it was.

 

[nuclearlemon]

i would say opposite the driver to offset weight, but the original tires were so tiny they didn't weight a thing ,

i've always hated them being right in my line of sight also

 

[Living in the Past]

i would say opposite the driver to offset weight, but the original tires were so tiny they didn't weight a thing ,

i've always hated them being right in my line of sight also

Ah yes the old Moody Blues song "A Question of Balance"

For the time they did this it makes about as much sense as anything. Balanced front to back as well as side to side.

 

[Dobster]

Here is the state of the old girl

not sure why these are small I'll have a look into that.

 

[tomibaravalle]

Excellent - From what I can see the cross member seems to be shorter and the rear lights set up attached to it.

I went and took some more photos of mine and had a chat with the Panel Beater. He thinks the cross member attached is that it is orginal. All the rivets and bolts are all correct and he suggested to replace it the body needed to come off and this one hasn't been off. No signs of any other work from former damage.

Have a look at the pics and see what you think. Obviously the angle welded below is not original.
View attachment 357696View attachment 357697

Hi dobster, I guess I have the same as you but mines was a little bit modified. Can you send me the length of yours? And also the space for the light.