Seat Frame Differences

Hey Gang:

Couple of questions regarding seat frames:

I have a few different ones, and I'm not sure which ones are correct for my 1969?

Driver's side:






I'm pretty sure the more inboard one is correct. What's the other one from?

Passenger side:



Both those frames are too narrow for the hinges on the '66 tub, and isn't the frame with the forward leg for an intermediate?

Thanks,

 

Yes, the one with the extra leg on the pass. side is for an intermediate (72-75)
Ditto for the drivers side one thats closer to the outside of the tub.

 

OK so those are for an intermediate. On the passenger bracket with the leg: is it the same as height as the one without? The leg is very crudely welded to the crossbar, and if it isn't right for the '69, I'll cut it off. I know the '66 tub has the holes in the toolbox for all three mounting bolts.

Just not sure which ones I should use.(Not that I'm anywhere close to mounting seats yet. . .)

Thanks,

 

From what I can gather some late Early CJ passenger seat brackets had the 3rd leg but are pretty cleanly welded. Daughter's late '69/'70 has it and the 3rd hole looks to be factory. I'd have to look but iirc the '67 tub I have also has that third hole. I know earlier ones did not use the 3rd leg and the frame would flex the body and damage the holes under hard use.
The driver seat frame that puts the seat closer to the tub side is an intermediate. Won't work with an underseat tank as the seat hits the filler and won't line up with the column and pedals.


Sent from my iPhone

 

Thanks guys. I guess I'll just leave that third leg then. What a lousy weld job. Must have been done on a Monday morning .

 

I would not be surprised at the blobby welds. Cars from this era were not assembled with the same care and uniformity that they are today, and Jeep cared less for appearance than most. No wonder the Japanese cars took the market by storm ... even in the '70s, if you looked at the body and frame work on CJs, they were assembled with little regard for visible welds and such.

Also, the intermediate seat position is ok wrt an under-seat tank. It's close or touching, but I had an under-seat tank in my '73 back in the day, and it fit fine. The column and pedal position is the main issue - use the late brackets, and the seat will not be centered with the controls. My impression is that Jeep moved the seating position over when they changed to Saginaw, simply because they could. When I look at an early Jeep interior, it looks to me like the drivers seat is oddly shifted toward the center - compared to your typical LHD passenger car.

 

Hmm. It was a tank that I got off the parts shelf at the Jeep dealer. Stock part for a '70ish CJ5. I installed the inset for the filler neck in the factory location, at least wrt the indent in the body. I used the factory hold-down strap. I think I put something under the tank, like chunks of rubber (old bungie cords?) Only difference was the seat was in the Jeep before I did the tank installation. As I recall, I did not make any measurements or test the tank in place - the folks at the dealership said it would fit, and had been done before.

 

Hey Scott,
I just walked out and measured my seat brackets on a '69 cj-5 with a tank under the driver seat. From the center of the outside body mount bolt to the center of the flat metal is 8.25" on driver side. On the Passenger side it was 6.5" from outside body bolt to the first flat metal hinge. Hope that helps.

Pete