1967 driver's side power seat interchange
#2
#6
I have toyed with the idea of adding power seat to my car, but only if the seat will raise and lower. During track days, myhelmet is tearing up my headliner, it would be nice to be able to lower the seat just a little.
What are the odds there is a later model car that shares the same mounting footprint? Just brainstorming.
What are the odds there is a later model car that shares the same mounting footprint? Just brainstorming.
#7
I have toyed with the idea of adding power seat to my car, but only if the seat will raise and lower. During track days, myhelmet is tearing up my headliner, it would be nice to be able to lower the seat just a little.
What are the odds there is a later model car that shares the same mounting footprint? Just brainstorming.
What are the odds there is a later model car that shares the same mounting footprint? Just brainstorming.
#9
Not sure who made that comparison between power and manual track height but it is simply not true. The power seat track will go about 2" lower in the back than the manual tracks. Considering where you sit in the seat, this does give more head room in the car and a more comfortable driving position. Not the best angle, but you can see in this pic of my chevelle the top of the driver seat is clearly lower than the top of the passenger seat. 66-72 power tracks had some minor changes over the years, but the geometry of the track parts was the same through all 6 years. With the track all the way down, there is very little room between the floor and the bottom of the seat. I think I have about 9 power driver seat tracks between the ones I have in cars and the ones I have in my parts collection, so if anyone is still not convinced, or wants to know exactly how much lower the power track goes I can get some more pics.
#10
https://classicoldsmobile.com/forums...estion-149941/
This is the discussion I had.
My personal knowledge is I have 2 fingers above my head in manual original buckets in a 72 H/O all the way back. and 3 fingers above my head in power bench in a 72 Monte Carlo, down and out. (and about 6 inches in a 73 Econoline, no seat adjustment, it's more of a chair.)
I would like there to be more room on power tracks in the vertical.
This is the discussion I had.
My personal knowledge is I have 2 fingers above my head in manual original buckets in a 72 H/O all the way back. and 3 fingers above my head in power bench in a 72 Monte Carlo, down and out. (and about 6 inches in a 73 Econoline, no seat adjustment, it's more of a chair.)
I would like there to be more room on power tracks in the vertical.
#11
I will try to get some pics tomorrow. I think the problem with the pics in the thread above is that the rear mounts on the power vs. non power are too close together in the comparison making it look like the rear height is closer than it actually is.
#13
If you go exotic, I can confirm that early 80’s Camaro z28 power seat tracks are much lower profile (shorter) than the 60’s stuff.
I spent weeks trying to gin up something using 60’s - 70’s big car parts for my ‘66 Starfire a few decades ago, but the 6 way tracks were all too tall - meaning seat height was just too high.
Once I got the (probably now rare) Camaro parts, it came together. Base camaros don’t have these seat tracks, they were a fancy option, so look on well optioned boneyard cars.
Having just redone the Starfire’s strato buckets with reproduction seats, they’re hard to get low enough to since the floor is angled. I had to use an angle grinder to cut relief slots in the steel seat bottoms to get them to sit down low on the seat track mechanisms.
I spent weeks trying to gin up something using 60’s - 70’s big car parts for my ‘66 Starfire a few decades ago, but the 6 way tracks were all too tall - meaning seat height was just too high.
Once I got the (probably now rare) Camaro parts, it came together. Base camaros don’t have these seat tracks, they were a fancy option, so look on well optioned boneyard cars.
Having just redone the Starfire’s strato buckets with reproduction seats, they’re hard to get low enough to since the floor is angled. I had to use an angle grinder to cut relief slots in the steel seat bottoms to get them to sit down low on the seat track mechanisms.
#14
cfair,
The late 80's style camaro (IROC era) do also work well as you mentioned as they get VERY thin when fully down. I recall putting a set on one of my chevelles years ago. If I remember correctly, I was able to pretty much bolt them on the strato buckets and drill some holes in the floor without too much trouble, but that was probably close to 15 years ago so I don't remember exactly.
As promised, here are some pics of power tracks vs. manual tracks.
Height of the seat backs in my 66 convertible with the driver seat the whole way down:
Here are some pics of power vs. manual tracks sitting on bucket seat brackets. The power track is about 1" lower than the manual track when set to the same position front to back and all the way down, but because the seat track tilts rather than dropping evenly, the person sitting in the seat essentially reclines giving 2" - 3" more headroom (hard to measure in my car being a convertible).
Here are some pics of the manual and power tracks sitting side by side
The late 80's style camaro (IROC era) do also work well as you mentioned as they get VERY thin when fully down. I recall putting a set on one of my chevelles years ago. If I remember correctly, I was able to pretty much bolt them on the strato buckets and drill some holes in the floor without too much trouble, but that was probably close to 15 years ago so I don't remember exactly.
As promised, here are some pics of power tracks vs. manual tracks.
Height of the seat backs in my 66 convertible with the driver seat the whole way down:
Here are some pics of power vs. manual tracks sitting on bucket seat brackets. The power track is about 1" lower than the manual track when set to the same position front to back and all the way down, but because the seat track tilts rather than dropping evenly, the person sitting in the seat essentially reclines giving 2" - 3" more headroom (hard to measure in my car being a convertible).
Here are some pics of the manual and power tracks sitting side by side
Last edited by Loaded68W34; August 28th, 2021 at 01:18 PM.
#15
To the OP's original question about A body vs. B/C body tracks here are some shots to show the differences. As was noted earlier, the basic structure of the track is basically the same, but the feet are different.
Here is what the inboard (trans tunnel side) track feet look like (rusted is the B-body clean is the A-body):
Outboard (rocker/ door side) feet. The bare metal are the A-body, silver painted are the B-body
As stated above, the short answer to your question is: No, B-body tracks will not fit in an A-body.
However, the longer answer is that anything can be made to fit. B-body tracks are easier to find and generally cheaper than A-body tracks because (1. there were a lot more B-body cars originally equipped with power tracks and 2. (Not meant to offend anyone) B-bodies are generally less popular so less people are out looking for B-body tracks now). If you find a good deal on a B-body power set up, you can make it work if you are willing to put in the effort. Years ago, I pulled a set of power bucket seats out of a junk yard. The tracks were so rusty that the feet had completely rusted off up to the rivets. I ended up making my own feet to put on the tracks. I also swapped where I put them so the track could be a 4-way passenger seat track (this required changing the wiring to the switch as well, but that is a whole other story).
For the front feet, I cut the front legs off of a set of A-body manual bench seat tracks and then made plates out of 1/4" steel plate to weld them to/ weld to the power track guides.
For the back, I stacked, welded, and ground/ shaped a few layers of 1/4" plate for the feet stands, and then made the lower plates out of thinner steal to mimic the original style of the A-body mounts.
Here is what the inboard (trans tunnel side) track feet look like (rusted is the B-body clean is the A-body):
Outboard (rocker/ door side) feet. The bare metal are the A-body, silver painted are the B-body
As stated above, the short answer to your question is: No, B-body tracks will not fit in an A-body.
However, the longer answer is that anything can be made to fit. B-body tracks are easier to find and generally cheaper than A-body tracks because (1. there were a lot more B-body cars originally equipped with power tracks and 2. (Not meant to offend anyone) B-bodies are generally less popular so less people are out looking for B-body tracks now). If you find a good deal on a B-body power set up, you can make it work if you are willing to put in the effort. Years ago, I pulled a set of power bucket seats out of a junk yard. The tracks were so rusty that the feet had completely rusted off up to the rivets. I ended up making my own feet to put on the tracks. I also swapped where I put them so the track could be a 4-way passenger seat track (this required changing the wiring to the switch as well, but that is a whole other story).
For the front feet, I cut the front legs off of a set of A-body manual bench seat tracks and then made plates out of 1/4" steel plate to weld them to/ weld to the power track guides.
For the back, I stacked, welded, and ground/ shaped a few layers of 1/4" plate for the feet stands, and then made the lower plates out of thinner steal to mimic the original style of the A-body mounts.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post