All the tilt away switches I have found are too long in the back to fit in my 69 Cougar convertible jamb. The last switch I ordered is 13713-A from National Parts(recommended) is 1-3/8" out the back of switch and pushes against body behind jamb(no matter what angle you use) and if you push into place the switches will come apart. The hole in jamb for switch is exactly 7/8". Ford must have used a shorter switch I suspect. When I purchased car it had the wrong switch in jamb, it was slightly pushed outward due to it being the same length as the ones I have purchased lately. Any ideas anyone???
I’ve seen that style before ( listed for the door jamb switch ) for tilt-away steering wheels. But that’s not what is in my car ( but granted mine is a San Jose assembly and EARLY 1969 ). But I know mine is original to the car, as it was purchased by my father, and has never been out of the family. The door jamb switch I have is identified as Autolite - and looks identical to the one offered by West Coast Classic Cougar for the courtesy lights, so who knows what they were doing in San Jose. All I know for certain is that it works and is original to the car.
This is the one being sold by WCCC as applicable to the tilt-away wheel, but it looks like the one you’re having trouble with:
Here’s the one that is a ‘dead ringer’ for what’s on my car:
The plastic Autolite one you have a pictured excepts those twin prong connectors that clips onto back of switch, I have those for my courtesy lights. The tilt away switch excepts two wires with bullet connectors. My car was built in Dearborn in late November,1968 and its a very original car and looks to never been in any accidents, so nothing bent behind jamb. The courtesy light switch holes on my car are smaller than the 7/8"hole for the tilt away switch.
I just measured and found that the plastic courtesy light switch, like you have pictured above, is the same length out the back and is for the same 7/8" hole. So both my courtesy light switches fit fine on my car. Its just the tilt away switch. The tilt away has two bullet plugs that fit in the back which stick out about 1/4"or so . On driver’s door the courtesy switch is in the top hole position and the tilt away switch is lower and angled more in the jamb toward door. Thinking about switching the positions of the switches and see if that helps since the tilt away switch has the bullet connector ends that stick out so far.
Max99-
My cat is a late April 69 (29th) built Dearborn car. XR7 Convertible.
I have that very tilt away switch in the door jab as you do. It is approximately 1.3 inches long with the 2 bullet connectors. Fits perfectly with NO clearance issues. Can you access the area behind the dash to check for any obstructions? Also, I have never seen that type of switch that gah posted. I will post a picture of mine tomorrow. Can’t say if that one (gah’s) is original (factory) or not.
These are the part numbers you should be looking for. (From the MPC)
Door Jam Switch C8AZ-13713-C (SW-828)
Tilt Jam Switch C6OZ-13713-A (SW548)
Possibly Dearborn and San Jose use different parts depending on built date.
There no obstructions other than the internal steel body. Google C6OZ-13713-A (SW-548). Okay you the switch I have from National Parts Depot like in first picture above. But on Ebay the switch looks shorter than the one I bought from NPD- take a look at it 1966 FORD FAIRLANE MERCURY COMET NOS MOTORCRAFT DOME LIGHT SWITCH C60Z-13713-A | eBay
In dealing with the “steel” switch coming apart, I had same issue. I used a washer & tape to protect the shiny parts. Crimped it with channel locks…
Here’s images ( courtesy of WCCC ) of the wide range of door jamb switches used from 1967 through 1970.
I measured the diameter of the two door jamb holes, and:
Upper ( courtesy light ) = 3/4" (0.746)
Lower( tilt away) = 7/8" ( 0.873), so even if my car was a very Late San Jose production model, the hole size and configuration is the same. Only the switches appear to be different.
The courtesy light switch is like #’ 5 ( without the prongs on the end, but with the two tabs to locate the switch into the 3/4" hole, which also has the two tab cut-outs on the left and right side ) and the tilt-away switch is like # 3 from the WCCC images.
Here’s the application chart and part numbers:
As well the tilt wheel switch has a rubber boot on it ( more like what I’ve seen on T-birds and Mark III’s.
There were no obstructions in the cavity where the two switches fit, in fact the depth is in excess of 4" of space.
Again the anomolies in the switches found in my Cougar are more than likely due to it’s production at San Jose and VERY late in the run, before that facility was shuttered.
What is the part number to the all plastic #3 that your car uses for tilt away? The switch that is recommended in the chart you provided for 1969 tilt away is C6OZ-13713-A(same style as the NPD repo I bought), this switch is completely different than the all plastic switch you have installed. I would like to try one like yours. Here is a picture of the C6OZ-13713-A below (pictures #1 & 2 Ebay and #3 & 4 West Cougar Cougar)
Best to walk away from this topic now.
Max99, I hope you find a solution to the issue you are having.
Have a good day
“Best to walk away from this topic now”
You sound triggered. Very strange.
Okay I forgot but I had another all plastic door jamb switch(picture #3) as well as the SW-548 which Ford recommends, both are 1-3/8" long. This 69 Cougar is all original and you can tell it has not been wrecked especially in the door jamb area. Look at picture #1 and you can see the seem all these switches push against regardless what angle you try to install switch. Picture #2 is of door jamb. I am wondering if it is a factory defect and tilt away switch hole was put in wrong place.
I measured the distance between the two holes ( bottom edge of top hole to top edge of bottom hole - see image ) and came up with 3 1/16". Hope that helps you.
I really appreciate your help, you have gone to quite a bit of trouble I never paid you one cent. Maybe I will have some parts up one day(its building up) that you need.
Looks like the same distance as mine. I found the switch that is in your car now and will order it and hope it works. Did you see the picture of inside my tilt away switch hole, does your car look like mine when you view through hole? THANKS!!!
I did look at the image of ( what’s inside / behind ) the tilt-away switch hole, on your Cougar. There is NO obstruction by a piece of stamped sheet metal like that in my Cougars kick panel cavity. There is only a very thick backing-plate ( ? ) for the hinge on the outside. But it doesn’t obstruct anything, as it lies flush against the outer panel. From the hole back ( towards the front of the car ) it is totally clear, for a distance FAR greater than is required for positioning the switch.
I will attempt to get some images for you, tomorrow.
Of note here, the “obstruction” you mention is most likely the harness(s) in that area. I am restoring a 69 w/ PW & tilt. The hole for tilt had 2 notches for the switch tabs to fit into. Did this cat come with tilt factory?
I’d remove the kick panel to get a better look at that obstruction.
Hi Cougar Bill. As I stated in one of my earlier posts to this thread, I noted that the UPPER hole ( Courtesy light switch ) on my San Jose assembly Cougar had the two notches on the LHS and the RHS of the hole, for the tabs on that switch to ‘engage’, but that the lower hole was just round ( and 7/8" in dia. ) with no notches.
My Cougar also has PW’s and the tilt-away steering, and the harnesses being routed through that area fill up the kick panel cavity, but nothing that would block the switches from being correctly installed.
But reading back to the very beginning of this thread, I note that Max99 indicates that this is a convertible. I’m aware of a lot of differences in the structural sheet metal assembly and welding ( in addition to the bolt-on panels on the underside ) in a convertible vs. a hard top. I’m also aware that these differences extend to the rocker panels. Perhaps what Max99 sees inside his kick panel area ( which I don’t on my HT ) is one of these ‘structural’ differences ? Just a thought ?
Yes its a factory tilt and listed so on the Marti Report.