SAAC Forum

I pose this question for your answers, debates and theories :

How significant are the 1969/70 Shelbys and who really ended their production ?

Can't wait to see this thread take off

In my opinion the 69/70s are relevant because it's the end of that generation production - end of an era if you will.   

The 70s have a unique status all their own.  As with any automobile that matures over time they're better GT cars than they are true sports cars; the handling and ride is very good the air-conditioning worked well, the big block cars in the summer in Texas made you feel like you needed asbestos jeans. However the small block is easy to work on, looks good was very reliable.

One of my friends owned about 20 different Shelby's in the 70s, his advice to me was go get a 67 GT 350 four-speed it'll be the best running driving car for what you want. He was right.  I'd really like to have a white, red interior 70 model small block with AC and automatic. I think that would be a tremendous car at 60 for me right now.

I'm sure I'm forgetting many details here. Can't wait to see what others have to comment on. I know having a 428 Cobra Jet Mustang as a kid in the mid 70s, what really frustrated me was the glued in windows.  Who it for that that was a good idea? It probably saved a nickel a car.

Quote from: FL SAAC on August 02, 2021, 09:25:58 PMHow significant are the 1969/70 Shelbys and who really ended their production ?

Fixed it. Ford ended their production when the sales of 1969 cars was so dismal they had to renumber the leftovers as 1970 cars. In Mid 67 Ford took over all of the Shelby production and assets. Shelby American still existed but Ford created Shelby Automotive to manufacture/sell the Shelby cars. While CS was seen as the guiding light he really had no involvement in the day to day operations. He became a race team contractor running the TransAm series. That contract also ended in 1970 and Shelby was done at Ford.
There is a lot of info on the end of Shelby as a manufacturer and closing/moving assets/companies around on the Google 67 Shelby Research Group. https://groups.google.com/g/shelbyresearch

Absolutely significant, if you are going by the amount of involvement of CS in defining this, here is something to think about.... the 65 and 66's styling was Fords (after all it was just a mustang :-) converted for Shelby performance)..... but the 67-70 were significantly different than their mustang counterparts  :).

May not be the answer you are looking for, but at the time they were very significant. The bare bones may have been a mustang, but the appearance was very different and stood out as something special.  Personally it was THE car I longed for.
In part because of it's appearance I suspect, my father vetoed me purchasing one. In his words "you buy that and you will be dead in six months ". Probably saved my life.

Quote from: PrettyMuchAShelbyGuy on August 03, 2021, 09:09:08 AM

Quote from: PrettyMuchAShelbyGuy on August 02, 2021, 11:37:08 PM
Can't wait to see this thread take off

In my opinion the 69/70s are relevant because it's the end of that generation production - end of an era if you will.   

The 70s have a unique status all their own.  As with any automobile that matures over time they're better GT cars than they are true sports cars; the handling and ride is very good the air-conditioning worked well, the big block cars in the summer in Texas made you feel like you needed asbestos jeans. However the small block is easy to work on, looks good was very reliable.

One of my friends owned about 20 different Shelby's in the 70s, his advice to me was go get a 67 GT 350 four-speed it'll be the best running driving car for what you want. He was right.  I'd really like to have a white, red interior 70 model small block with AC and automatic. I think that would be a tremendous car at 60 for me right now.

I'm sure I'm forgetting many details here. Can't wait to see what others have to comment on. I know having a 428 Cobra Jet Mustang as a kid in the mid 70s, what really frustrated me was the glued in windows.  Who in the world ever thought that was a good idea? It probably saved a nickel a car.

So a 1967 Gt350 Shelby would handle better than a 1969/70 GT350 that had the Boss 302 suspension? Would it be the shocks? How does the 351W do performance wise compared to a 289 hipo both stock? I'm curious to that. I remember running my car at Waterford hills and on the back straightaway gaining on a 67 GT350 every lap. Of course it was my stone stock vert against an unknown condition GT350. I had 3 people in my car also.1989 different times.. Got pics at the end of the straightaway of the GT350 right in front of me.  :) Gary

The main reason 69 shelby sales were down is ford was directly competing against shelby sales with the new 69 428 cj shaker mach 1     13.000 or so made along with the boss 429 302s and cobra torino and talladegas etc

Not be rude, but would a 1970 be considered a 1969 "carryover"?  Never heard it refered to that way.

Quote from: Special Ed on August 03, 2021, 10:25:20 AM
The main reason 69 shelby sales were down is ford was directly competing against shelby sales with the new 69 428 cj shaker mach 1     13.000 or so made along with the boss 429 302s and cobra torino and talladegas etc

Thanks Ed, exactly. To me all of the manufacturers were engineering/improving their cars every year to some degree during this era. I wonder if it wasn't for AO Smith losing the Corvette contract with the new 68 Vettes if Shelby production might have stayed out in California. Wasn't Fiberglass issues a big one that Ford had to tackle and AO smith was the answer and probably the only answer in 1967(for 68 and beyond)? Gary

Quote from: Don Johnston on August 03, 2021, 10:27:20 AM
Not be rude, but would a 1970 be considered a 1969 "carryover"?  Never heard it refered to that way.

interesting observation but Shelby never called 1965 Mustangs made into 66 Shelbys carryover cars either. A term coined in the marque to call attention to those special early cars. I like my 70 because it was the only car to be worked on at 3 different plants(Dearborn, AO Smith and Kar Kraft). It is rare as only 57 were "revinned". And I don't see another like it when I go to shows. Gary

Quote from: shelbymann1970 on August 03, 2021, 10:16:22 AM

Quote from: PrettyMuchAShelbyGuy on August 03, 2021, 09:09:08 AM

Quote from: PrettyMuchAShelbyGuy on August 02, 2021, 11:37:08 PM
Can't wait to see this thread take off

In my opinion the 69/70s are relevant because it's the end of that generation production - end of an era if you will.   

The 70s have a unique status all their own.  As with any automobile that matures over time they're better GT cars than they are true sports cars; the handling and ride is very good the air-conditioning worked well, the big block cars in the summer in Texas made you feel like you needed asbestos jeans. However the small block is easy to work on, looks good was very reliable.

One of my friends owned about 20 different Shelby's in the 70s, his advice to me was go get a 67 GT 350 four-speed it'll be the best running driving car for what you want. He was right.  I'd really like to have a white, red interior 70 model small block with AC and automatic. I think that would be a tremendous car at 60 for me right now.

I'm sure I'm forgetting many details here. Can't wait to see what others have to comment on. I know having a 428 Cobra Jet Mustang as a kid in the mid 70s, what really frustrated me was the glued in windows.  Who in the world ever thought that was a good idea? It probably saved a nickel a car.

So a 1967 Gt350 Shelby would handle better than a 1969/70 GT350 that had the Boss 302 suspension? Would it be the shocks? How does the 351W do performance wise compared to a 289 hipo both stock? I'm curious to that. I remember running my car at Waterford hills and on the back straightaway gaining on a 67 GT350 every lap. Of course it was my stone stock vert against an unknown condition GT350. I had 3 people in my car also.1989 different times. Got pics at the end of the straightaway of the GT350 right in front of me.  :) Gary

Gary suspension wise the 67 GT350 and the 69/70 were virtually identical. The big suspension of the later 69/70 didn't help with handling but did with strength and longevity of components. The shocks were identical in function . The two Shelby's weight was comparable apples to apples . The 351 had a little more power but wouldn't rev as high limited by its hydraulic cam.

Quote from: Bob Gaines on August 03, 2021, 10:44:47 AM

Quote from: shelbymann1970 on August 03, 2021, 10:16:22 AM

Quote from: PrettyMuchAShelbyGuy on August 03, 2021, 09:09:08 AM

Quote from: PrettyMuchAShelbyGuy on August 02, 2021, 11:37:08 PM
Can't wait to see this thread take off

In my opinion the 69/70s are relevant because it's the end of that generation production - end of an era if you will.   

The 70s have a unique status all their own.  As with any automobile that matures over time they're better GT cars than they are true sports cars; the handling and ride is very good the air-conditioning worked well, the big block cars in the summer in Texas made you feel like you needed asbestos jeans. However the small block is easy to work on, looks good was very reliable.

One of my friends owned about 20 different Shelby's in the 70s, his advice to me was go get a 67 GT 350 four-speed it'll be the best running driving car for what you want. He was right.  I'd really like to have a white, red interior 70 model small block with AC and automatic. I think that would be a tremendous car at 60 for me right now.

I'm sure I'm forgetting many details here. Can't wait to see what others have to comment on. I know having a 428 Cobra Jet Mustang as a kid in the mid 70s, what really frustrated me was the glued in windows.  Who in the world ever thought that was a good idea? It probably saved a nickel a car.

So a 1967 Gt350 Shelby would handle better than a 1969/70 GT350 that had the Boss 302 suspension? Would it be the shocks? How does the 351W do performance wise compared to a 289 hipo both stock? I'm curious to that. I remember running my car at Waterford hills and on the back straightaway gaining on a 67 GT350 every lap. Of course it was my stone stock vert against an unknown condition GT350. I had 3 people in my car also.1989 different times. Got pics at the end of the straightaway of the GT350 right in front of me.  :) Gary

Gary suspension wise the 67 GT350 and the 69/70 were virtually identical. The big suspension of the later 69/70 didn't help with handling but did with strength and longevity of components. The shocks were identical in function . The two Shelby's weight was comparable apples to apples . The 351 had a little more power but wouldn't rev as high limited by its hydraulic cam.

I'm far from a suspension engineer but wouldn't the larger components help  with less "movement/flexing" when road racing?

Gentlemen thanks for the responses. Things we can agree on are:

Three companies where involved in the 1969 / 70 program. Ford, Shelby Automotive and A.O. Smith.

I believe each had an equal amount of leverage in the process.

This complicated the relationship and the introduction of some of the other mustang (boss, mach1 etc) product's would eventually lead to the end of the demise of the Ford, Shelby and A. O. Smith program.

Having three entities involved,  with out clear direction or better yet quick resolution or decision making on daily production issues that may have come up, also caused great discord.

Then you had the question of processing, billing and the questioning of payments or non payments.

This where the program came to a complete halt.

Just my simple two cents. Keep your thoughts, on-site and knowledge  flowing

Quote from: FL SAAC on August 03, 2021, 11:08:53 AM
Gentlemen thanks for the responses. Things we can agree on are:

Three companies where involved in the 1969 / 70 program. Ford, Shelby Automotive and A.O. Smith.

I believe each had an equal amount of leverage in the process.

This complicated the relationship and the introduction of some of the other mustang (boss, mach1 etc) product's would eventually lead to the end of the demise of the Ford, Shelby and A. O. Smith program.

Having three entities involved,  with out clear direction or better yet quick resolution or decision making on daily production issues that may have come up, also caused great discord.

Then you had the question of processing, billing and the questioning of payments or non payments.

This where the program came to a complete halt.

Just my simple two cents. Keep your thoughts, on-site and knowledge  flowing

you forgot Kar Kraft.....Ed?

KK was in it also

Quote from: shelbymann1970 on August 03, 2021, 11:15:47 AM

Quote from: FL SAAC on August 03, 2021, 11:08:53 AM
Gentlemen thanks for the responses. Things we can agree on are:

Three companies where involved in the 1969 / 70 program. Ford, Shelby Automotive and A.O. Smith.

I believe each had an equal amount of leverage in the process.

This complicated the relationship and the introduction of some of the other mustang (boss, mach1 etc) product's would eventually lead to the end of the demise of the Ford, Shelby and A. O. Smith program.

Having three entities involved,  with out clear direction or better yet quick resolution or decision making on daily production issues that may have come up, also caused great discord.

Then you had the question of processing, billing and the questioning of payments or non payments.

This where the program came to a complete halt.

Just my simple two cents. Keep your thoughts, on-site and knowledge  flowing

you forgot Kar Kraft.....Ed?

Quote from: shelbymann1970 on August 03, 2021, 11:01:58 AM

Quote from: Bob Gaines on August 03, 2021, 10:44:47 AM

Quote from: shelbymann1970 on August 03, 2021, 10:16:22 AM

Quote from: PrettyMuchAShelbyGuy on August 03, 2021, 09:09:08 AM

Quote from: PrettyMuchAShelbyGuy on August 02, 2021, 11:37:08 PM
Can't wait to see this thread take off

In my opinion the 69/70s are relevant because it's the end of that generation production - end of an era if you will.   

The 70s have a unique status all their own.  As with any automobile that matures over time they're better GT cars than they are true sports cars; the handling and ride is very good the air-conditioning worked well, the big block cars in the summer in Texas made you feel like you needed asbestos jeans. However the small block is easy to work on, looks good was very reliable.

One of my friends owned about 20 different Shelby's in the 70s, his advice to me was go get a 67 GT 350 four-speed it'll be the best running driving car for what you want. He was right.  I'd really like to have a white, red interior 70 model small block with AC and automatic. I think that would be a tremendous car at 60 for me right now.

I'm sure I'm forgetting many details here. Can't wait to see what others have to comment on. I know having a 428 Cobra Jet Mustang as a kid in the mid 70s, what really frustrated me was the glued in windows.  Who in the world ever thought that was a good idea? It probably saved a nickel a car.

So a 1967 Gt350 Shelby would handle better than a 1969/70 GT350 that had the Boss 302 suspension? Would it be the shocks? How does the 351W do performance wise compared to a 289 hipo both stock? I'm curious to that. I remember running my car at Waterford hills and on the back straightaway gaining on a 67 GT350 every lap. Of course it was my stone stock vert against an unknown condition GT350. I had 3 people in my car also.1989 different times. Got pics at the end of the straightaway of the GT350 right in front of me.  :) Gary

Gary suspension wise the 67 GT350 and the 69/70 were virtually identical. The big suspension of the later 69/70 didn't help with handling but did with strength and longevity of components. The shocks were identical in function . The two Shelby's weight was comparable apples to apples . The 351 had a little more power but wouldn't rev as high limited by its hydraulic cam.

I'm far from a suspension engineer but wouldn't the larger components help  with less "movement/flexing" when road racing?

Gary even under extreme racing conditions far beyond what you were driving the flexing of the early car spindles is negligible. The same goes for the tie rods. The big suspension parts were stronger and did not break  The point is , there is no measurable difference in handling between small and large suspension cars in the context of your example.

[/quote]Gary even under extreme racing conditions far beyond what you were driving the flexing of the early car spindles is negligible. The same goes for the tie rods. The big suspension parts were stronger and did not break  The point is , there is no measurable difference in handling between small and large suspension cars in the context of your example.
[/quote]Thanks as always for your expertise Bob. Gary

Gary
The only Shelby that I am aware of that Ford shipped was 9F02G482244 to Kar Kraft. Known as the Shelby (G) Boss . Did K. K. have any other involvement with the regular 1969/70 Shelby production  ?

Quote from: shelbymann1970 on August 03, 2021, 11:15:47 AM

Quote from: FL SAAC on August 03, 2021, 11:08:53 AM
Gentlemen thanks for the responses. Things we can agree on are:

Three companies where involved in the 1969 / 70 program. Ford, Shelby Automotive and A.O. Smith.

I believe each had an equal amount of leverage in the process.

This complicated the relationship and the introduction of some of the other mustang (boss, mach1 etc) product's would eventually lead to the end of the demise of the Ford, Shelby and A. O. Smith program.

Having three entities involved,  with out clear direction or better yet quick resolution or decision making on daily production issues that may have come up, also caused great discord.

Then you had the question of processing, billing and the questioning of payments or non payments.

This where the program came to a complete halt.

Just my simple two cents. Keep your thoughts, on-site and knowledge  flowing

you forgot Kar Kraft.....Ed?

Quote from: FL SAAC on August 03, 2021, 12:14:52 PM
Gary
The only Shelby that I am aware of that Ford shipped was 9F02G482244 to Kar Kraft. Known as the Shelby (G) Boss . Did K. K. have any other involvement with the regular 1969/70 Shelby production  ?

Quote from: shelbymann1970 on August 03, 2021, 11:15:47 AM

Quote from: FL SAAC on August 03, 2021, 11:08:53 AM
Gentlemen thanks for the responses. Things we can agree on are:

Three companies where involved in the 1969 / 70 program. Ford, Shelby Automotive and A.O. Smith.

I believe each had an equal amount of leverage in the process.

This complicated the relationship and the introduction of some of the other mustang (boss, mach1 etc) product's would eventually lead to the end of the demise of the Ford, Shelby and A. O. Smith program.

Having three entities involved,  with out clear direction or better yet quick resolution or decision making on daily production issues that may have come up, also caused great discord.

Then you had the question of processing, billing and the questioning of payments or non payments.

This where the program came to a complete halt.

Just my simple two cents. Keep your thoughts, on-site and knowledge  flowing

you forgot Kar Kraft.....Ed?

The 70 Shelby's were sent to Kar Kraft for 70 conversion process.

Quote from: FL SAAC on August 03, 2021, 12:14:52 PM
Gary
The only Shelby that I am aware of that Ford shipped was 9F02G482244 to Kar Kraft. Known as the Shelby (G) Boss . Did K. K. have any other involvement with the regular 1969/70 Shelby production  ?

Quote from: shelbymann1970 on August 03, 2021, 11:15:47 AM

Quote from: FL SAAC on August 03, 2021, 11:08:53 AM
Gentlemen thanks for the responses. Things we can agree on are:

Three companies where involved in the 1969 / 70 program. Ford, Shelby Automotive and A.O. Smith.

I believe each had an equal amount of leverage in the process.

This complicated the relationship and the introduction of some of the other mustang (boss, mach1 etc) product's would eventually lead to the end of the demise of the Ford, Shelby and A. O. Smith program.

Having three entities involved,  with out clear direction or better yet quick resolution or decision making on daily production issues that may have come up, also caused great discord.

Then you had the question of processing, billing and the questioning of payments or non payments.

This where the program came to a complete halt.

Just my simple two cents. Keep your thoughts, on-site and knowledge  flowing

you forgot Kar Kraft.....Ed?

most of the 70s ran through Kar Kraft(according to a friend he vin changed some on Market street in Livonia Mi back in 1969). I knew the painter who painted the hood stripes on the 70s. He posted pics on the Brighton Historical society Facebook page as well as a video of the facility in 1969 when a young Bill Ford(?) visited it and they had a lot of cool cars on display. My 70 went through Brighton. There is a great aerial view that Larry(painter) had commissioned by a pilot to fly over KK and photograph it with Boss 9s and Shelbys in the back parking lot. That pic was "loaned out" to a Mustang "president" and never seen again by him except in publications. HE also had many other pics that I hope someday will surface since he passed away a few years ago. He posted a pic on facebook of the last batch of 70 Shelbys leaving KK in spring of 1970.

Mr Gaines  thank you for the response

So to be clear Kar Kraft was involved with the left over 1969 conversion to 1970s :

Adding stripes on hood
Front spoiler
Possible emmision updates to 70 standards
Stickers to reflect the above
Door V. I. N. sticker on doors with the Fed's supervision


So then actually three companies where truly involed in the 1969 program, Ford,  Shelby and A. O. Smith.

Quote from: FL SAAC on August 03, 2021, 12:28:51 PM
Mr Gaines  thank you for the response

So to be clear Kar Kraft was involved with the left over 1969 conversion to 1970s :

Adding stripes on hood
Front spoiler
Possible emmision updates to 70 standards
Stickers to reflect the above
Door V. I. N. sticker on doors with the Fed's supervision


So then actually three companies where truly involed in the 1969 program, Ford,  Shelby and A. O. Smith.

I thought I was CLEAR ENOUGH? Larry's photos from KK in spring of 70. BTW Front spoiler done by dealers. I have pics of Larry actually painting the hood stripes at KK. Just not here at work. I also have paperwork thanks to Mongo of my car leaving KK to Wixom holding facility to be shipped by rail to the east coast for export.

Mr Gary you where clear and I thank you for your response

Mr Gaines just added additional information and I rehashed it.

Quote from: shelbymann1970 on August 03, 2021, 12:48:58 PM

Quote from: FL SAAC on August 03, 2021, 12:28:51 PM
Mr Gaines  thank you for the response

So to be clear Kar Kraft was involved with the left over 1969 conversion to 1970s :

Adding stripes on hood
Front spoiler
Possible emmision updates to 70 standards
Stickers to reflect the above
Door V. I. N. sticker on doors with the Fed's supervision


So then actually three companies where truly involed in the 1969 program, Ford,  Shelby and A. O. Smith.

I thought I was CLEAR ENOUGH? Larry's photos from KK in spring of 70. BTW Front spoiler done by dealers. I have pics of Larry actually painting the hood stripes at KK. Just not here at work. I also have paperwork thanks to Mongo of my car leaving KK to Wixom holding facility to be shipped by rail to the east coast for export.

Quote from: shelbymann1970 on August 03, 2021, 12:48:58 PM

Quote from: FL SAAC on August 03, 2021, 12:28:51 PM
Mr Gaines  thank you for the response

So to be clear Kar Kraft was involved with the left over 1969 conversion to 1970s :

Adding stripes on hood
Front spoiler
Possible emmision updates to 70 standards
Stickers to reflect the above
Door V. I. N. sticker on doors with the Fed's supervision


So then actually three companies where truly involed in the 1969 program, Ford,  Shelby and A. O. Smith.

I thought I was CLEAR ENOUGH? Larry's photos from KK in spring of 70. BTW Front spoiler done by dealers. I have pics of Larry actually painting the hood stripes at KK. Just not here at work. I also have paperwork thanks to Mongo of my car leaving KK to Wixom holding facility to be shipped by rail to the east coast for export.

Larry Lawrence KK painter.

Back to the topic:

How significant are the 1969/70 Shelbys and who really ended their production ?

Who really was the cause of the demise of the Shelby program ?

Ford
Shelby
A. O. Smith
Internal developments (Ford new Mustangs)
Why are we paying royalties and advisory fees
Insurance
Consumers
Market changes
Oil
Other

Quote from: Bob Gaines on August 03, 2021, 01:12:07 PM

Quote from: shelbymann1970 on August 03, 2021, 12:48:58 PM

Quote from: FL SAAC on August 03, 2021, 12:28:51 PM
Mr Gaines  thank you for the response

So to be clear Kar Kraft was involved with the left over 1969 conversion to 1970s :

Adding stripes on hood
Front spoiler
Possible emmision updates to 70 standards
Stickers to reflect the above
Door V. I. N. sticker on doors with the Fed's supervision


So then actually three companies where truly involed in the 1969 program, Ford,  Shelby and A. O. Smith.

I thought I was CLEAR ENOUGH? Larry's photos from KK in spring of 70. BTW Front spoiler done by dealers. I have pics of Larry actually painting the hood stripes at KK. Just not here at work. I also have paperwork thanks to Mongo of my car leaving KK to Wixom holding facility to be shipped by rail to the east coast for export.

Larry Lawrence KK painter.

Thank you Bob for posting the pic of Larry(RIP). I'm on a "loaner" computer at work until IT fixes mine so no access to pics I have here. The other 3 above I pulled off the Brighton FB page. I thought Larry had that one you posted  and the front view of that car on the FB page but must have missed it. Do you have a pic of the aerial view? Bob, Mark Haas and I talked for a little while with Larry not long before he passed away at his body shop not far from the old KK building. He walked us down memory lane on his stint there as a painter. How he got the job as a 19 year old assembler at the Wixom plant and the issues with 69 B9 hood scoops(probably why they were all black in 70). Never got back to ask him more questions before he passed away.

Quote from: Stillakid54 on August 03, 2021, 09:53:45 AM
........ at the time they were very significant. The bare bones may have been a mustang, but the appearance was very different and stood out as something special.  .......

This points out the pure and simple fact that later Shelbys were nothing more than dolled up Mustangs.
65 had improved engines and suspensions - Ford designed the suspension changes
66 early had the same but later the suspensions changes would be dropped
67 Ford designer Charlie McHose was assigned to SA to create a new look and guide GT500 creation. Stock suspension same 65/6 engine mods, 428
Mid 67 - Ford assumes all assets and trademarks of SA over unpaid 1962 startup loan - CS becomes race team contractor only.
67s with Z on serial number plate were done under Ford ownership - All dealers could now order Shelby's ($100 fee added if not a Shelby dealer)
68 Ford does it all - mid year the 428 CJ is available in Mustangs not just GT500
69 All Ford again.
Dec 1970 all of Shelby's contracts (parts, racing, personal services) end with Ford Motor Company.
Ford unplugs Shelby Automotive at the same time (warranty charges still go against the company for accounting)
68-70 were styling changes the same chassis parts and engines were available in regular Mustangs. Buyers saw through the fact that they were no longer at the top of the performance food chain. That spot was held by the lighter/cheaper Mach1.
I guess you could divide the 69-70 into several groups - pedestrian 6 cyl & 302 Coupe/Sportroof - pedestrian performance 351 428 Coupe/Sportroof -
dress up cars Mach1 and Shelby and finally the the real performance cars Boss 302 and 429.
History repeated itself in 06 when SVT designed the new hi performance Mustang and decided to use CS as a marketing tool to sell it. Their earlier GT350 Fox Mustang and SVT/Cobra monikers were not enough to boost the sales to make them a profit center.
The Las Vegas Shelby American built Shelby GT was panned in many magazines for charging a $9,000 premium and only adding $2,500 worth of Ford Performance parts.
The recent demise of the Bullitt and GT350 are nothing more than marketing driven. They were tired of paying the McQueen family per car (I predict there will soon be a supercharged Mach1 and the 500 will be gone - or at least they will drop Shelby (so they can save that money and just call it the GT500).

Quote from: 98SVT - was 06GT on August 03, 2021, 01:31:05 PM

Quote from: Stillakid54 on August 03, 2021, 09:53:45 AM
........ at the time they were very significant. The bare bones may have been a mustang, but the appearance was very different and stood out as something special.  .......

This points out the pure and simple fact that later Shelbys were nothing more than dolled up Mustangs.
65 had improved engines and suspensions - Ford designed the suspension changes
66 early had the same but later the suspensions changes would be dropped
67 Ford designer Charlie McHose was assigned to SA to create a new look and guide GT500 creation. Stock suspension same 65/6 engine mods, 428
Mid 67 - Ford assumes all assets and trademarks of SA over unpaid 1962 startup loan - CS becomes race team contractor only.
67s with Z on serial number plate were done under Ford ownership - All dealers could now order Shelby's ($100 fee added if not a Shelby dealer)
68 Ford does it all - mid year the 428 CJ is available in Mustangs not just GT500
69 All Ford again.
Dec 1970 all of Shelby's contracts (parts, racing, personal services) end with Ford Motor Company.
Ford unplugs Shelby Automotive at the same time (warranty charges still go against the company for accounting)
68-70 were styling changes the same chassis parts and engines were available in regular Mustangs. Buyers saw through the fact that they were no longer at the top of the performance food chain. That spot was held by the lighter/cheaper Mach1.
I guess you could divide the 69-70 into several groups - pedestrian 6 cyl & 302 Coupe/Sportroof - pedestrian performance 351 428 Coupe/Sportroof -
dress up cars Mach1 and Shelby and finally the the real performance cars Boss 302 and 429.
History repeated itself in 06 when SVT designed the new hi performance Mustang and decided to use CS as a marketing tool to sell it. Their earlier GT350 Fox Mustang and SVT/Cobra monikers were not enough to boost the sales to make them a profit center.
The Las Vegas Shelby American built Shelby GT was panned in many magazines for charging a $9,000 premium and only adding $2,500 worth of Ford Performance parts.
The recent demise of the Bullitt and GT350 are nothing more than marketing driven. They were tired of paying the McQueen family per car (I predict there will soon be a supercharged Mach1 and the 500 will be gone - or at least they will drop Shelby (so they can save that money and just call it the GT500).

you said Ford took over mid year. I wasn't aware the Z meant Ford? Also Brian's SA documents if I remember correctly had Ford taking over the first week of October 1966-hardly midyear? Can you please clarify? Did Ford take over producing Shelbys in Oct 1966 or midway through production? Thanks. Gary
BTW the69  Mach1 was cheaper but where do you find it was lighter? Is fiberglass heavier than steel? What was the modification of a 289 HiPo in 1967? Did regular Mustangs get the Holley carb, Al intake in the J code cars? GT500s had 428s in 68 well before the CJ came out? 69s you couldn't get an AL intake or valve covers on the regular Mustang. Real performance cars the boss 302 or Boss 429?I think a drag pack GT500 would run circles around a Boss 302 performance wise. How many drag racers pulled the B9 out and put an FE into their cars to go drag racing? Same FE that was in the GT500s in some cases.  I think you need to "revise" your post.

Let me congratulate you on a superb dissertation!

But back to the topic:

How significant are the 1969/70 Shelbys and who really ended their production ?

Who really was the cause of the demise of the Shelby program ?

Ford
Shelby
A. O. Smith
Internal developments (Ford new Mustangs)
Why are we paying royalties and advisory fees
Insurance
Consumers
Market changes
Oil
Other

Quote from: 98SVT - was 06GT on August 03, 2021, 01:31:05 PM

Quote from: Stillakid54 on August 03, 2021, 09:53:45 AM
........ at the time they were very significant. The bare bones may have been a mustang, but the appearance was very different and stood out as something special.  .......

This points out the pure and simple fact that later Shelbys were nothing more than dolled up Mustangs.
65 had improved engines and suspensions - Ford designed the suspension changes
66 early had the same but later the suspensions changes would be dropped
67 Ford designer Charlie McHose was assigned to SA to create a new look and guide GT500 creation. Stock suspension same 65/6 engine mods, 428
Mid 67 - Ford assumes all assets and trademarks of SA over unpaid 1962 startup loan - CS becomes race team contractor only.
67s with Z on serial number plate were done under Ford ownership - All dealers could now order Shelby's ($100 fee added if not a Shelby dealer)
68 Ford does it all - mid year the 428 CJ is available in Mustangs not just GT500
69 All Ford again.
Dec 1970 all of Shelby's contracts (parts, racing, personal services) end with Ford Motor Company.
Ford unplugs Shelby Automotive at the same time (warranty charges still go against the company for accounting)
68-70 were styling changes the same chassis parts and engines were available in regular Mustangs. Buyers saw through the fact that they were no longer at the top of the performance food chain. That spot was held by the lighter/cheaper Mach1.
I guess you could divide the 69-70 into several groups - pedestrian 6 cyl & 302 Coupe/Sportroof - pedestrian performance 351 428 Coupe/Sportroof -
dress up cars Mach1 and Shelby and finally the the real performance cars Boss 302 and 429.
History repeated itself in 06 when SVT designed the new hi performance Mustang and decided to use CS as a marketing tool to sell it. Their earlier GT350 Fox Mustang and SVT/Cobra monikers were not enough to boost the sales to make them a profit center.
The Las Vegas Shelby American built Shelby GT was panned in many magazines for charging a $9,000 premium and only adding $2,500 worth of Ford Performance parts.
The recent demise of the Bullitt and GT350 are nothing more than marketing driven. They were tired of paying the McQueen family per car (I predict there will soon be a supercharged Mach1 and the 500 will be gone - or at least they will drop Shelby (so they can save that money and just call it the GT500).

IMO, Ford wanting (taking) control from Shelby American.  Carroll getting pissed, telling Ford to get lost & going an entirely different direction (Africa, Reno - motel & dealership, etc.). May not be 100% accurate, but generally from the dozen or so books I have read over the years...

Quote from: Don Johnston on August 03, 2021, 10:27:20 AM
Not be rude, but would a 1970 be considered a 1969 "carryover"?  Never heard it refered to that way.

Excellent observation...51 years & the thought never occurred to me.... That's Mensa-level stuff you got there...

  Significant as in 5 years the Shelby went from being a damn near race car to a really nice touring car.  I like that.  If I had room in my garage I would have one.

Quote from: shelbymann1970 on August 03, 2021, 02:23:30 PM
BTW the69  Mach1 was cheaper but where do you find it was lighter? Is fiberglass heavier than steel?
* Depends on how thick it is. Production weight fiberglass is generally just as heavy as steel. But it's easier to get complex shapes.
What was the modification of a 289 HiPo in 1967?
* Same intake as 66
Did regular Mustangs get the Holley carb, Al intake in the J code cars?
* Why would they? They weren't selling performance with that car/engine.
GT500s had 428s in 68 well before the CJ came out?
* Which is why I said mid year
69s you couldn't get an AL intake or valve covers on the regular Mustang.
* Again not necessary for the market the "regular" Mustang was targeted for. Not sure I'd call a 470cfm Autolite carb on a 351 "performance" even with an AL intake.
Real performance cars the boss 302 or Boss 429?I think a drag pack GT500 would run circles around a Boss 302 performance wise.
* I would hope so - an extra 126" and all that torque should help. But let's put both those same cars on a twisty road and see which one understeers into the nearest ditch.
How many drag racers pulled the B9 out and put an FE into their cars to go drag racing? Same FE that was in the GT500s in some cases. 
* Everyone who scattered their B9 and realized they could downgrade the engine for much less money. The B9 was never designed to be a drag engine.
I think you need to "revise" your post.
Still think I'm wrong? Did you go to the site in my first post? Check out their discussion on the Z serial numbers and their documents

I guess I could revise the Mach1 and Shelby and list them as Luxury Mustangs - using Ford's own ad pitch of the time.
PS when I was writing stuff for Mustang Illustrated in the late 80s I always recommended buying the Mustang LX instead of the GT they were exactly the same engine and chassis wise but the LX was over 100 pounds lighter.

Quote from: Bob Gaines on August 03, 2021, 01:12:07 PM

Quote from: shelbymann1970 on August 03, 2021, 12:48:58 PM

Quote from: FL SAAC on August 03, 2021, 12:28:51 PM
Mr Gaines  thank you for the response

So to be clear Kar Kraft was involved with the left over 1969 conversion to 1970s :

Adding stripes on hood
Front spoiler
Possible emmision updates to 70 standards
Stickers to reflect the above
Door V. I. N. sticker on doors with the Fed's supervision


So then actually three companies where truly involed in the 1969 program, Ford,  Shelby and A. O. Smith.

I thought I was CLEAR ENOUGH? Larry's photos from KK in spring of 70. BTW Front spoiler done by dealers. I have pics of Larry actually painting the hood stripes at KK. Just not here at work. I also have paperwork thanks to Mongo of my car leaving KK to Wixom holding facility to be shipped by rail to the east coast for export.

Larry Lawrence KK painter.

Dang cool vintage photo. How did they keep the overspray off the uncovered sheetmetal? Especially the top?

Quote from: 69mach351w on August 03, 2021, 09:02:47 PM
How did they keep the overspray off the uncovered sheetmetal? Especially the top?

Down draft style booth/open shooting area coupled with a (for the day) low volume, low pressure paint gun. Not a lot of overspray potential compared to todays, modern HVLP paint equipment (Sata 4000 digital being my personal choice)


Bill

Quote from: 98SVT - was 06GT on August 03, 2021, 08:48:45 PM

Quote from: shelbymann1970 on August 03, 2021, 02:23:30 PM
BTW the69  Mach1 was cheaper but where do you find it was lighter? Is fiberglass heavier than steel?
* Depends on how thick it is. Production weight fiberglass is generally just as heavy as steel. But it's easier to get complex shapes.
What was the modification of a 289 HiPo in 1967?
* Same intake as 66
Did regular Mustangs get the Holley carb, Al intake in the J code cars?
* Why would they? They weren't selling performance with that car/engine.
GT500s had 428s in 68 well before the CJ came out?
* Which is why I said mid year
69s you couldn't get an AL intake or valve covers on the regular Mustang.
* Again not necessary for the market the "regular" Mustang was targeted for. Not sure I'd call a 470cfm Autolite carb on a 351 "performance" even with an AL intake.
Real performance cars the boss 302 or Boss 429?I think a drag pack GT500 would run circles around a Boss 302 performance wise.
* I would hope so - an extra 126" and all that torque should help. But let's put both those same cars on a twisty road and see which one understeers into the nearest ditch.
How many drag racers pulled the B9 out and put an FE into their cars to go drag racing? Same FE that was in the GT500s in some cases. 
* Everyone who scattered their B9 and realized they could downgrade the engine for much less money. The B9 was never designed to be a drag engine.
I think you need to "revise" your post.
Still think I'm wrong? Did you go to the site in my first post? Check out their discussion on the Z serial numbers and their documents

I guess I could revise the Mach1 and Shelby and list them as Luxury Mustangs - using Ford's own ad pitch of the time.
PS when I was writing stuff for Mustang Illustrated in the late 80s I always recommended buying the Mustang LX instead of the GT they were exactly the same engine and chassis wise but the LX was over 100 pounds lighter.

My friends 69 Boss 429 was street raced in California with an FE in it. OO pulled out the B9 and installed a FE(my friends conversation with him). The B9 engine was then reinstalled back in the Boss when it's racing days were over(one of the nicest survivor B9s out there). Just one example but still what some did back in the day. My point which you missed with your comments back was the engines were the SAME in reg Mustangs and Shelbys. No they were not(I guess you don't consider adding an AL intake as a performance gain?). Was a 67 HiPo changed internally for the Shelby(Not sure but asking?). Yeah the POS autolite carb on 69s sucked and a Holley 600 from a 66 Fairlane works great. I'm sure emissions had a lot to do after the 68 problems on why carbs were not Holleys in 69. I'll tell you right now that I can lift a hood off of my 70 GT350 by myself. I sure as heck cannot lift the hood off of my 69 SCJ Mach1. I know by handling that  the fenders are lighter too so take that as you may. I agree a Mach1 is a "luxury" Mustang that is why many ordered a sportsroof when drag racing. All I know is whether people think a 68-70 Shelbys are considered "real Shelbys" or not they are kickass looking cars and why I own them. Ditto for my "heavier" Mach1. There isn't a 65-68 Mustang I'd rather own over my Mach1. Opinions(tastes) are like A-holes. We all have them and if we didn't it would be a boring world.

Quote from: 98SVT - was 06GT on August 03, 2021, 08:48:45 PM

Quote from: shelbymann1970 on August 03, 2021, 02:23:30 PM
BTW the69  Mach1 was cheaper but where do you find it was lighter? Is fiberglass heavier than steel?
* Depends on how thick it is. Production weight fiberglass is generally just as heavy as steel. But it's easier to get complex shapes.
What was the modification of a 289 HiPo in 1967?
* Same intake as 66
Did regular Mustangs get the Holley carb, Al intake in the J code cars?
* Why would they? They weren't selling performance with that car/engine.
GT500s had 428s in 68 well before the CJ came out?
* Which is why I said mid year
69s you couldn't get an AL intake or valve covers on the regular Mustang.
* Again not necessary for the market the "regular" Mustang was targeted for. Not sure I'd call a 470cfm Autolite carb on a 351 "performance" even with an AL intake.
Real performance cars the boss 302 or Boss 429?I think a drag pack GT500 would run circles around a Boss 302 performance wise.
* I would hope so - an extra 126" and all that torque should help. But let's put both those same cars on a twisty road and see which one understeers into the nearest ditch.
How many drag racers pulled the B9 out and put an FE into their cars to go drag racing? Same FE that was in the GT500s in some cases. 
* Everyone who scattered their B9 and realized they could downgrade the engine for much less money. The B9 was never designed to be a drag engine.
I think you need to "revise" your post.
Still think I'm wrong? Did you go to the site in my first post? Check out their discussion on the Z serial numbers and their documents

My question was the timeline Ford took over production. You said"Mid 67 - Ford assumes all assets and trademarks of SA over unpaid 1962 startup loan - CS becomes race team contractor only.
67s with Z on serial number plate were done under Ford ownership - All dealers could now order Shelby's ($100 fee added if not a Shelby dealer) so I went back to Brian's site and pulled this out: Oct. 01: The first production '67 G.T. 350 Fastback is completed by Shelby American and assigned s/n 0176.
Unfortunately, fiberglass fitment, supply issues, and financial problems plague the '67 operation from the start.  Due to these "launch problems" Ford Motor Company steps in and takes control.  SAI's district code is changed from 71 to 84. Dr. Ray A. Geddes takes over purchasing (and possibly operations as a whole).Oct. 27 - Nov. 06: G.T. 350 Fastback (#0018) is shown at the 44th annual Southern California International Automobile Show held at the Pan Pacific Auditorium in Los Angeles California. So is this midyear? Am I missing something or reading the timeline wrong here? Is the taking control out of order in this timeline sequence. It has been years since I visited Brian and saw his 67 at his mancave but coming away from our discussions I thought Ford essentially built the 67s and why there was only 1 coupe and Vert built(little red wasn't discovered yet) in stead of 6 models Shelby was planning. Funny also you want to compare road racing performance and not drag racing performance in comparing the B2 to the CJ. I'm sure the GT500 in 1967 wasn't designed for winding roads but is still a "real" Shelby.

Now we are getting somewhere, this is when things starts to become unplugged


What truly caused  the demise of the Shelby program ?

Ford
Shelby
A. O. Smith
FL SAAC ?
Internal developments (Ford new Mustangs)
Why are we paying royalties and advisory fees
Insurance
Male menopause
Consumers
Market changes
Oil
Other

Quote from: shelbymann1970 on August 04, 2021, 08:13:32 AM

Quote from: 98SVT - was 06GT on August 03, 2021, 08:48:45 PM

Quote from: shelbymann1970 on August 03, 2021, 02:23:30 PM

My question was the timeline Ford took over production. You said"Mid 67 - Ford assumes all assets and trademarks of SA over unpaid 1962 startup loan - CS becomes race team contractor only.
67s with Z on serial number plate were done under Ford ownership - All dealers could now order Shelby's ($100 fee added if not a Shelby dealer) so I went back to Brian's site and pulled this out: Oct. 01: The first production '67 G.T. 350 Fastback is completed by Shelby American and assigned s/n 0176.
Unfortunately, fiberglass fitment, supply issues, and financial problems plague the '67 operation from the start.  Due to these "launch problems" Ford Motor Company steps in and takes control.  SAI's district code is changed from 71 to 84. Dr. Ray A. Geddes takes over purchasing (and possibly operations as a whole).Oct. 27 - Nov. 06: G.T. 350 Fastback (#0018) is shown at the 44th annual Southern California International Automobile Show held at the Pan Pacific Auditorium in Los Angeles California. So is this midyear? Am I missing something or reading the timeline wrong here? Is the taking control out of order in this timeline sequence. It has been years since I visited Brian and saw his 67 at his mancave but coming away from our discussions I thought Ford essentially built the 67s and why there was only 1 coupe and Vert built(little red wasn't discovered yet) in stead of 6 models Shelby was planning. Funny also you want to compare road racing performance and not drag racing performance in comparing the B2 to the CJ. I'm sure the GT500 in 1967 wasn't designed for winding roads but is still a "real" Shelby.

Quote from: FL SAAC on August 04, 2021, 09:36:45 AM
Now we are getting somewhere, this is when things starts to become unplugged


What truly caused  the demise of the Shelby program ?
Mopars and Chevies. nobody wanted anything to do with Ford products anynmore.  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Quote from: shelbymann1970 on August 04, 2021, 07:48:03 AM
My point which you missed with your comments back was the engines were the SAME in reg Mustangs and Shelbys. No they were not(I guess you don't consider adding an AL intake as a performance gain?). Was a 67 HiPo changed internally for the Shelby(Not sure but asking?).

Same engine internally with an intake/carb swap - No the 67 HiPo was not changed internally - neither was the 65-66. The 31 hp gain came from external intake/carb/exhaust changes.

Quote from: shelbymann1970 on August 04, 2021, 08:13:32 AM
Due to these "launch problems" Ford Motor Company steps in and takes control. .......Oct. 27 - Nov. 06: ......So is this midyear?
Funny also you want to compare road racing performance and not drag racing performance in comparing the B2 to the CJ. I'm sure the GT500 in 1967 wasn't designed for winding roads but is still a "real" Shelby.

There is a difference between Ford managing the production of cars and them basically foreclosing on SA in April/May 67 (which is actually near the end of model year production - remember new cars came out in Sept and June was generally a shutdown month for assembly line changeover)
Funny you want to compare drag racing performance between a big block and small block and then expect me to judge between cars in an apples to oranges race.

Great point market changes and consumers swaying over to a more hip cars with psychedelic advertising,  groovy colors and options. More competitively priced offering more bang for your buck.

Heck looks like it's the 60s all over again, cause it's happening now ( C8 )

Back to the topic " what happened in the three way relationship? "

Infidelity....

Quote from: shelbymann1970 on August 04, 2021, 11:16:54 AM

Quote from: FL SAAC on August 04, 2021, 09:36:45 AM
Now we are getting somewhere, this is when things starts to become unplugged


What truly caused  the demise of the Shelby program ?
Mopars and Chevies. nobody wanted anything to do with Ford products anynmore.  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Answer.... All good things must come to an end!

Quote from: PrettyMuchAShelbyGuy on August 03, 2021, 05:58:30 PM
IMO, Ford wanting (taking) control from Shelby American.  Carroll getting pissed, telling Ford to get lost & going an entirely different direction (Africa, Reno - motel & dealership, etc.). May not be 100% accurate, but generally from the dozen or so books I have read over the years...

Sorry I missed your post, as you raise good questions:

Ford wanting (taking) control from Shelby American. 

Why for non performance on S.A. part ?

Carroll getting pissed, telling Ford to get lost & going an entirely different direction (Africa, Reno - motel & dealership, etc.).

Or Ford again not happy with compliance or production results. One has to acknowledge making 500 widgets the first year was a challenge.  Come year two and three, are you ramped up to handle an additional demand on widgets ?

I don't think CS and crew had the ability, man power, resources to continue their product growth.  Sometimes  your worst enemy is your very own success


May not be 100% accurate, but generally from the dozen or so books I have read over the years...

Alrighty

A couple other deal killers we haven't gone into deeply yet were the EPA and insurance costs. Early emissions requirements were tough for manufacturers to meet. Look at the low HP from the 70s all the way into the 90s. Insurance costs were always based on risk vs cost. Performance cars cost more to insure. A 69 GT500 cost more to insure due to initial price than a 69 Coupe with the same drivetrain. A buyer just looking for performance would get the cheaper to buy/insure Coupe or Sportroof. In 1969 I bought a new 1970 Road Runner. I opted for the 3 speed stick because to insure me as a 19 year old with a 4 speed was 3 times the price.
CS always had the public story he killed it himself due to the emissions requirements. Long before that Ford had already decided to pull the plug. The Duece had made his point to Enzo in 66-67. The Shelby's were not race cars getting free ink and drawing customers to the showroom floor. The races getting all the ink was TransAm and Ford/Chevy had decided to pull their dollars out of that so there was no need to renew CSs race team or personal services contract. I heard a price tag of $25 million is what Ford spent on racing from the start of the GT40 program until LeMans in 67. Yeah HFII ran the place but he had a board of directors to justify that kind of money to and spending $3-4 dollars profit from each car would no longer fly on the balance sheet. CS also hadn't had many race wins since the 67 TA championship. TA crowds were down and NASCAR was still drawing 5-10 times the number of people to a race than TA ever did.

Excellent analysis-

Quote from: 98SVT - was 06GT on August 04, 2021, 11:09:54 PM
A couple other deal killers we haven't gone into deeply yet were the EPA and insurance costs. Early emissions requirements were tough for manufacturers to meet. Look at the low HP from the 70s all the way into the 90s. Insurance costs were always based on risk vs cost. Performance cars cost more to insure. A 69 GT500 cost more to insure due to initial price than a 69 Coupe with the same drivetrain. A buyer just looking for performance would get the cheaper to buy/insure Coupe or Sportroof. In 1969 I bought a new Road Runner. I opted for the 3 speed stick because to insure me as a 19 year old with a 4 speed was 3 times the price.
CS always had the public story he killed it himself due to the emissions requirements. Long before that Ford had already decided to pull the plug. The Duece had made his point to Enzo in 66-67. The Shelby's were not race cars getting free ink and drawing customers to the showroom floor. The races getting all the ink was TransAm and Ford/Chevy had decided to pull their dollars out of that so there was no need to renew CSs race team or personal services contract. I heard a price tag of $25 million is what Ford spent on racing from the start of the GT40 program until LeMans in 67. Yeah HFII ran the place but he had a board of directors to justify that kind of money to and spending $3-4 dollars profit from each car would no longer fly on the balance sheet. CS also hadn't had many race wins since the 67 TA championship. TA crowds were down and NASCAR was still drawing 5-10 times the number of people to a race than TA ever did.

Not sure of all the reasons you raise - quite possibly non-performance, I dunno.  I read all those books in the 70's through the early 90's - long time ago, then sold them all to fund a GT40 along with a bunch of other CS/Bill Neale memorabilia.  You are right on the (limited) ability to manufacture - Hank did the assembly line thing, CS for the most part did not...  So, no doubt there...  I think however the issue(s) you are raising have more to do about the perspective of all those who "wrote those books"...  It's not my PoV...It was CS & his 'cronies' for the most part.  In any event, I can assure you it was not Hank the Duce or Ford in general....hence the juandiced perspective(s) published.

Quote from: FL SAAC on August 04, 2021, 02:41:13 PM

Quote from: PrettyMuchAShelbyGuy on August 03, 2021, 05:58:30 PM
IMO, Ford wanting (taking) control from Shelby American.  Carroll getting pissed, telling Ford to get lost & going an entirely different direction (Africa, Reno - motel & dealership, etc.). May not be 100% accurate, but generally from the dozen or so books I have read over the years...

Sorry I missed your post, as you raise good questions:

Ford wanting (taking) control from Shelby American. 

Why for non performance on S.A. part ?

Carroll getting pissed, telling Ford to get lost & going an entirely different direction (Africa, Reno - motel & dealership, etc.).

Or Ford again not happy with compliance or production results. One has to acknowledge making 500 widgets the first year was a challenge.  Come year two and three, are you ramped up to handle an additional demand on widgets ?

I don't think CS and crew had the ability, man power, resources to continue their product growth.  Sometimes  your worst enemy is your very own success


May not be 100% accurate, but generally from the dozen or so books I have read over the years...

Alrighty

So in essence we can only say that this process did produce one of the most unique Shelbys of its time, with more parts made specifically for this particular model than any other.
Where do we begin to behold the glory of this spectacular specimens in the history of the known universe . How about that front end all those scoops and vents on the hood and fenders making you think this car was from outer space . That snake on the grille so menacing. The rear end wants to say hi, hello, how are ya and how do you do with its sequential tail lights, a true touring car and a brutal torque monster motor could be had.  This is true Americana, the 1969 S H E L B Y

My sense is that production ended because what was the point of making a Shelby when Shelby was gone and Ford had plenty of performance already in house.  I will say that when I drive my 69 GT500 and my 69 Boss 429 that the Boss 9 definitely seems a lot racier -- whether it is or not who knows?  If you drive a 66 GT350 it is truly a great all around car.  The 67 GT500 still has a lot of early car feel.  My 69 GT500 seems a lot softer and less edgy.  Ford may have sold a lot more square birds but I will take a 55 - 57 over them all day long.

They were, are and shall always remain very significant and influential. Their influences still can be seen in current Fomoco offerings.

They were ended more for a Ford Corporate identity crisis as much as anything. That won't ever change and if you look at all Ford current offerings that seems to still be present.

The Ford GT's suggest that very strongly I think as well as e-powered Mustang SUV's and other brand names Corporate is attempting to hold on to.



Shelby and Shelby's have always been just another Ford Corporate vehicle to use or abuse as seen necessary.

Shelby is something that was essentially created by Ford and has remnants of being a "Frankenstein Monster" they created and that sometimes can't control to their liking. The comment Iococca made about "we better give that guy something before he comes back to bite us" was very prophetic and still is.

Corporate treats people like racing horses or dogs. You flog them until they are done, then you look for new ones. Same as it ever was.



Shelby has become a bight light of a public icon and it's doubtful that it can ever be completely extinguished. It's concept is not a singularity and is surprisingly multidimensional for a car. Simply put, it's because it is more then just a car. It's an end desire. The '69's and '70's are an outstanding illustration of that.

I seriously doubt that they will be forgotten anytime soon.

Another factor I don't recall seeing mentioned is the expiration of the lease on Imperial Hwy.

1. Production would have to move somewhere else
2. the problems with the 67 program had solutions (from Ford's view) of more control/management from Dearborn
3. With more control from Dearborn, production moving to Ionia/Metuchen, why have any CA involvement?
4. With more internal Ford performance vehicle development (KK, Trans-Am, Boss programs), SAI becomes a burden
5. CS "agreement with Ford circa 1962 had a 5 yr expiration, so by 1967 the relationship would change no matter what
6. Corporate entities do not work well with outside contractors, i.e. they do not conform to the corporate structure, this is exactly what SAI was, "non-corporate" CA racers
7. eventually the $'s going to SAI would get reigned in by financial side of corporation, even HF-II wouldn't protect CS
8. as mentioned other priorities begin to push performance / halo cars (Shelby/Cobra) aside, safety (Ralph Nader), emissions, insurance pressure, global Ford expansion
9. The slow death began with Ford takeover of 1967 production, it just took until late 1969 to call "the time of death"

just my humble opinion, FWIW

jim p

Quote from: shelbydoug on August 18, 2021, 08:37:26 AMShelby and Shelby's have always been just another Ford Corporate vehicle to use or abuse as seen necessary.

Shelby is something that was essentially created by Ford and has remnants of being a "Frankenstein Monster" they created and that sometimes can't control to their liking. The comment Iococca made about "we better give that guy something before he comes back to bite us" was very prophetic and still is.

Corporate treats people like racing horses or dogs. You flog them until they are done, then you look for new ones. Same as it ever was.

Shelby has become a bight light of a public icon and it's doubtful that it can ever be completely extinguished. It's concept is not a singularity and is surprisingly multidimensional for a car. Simply put, it's because it is more then just a car. It's an end desire. The '69's and '70's are an outstanding illustration of that.

I seriously doubt that they will be forgotten anytime soon.

Shelby created Shelby. Don't forget he went to Chevrolet for engines first. They turned him down because they already had the Corvette.
Iacocca the marketing guy thought he could get some good ink for 2 engines and $25,000 so he bought the story.
The ink generated more interest in Ford so the marketing and engineering dept poured more $ into SA.
By 1970 Ford was tired of pouring money down the drain on SCCA race cars that weren't televised to the masses and kept their NASCAR teams.
Shelby was also done with the automotive world and went to Africa.
There were a few Cobra/Shelby clubs enjoying the cars but it wasn't until SAAC came along that the cars started to get respect. Guarding the heritage and getting them in magazines brought their collectability and rarity into the spotlight.
SAAC got Shelby re-involved when they invited him to SAAC 1 in Oakland and he enjoyed the spotlight.
Ford performance efforts went under misc programs - Motorsport - SVO - SVT all with little success even adding GT350 to a Fox body didn't increase sales. They did see better success by adding Cobra to them but it still was not a giant boost in sales.
When marketing looking to sell the latest SVT supercharged retro looking Mustang they decided to stick GT500 on it. From previous experience they knew just the GT500 moniker would not boost sales to make a real profit center out of the car.
They paid the McQueen family a per car deal to use Bullitt and it sold well.
Someone figured adding Shelby to the car would boost sales. CS wanted BIG number per car to use his name (they already owned GT500). In lieu of a per car deal they signed him to a 15 million 5 year personal services contract.
Ford worked CS like a dog for their money - lots of visits and time on the road at dealer events etc.
The cars sold well with Ford using Shelby as the face of performance and he was able to parley his re involvement with Ford to sell some of his own cars.
Now seeing that GT350 and Bullitt alone aren't selling cars they have dumped them and just like in the 70s are going with Mach-1 which also ties in with the Mach-E and helps Ford who wants to make the Mustang name as a brand in of itself with cars and SUVs - don't be surprised if the next Mustang that is being developed on the Explorer chassis has a V6 Hybrid as it's top performer. Maybe now that Ford has realized it's mistake of no more cars just Mustangs, trucks and SUVs they will add a 4 door to the Mustang lineup and create 2 companies Ford for truck & SUV and Mustang for cars - like Fiat did breaking up Chrysler into 3 companies - Ram trucks - Jeep and Dodge.

Very well expressed l, let's see what happens in the next chapter, to be continued or not ...

Quote from: 98SVT - was 06GT on August 18, 2021, 01:27:22 PM

Quote from: shelbydoug on August 18, 2021, 08:37:26 AM

Shelby created Shelby. Don't forget he went to Chevrolet for engines first. They turned him down because they already had the Corvette.
Iacocca the marketing guy thought he could get some good ink for 2 engines and $25,000 so he bought the story.
The ink generated more interest in Ford so the marketing and engineering dept poured more $ into SA.
By 1970 Ford was tired of pouring money down the drain on SCCA race cars that weren't televised to the masses and kept their NASCAR teams.
Shelby was also done with the automotive world and went to Africa.
There were a few Cobra/Shelby clubs enjoying the cars but it wasn't until SAAC came along that the cars started to get respect. Guarding the heritage and getting them in magazines brought their collectability and rarity into the spotlight.
SAAC got Shelby re-involved when they invited him to SAAC 1 in Oakland and he enjoyed the spotlight.
Ford performance efforts went under misc programs - Motorsport - SVO - SVT all with little success even adding GT350 to a Fox body didn't increase sales. They did see better success by adding Cobra to them but it still was not a giant boost in sales.
When marketing looking to sell the latest SVT supercharged retro looking Mustang they decided to stick GT500 on it. From previous experience they knew just the GT500 moniker would not boost sales to make a real profit center out of the car.
They paid the McQueen family a per car deal to use Bullitt and it sold well.
Someone figured adding Shelby to the car would boost sales. CS wanted BIG number per car to use his name (they already owned GT500). In lieu of a per car deal they signed him to a 15 million 5 year personal services contract.
Ford worked CS like a dog for their money - lots of visits and time on the road at dealer events etc.
The cars sold well with Ford using Shelby as the face of performance and he was able to parley his re involvement with Ford to sell some of his own cars.
Now seeing that GT350 and Bullitt alone aren't selling cars they have dumped them and just like in the 70s are going with Mach-1 which also ties in with the Mach-E and helps Ford who wants to make the Mustang name as a brand in of itself with cars and SUVs - don't be surprised if the next Mustang that is being developed on the Explorer chassis has a V6 Hybrid as it's top performer. Maybe now that Ford has realized it's mistake of no more cars just Mustangs, trucks and SUVs they will add a 4 door to the Mustang lineup and create 2 companies Ford for truck & SUV and Mustang for cars - like Fiat did breaking up Chrysler into 3 companies - Ram trucks - Jeep and Dodge.

It was over when Shelby got a good look at the '71 prototype and said "You can't pay me enough to put my name on that!"

(http://www.saacforum.com/gallery/487-240820103836.jpeg)

Quote from: cj750 on September 11, 2021, 10:30:22 PM
It was over when Shelby got a good look at the '71 prototype and said "You can't pay me enough to put my name on that!"

(http://www.saacforum.com/gallery/487-240820103836.jpeg)

While that sounds good this prototype pretty much says Ford was on the path to produce Shelbys into the 70s. According to documents Ford asked AO Smith to build the 70s but they declined effectively killing the program. Wasn't the Bosses, Wasn't the Mach1s. Lots of interesting comments but documents tell the story. So lets kill this topic now. Gary

Shelby was quoted as saying many times more then once, that "the only GT350 I had anything to do with was the '65".

Another quote was "I don't care anything about the Trans Am and those cars".

I love the guy and miss him but I look at the reality as much as I can but Ford was and still is the "money man" and runs the show.

Even Iaccoca was just an employee as "Ford v. Ferrari" attempts to illustrate.



I didn't keep track of when Iaccoca departs Ford but by the time of the end of the "Shelby GT" run, Shel was done and already in Africa taking the elites of the world on hunting expeditions on his "reserve".

HIS car was the Cobra. He accepted the GT40 project to beat Ferrari and the initial GT350 to as Iaccoca said "jazz up the Mustang".

What precisely happened within Ford Corporate is likely very similar to what was speculated in Ford v. Ferrari.

All of the "Shelby's creations" are forever iconic and still remain influential. They likely always will. Ford is the elephant in the room here and whether or not one accepts that doesn't change anything.



The other significant factor that is present is how Shelby influenced Ford's thinking as well as other manufacturers AND THE MARKET PLACE and that IS an almost "God like achievement" for a mere mortal who rose from chicken farming.

Ford jumped on an opportunity with Shelby and renamed an arm of their production train, the Shelby train. It can be said of Ford that they are a lot of things, some of which are kind of ugly but you can't criticize Ford with lacking vision, at least at that time.


Like in the story of the "Frankenstein 'Monster'" to this day, they are attempting to resurrect those 'monsters' by shooting new life into identifiable product names that they created that in fact may be only distant relatives of the originals.

As the quote at the end of the Le mans race goes Miles says "they are out there selling cars already aren't they Shel?" to which he replies, "that's what they do Bulldog".




There is another "story" that is involved in this that so far none have mentioned and maybe should? There was a novel, you know, a book. Those things with way too many printed pages with lots of words on them bound together?

It was called "The Betsy". Now in this story a powerful automotive industrialist gives a job to the son of a distant friend out of keeping a promise to his friend. The "rumor" or suggestion was that the industrialist was Henry Ford and the friend's son was Lee Iaccoca.


Which player in all of this is the critical factor and which is a catalyst? Quite a debate and maybe there should be a book or a movie about it to stimulate further "discussions"?

I vote movie. Those books can get heavy and if you drop one on your foot can do a lot of damage. Plus I already have one book. How many do you really need?

The reality is there is no SIMPLE answer. It's complicated.  ;)

Quote from: shelbydoug on September 12, 2021, 08:03:36 AM
Shelby was quoted as saying many times more then once, that "the only GT350 I had anything to do with was the '65".

Another quote was "I don't care anything about the Trans Am and those cars".

I love the guy and miss him but I look at the reality as much as I can but Ford was and still is the "money man" and runs the show.

Even Iaccoca was just an employee as "Ford v. Ferrari" attempts to illustrate.



I didn't keep track of when Iaccoca departs Ford but by the time of the end of the "Shelby GT" run, Shel was done and already in Africa taking the elites of the world on hunting expeditions on his "reserve".

HIS car was the Cobra. He accepted the GT40 project to beat Ferrari and the initial GT350 to as Iaccoca said "jazz up the Mustang".

What precisely happened within Ford Corporate is likely very similar to what was speculated in Ford v. Ferrari.

All of the "Shelby's creations" are forever iconic and still remain influential. They likely always will. Ford is the elephant in the room here and whether or not one accepts that doesn't change anything.



The other significant factor that is present is how Shelby influenced Ford's thinking as well as other manufacturers AND THE MARKET PLACE and that IS an almost "God like achievement" for a mere mortal who rose from chicken farming.

Ford jumped on an opportunity with Shelby and renamed an arm of their production train, the Shelby train. It can be said of Ford that they are a lot of things, some of which are kind of ugly but you can't criticize Ford with lacking vision, at least at that time.


Like in the story of the "Frankenstein 'Monster'" to this day, they are attempting to resurrect those 'monsters' by shooting new life into identifiable product names that they created that in fact may be only distant relatives of the originals.

As the quote at the end of the Le mans race goes Miles says "they are out there selling cars already aren't they Shel?" to which he replies, "that's what they do Bulldog".




There is another "story" that is involved in this that so far none have mentioned and maybe should? There was a novel, you know, a book. Those things with way too many printed pages with lots of words on them bound together?

It was called "The Betsy". Now in this story a powerful automotive industrialist gives a job to the son of a distant friend out of keeping a promise to his friend. The "rumor" or suggestion was that the industrialist was Henry Ford and the friend's son was Lee Iaccoca.


Which player in all of this is the critical factor and which is a catalyst? Quite a debate and maybe there should be a book or a movie about it to stimulate further "discussions"?

I vote movie. Those books can get heavy and if you drop one on your foot can do a lot of damage. Plus I already have one book. How many do you really need?

The reality is there is no SIMPLE answer. It's complicated.  ;)

I think what actully happened from 1962-1970 invalidates those quotes you cite.

Quote from: 427hunter on September 15, 2021, 11:15:46 AM

Quote from: shelbydoug on September 12, 2021, 08:03:36 AM
Shelby was quoted as saying many times more then once, that "the only GT350 I had anything to do with was the '65".

Another quote was "I don't care anything about the Trans Am and those cars".

I love the guy and miss him but I look at the reality as much as I can but Ford was and still is the "money man" and runs the show.

Even Iaccoca was just an employee as "Ford v. Ferrari" attempts to illustrate.



I didn't keep track of when Iaccoca departs Ford but by the time of the end of the "Shelby GT" run, Shel was done and already in Africa taking the elites of the world on hunting expeditions on his "reserve".

HIS car was the Cobra. He accepted the GT40 project to beat Ferrari and the initial GT350 to as Iaccoca said "jazz up the Mustang".

What precisely happened within Ford Corporate is likely very similar to what was speculated in Ford v. Ferrari.

All of the "Shelby's creations" are forever iconic and still remain influential. They likely always will. Ford is the elephant in the room here and whether or not one accepts that doesn't change anything.



The other significant factor that is present is how Shelby influenced Ford's thinking as well as other manufacturers AND THE MARKET PLACE and that IS an almost "God like achievement" for a mere mortal who rose from chicken farming.

Ford jumped on an opportunity with Shelby and renamed an arm of their production train, the Shelby train. It can be said of Ford that they are a lot of things, some of which are kind of ugly but you can't criticize Ford with lacking vision, at least at that time.


Like in the story of the "Frankenstein 'Monster'" to this day, they are attempting to resurrect those 'monsters' by shooting new life into identifiable product names that they created that in fact may be only distant relatives of the originals.

As the quote at the end of the Le mans race goes Miles says "they are out there selling cars already aren't they Shel?" to which he replies, "that's what they do Bulldog".




There is another "story" that is involved in this that so far none have mentioned and maybe should? There was a novel, you know, a book. Those things with way too many printed pages with lots of words on them bound together?

It was called "The Betsy". Now in this story a powerful automotive industrialist gives a job to the son of a distant friend out of keeping a promise to his friend. The "rumor" or suggestion was that the industrialist was Henry Ford and the friend's son was Lee Iaccoca.


Which player in all of this is the critical factor and which is a catalyst? Quite a debate and maybe there should be a book or a movie about it to stimulate further "discussions"?

I vote movie. Those books can get heavy and if you drop one on your foot can do a lot of damage. Plus I already have one book. How many do you really need?

The reality is there is no SIMPLE answer. It's complicated.  ;)

I think what actully happened from 1962-1970 invalidates those quotes you cite.

In what way? He made those comments well after production was over and when he was around us. Charlotte in 81 or 2 and again in 87. I was standing next to him.

People would ask him questions like why didn't you put roll bars in the 65 and 66 and he would say "I don't know, I had nothing to do with them".

Quote from: shelbydoug on September 15, 2021, 01:08:20 PM

Quote from: 427hunter on September 15, 2021, 11:15:46 AM

Quote from: shelbydoug on September 12, 2021, 08:03:36 AM
Shelby was quoted as saying many times more then once, that "the only GT350 I had anything to do with was the '65".

Another quote was "I don't care anything about the Trans Am and those cars".

I love the guy and miss him but I look at the reality as much as I can but Ford was and still is the "money man" and runs the show.

Even Iaccoca was just an employee as "Ford v. Ferrari" attempts to illustrate.



I didn't keep track of when Iaccoca departs Ford but by the time of the end of the "Shelby GT" run, Shel was done and already in Africa taking the elites of the world on hunting expeditions on his "reserve".

HIS car was the Cobra. He accepted the GT40 project to beat Ferrari and the initial GT350 to as Iaccoca said "jazz up the Mustang".

What precisely happened within Ford Corporate is likely very similar to what was speculated in Ford v. Ferrari.

All of the "Shelby's creations" are forever iconic and still remain influential. They likely always will. Ford is the elephant in the room here and whether or not one accepts that doesn't change anything.



The other significant factor that is present is how Shelby influenced Ford's thinking as well as other manufacturers AND THE MARKET PLACE and that IS an almost "God like achievement" for a mere mortal who rose from chicken farming.

Ford jumped on an opportunity with Shelby and renamed an arm of their production train, the Shelby train. It can be said of Ford that they are a lot of things, some of which are kind of ugly but you can't criticize Ford with lacking vision, at least at that time.


Like in the story of the "Frankenstein 'Monster'" to this day, they are attempting to resurrect those 'monsters' by shooting new life into identifiable product names that they created that in fact may be only distant relatives of the originals.

As the quote at the end of the Le mans race goes Miles says "they are out there selling cars already aren't they Shel?" to which he replies, "that's what they do Bulldog".




There is another "story" that is involved in this that so far none have mentioned and maybe should? There was a novel, you know, a book. Those things with way too many printed pages with lots of words on them bound together?

It was called "The Betsy". Now in this story a powerful automotive industrialist gives a job to the son of a distant friend out of keeping a promise to his friend. The "rumor" or suggestion was that the industrialist was Henry Ford and the friend's son was Lee Iaccoca.


Which player in all of this is the critical factor and which is a catalyst? Quite a debate and maybe there should be a book or a movie about it to stimulate further "discussions"?

I vote movie. Those books can get heavy and if you drop one on your foot can do a lot of damage. Plus I already have one book. How many do you really need?

The reality is there is no SIMPLE answer. It's complicated.  ;)

I think what actully happened from 1962-1970 invalidates those quotes you cite.

In what way? He made them well after that when he was around us.

If you are unaware of where 65,66,67 were made and the production changes, SA's involvement in SCCA, AHRA, sponsored drivers, etc (too much to list) then I don't know what to tell you. The man had his hand in everything racing during that period. SA was his company and that is his direct involvement; under your way of thinking he had zero involvement in any car, because in reality he didn't turn a wrench.

Quote from: 427hunter on September 15, 2021, 03:00:00 PM

Quote from: shelbydoug on September 15, 2021, 01:08:20 PM

Quote from: 427hunter on September 15, 2021, 11:15:46 AM

Quote from: shelbydoug on September 12, 2021, 08:03:36 AM
Shelby was quoted as saying many times more then once, that "the only GT350 I had anything to do with was the '65".

Another quote was "I don't care anything about the Trans Am and those cars".

I love the guy and miss him but I look at the reality as much as I can but Ford was and still is the "money man" and runs the show.

Even Iaccoca was just an employee as "Ford v. Ferrari" attempts to illustrate.



I didn't keep track of when Iaccoca departs Ford but by the time of the end of the "Shelby GT" run, Shel was done and already in Africa taking the elites of the world on hunting expeditions on his "reserve".

HIS car was the Cobra. He accepted the GT40 project to beat Ferrari and the initial GT350 to as Iaccoca said "jazz up the Mustang".

What precisely happened within Ford Corporate is likely very similar to what was speculated in Ford v. Ferrari.

All of the "Shelby's creations" are forever iconic and still remain influential. They likely always will. Ford is the elephant in the room here and whether or not one accepts that doesn't change anything.



The other significant factor that is present is how Shelby influenced Ford's thinking as well as other manufacturers AND THE MARKET PLACE and that IS an almost "God like achievement" for a mere mortal who rose from chicken farming.

Ford jumped on an opportunity with Shelby and renamed an arm of their production train, the Shelby train. It can be said of Ford that they are a lot of things, some of which are kind of ugly but you can't criticize Ford with lacking vision, at least at that time.


Like in the story of the "Frankenstein 'Monster'" to this day, they are attempting to resurrect those 'monsters' by shooting new life into identifiable product names that they created that in fact may be only distant relatives of the originals.

As the quote at the end of the Le mans race goes Miles says "they are out there selling cars already aren't they Shel?" to which he replies, "that's what they do Bulldog".




There is another "story" that is involved in this that so far none have mentioned and maybe should? There was a novel, you know, a book. Those things with way too many printed pages with lots of words on them bound together?

It was called "The Betsy". Now in this story a powerful automotive industrialist gives a job to the son of a distant friend out of keeping a promise to his friend. The "rumor" or suggestion was that the industrialist was Henry Ford and the friend's son was Lee Iaccoca.


Which player in all of this is the critical factor and which is a catalyst? Quite a debate and maybe there should be a book or a movie about it to stimulate further "discussions"?

I vote movie. Those books can get heavy and if you drop one on your foot can do a lot of damage. Plus I already have one book. How many do you really need?

The reality is there is no SIMPLE answer. It's complicated.  ;)

I think what actully happened from 1962-1970 invalidates those quotes you cite.

In what way? He made them well after that when he was around us.

If you are unaware of where 65,66,67 were made and the production changes, SA's involvement in SCCA, AHRA, sponsored drivers, etc (too much to list) then I don't know what to tell you. The man had his hand in everything racing during that period. SA was his company and that is his direct involvement; under your way of thinking he had zero involvement in any car, because in reality he didn't turn a wrench.

I am quite aware of it. Apparently you aren't aware of what he said after all of that ended?

Quote from: shelbydoug on September 15, 2021, 03:41:07 PM

Quote from: 427hunter on September 15, 2021, 03:00:00 PM

Quote from: shelbydoug on September 15, 2021, 01:08:20 PM

Quote from: 427hunter on September 15, 2021, 11:15:46 AM

Quote from: shelbydoug on September 12, 2021, 08:03:36 AM
Shelby was quoted as saying many times more then once, that "the only GT350 I had anything to do with was the '65".

Another quote was "I don't care anything about the Trans Am and those cars".

I love the guy and miss him but I look at the reality as much as I can but Ford was and still is the "money man" and runs the show.

Even Iaccoca was just an employee as "Ford v. Ferrari" attempts to illustrate.



I didn't keep track of when Iaccoca departs Ford but by the time of the end of the "Shelby GT" run, Shel was done and already in Africa taking the elites of the world on hunting expeditions on his "reserve".

HIS car was the Cobra. He accepted the GT40 project to beat Ferrari and the initial GT350 to as Iaccoca said "jazz up the Mustang".

What precisely happened within Ford Corporate is likely very similar to what was speculated in Ford v. Ferrari.

All of the "Shelby's creations" are forever iconic and still remain influential. They likely always will. Ford is the elephant in the room here and whether or not one accepts that doesn't change anything.



The other significant factor that is present is how Shelby influenced Ford's thinking as well as other manufacturers AND THE MARKET PLACE and that IS an almost "God like achievement" for a mere mortal who rose from chicken farming.

Ford jumped on an opportunity with Shelby and renamed an arm of their production train, the Shelby train. It can be said of Ford that they are a lot of things, some of which are kind of ugly but you can't criticize Ford with lacking vision, at least at that time.


Like in the story of the "Frankenstein 'Monster'" to this day, they are attempting to resurrect those 'monsters' by shooting new life into identifiable product names that they created that in fact may be only distant relatives of the originals.

As the quote at the end of the Le mans race goes Miles says "they are out there selling cars already aren't they Shel?" to which he replies, "that's what they do Bulldog".




There is another "story" that is involved in this that so far none have mentioned and maybe should? There was a novel, you know, a book. Those things with way too many printed pages with lots of words on them bound together?

It was called "The Betsy". Now in this story a powerful automotive industrialist gives a job to the son of a distant friend out of keeping a promise to his friend. The "rumor" or suggestion was that the industrialist was Henry Ford and the friend's son was Lee Iaccoca.


Which player in all of this is the critical factor and which is a catalyst? Quite a debate and maybe there should be a book or a movie about it to stimulate further "discussions"?

I vote movie. Those books can get heavy and if you drop one on your foot can do a lot of damage. Plus I already have one book. How many do you really need?

The reality is there is no SIMPLE answer. It's complicated.  ;)

I think what actully happened from 1962-1970 invalidates those quotes you cite.

In what way? He made them well after that when he was around us.

If you are unaware of where 65,66,67 were made and the production changes, SA's involvement in SCCA, AHRA, sponsored drivers, etc (too much to list) then I don't know what to tell you. The man had his hand in everything racing during that period. SA was his company and that is his direct involvement; under your way of thinking he had zero involvement in any car, because in reality he didn't turn a wrench.

I am quite aware of it. Apparently you aren't aware of what he said after all of that ended?

He didn't turn a wrench on a 65 either so what's your point ?

Quote from: 427hunter on September 15, 2021, 05:07:34 PM

Quote from: shelbydoug on September 15, 2021, 03:41:07 PM

Quote from: 427hunter on September 15, 2021, 03:00:00 PM

Quote from: shelbydoug on September 15, 2021, 01:08:20 PM

Quote from: 427hunter on September 15, 2021, 11:15:46 AM

Quote from: shelbydoug on September 12, 2021, 08:03:36 AM
Shelby was quoted as saying many times more then once, that "the only GT350 I had anything to do with was the '65".

Another quote was "I don't care anything about the Trans Am and those cars".

I love the guy and miss him but I look at the reality as much as I can but Ford was and still is the "money man" and runs the show.

Even Iaccoca was just an employee as "Ford v. Ferrari" attempts to illustrate.



I didn't keep track of when Iaccoca departs Ford but by the time of the end of the "Shelby GT" run, Shel was done and already in Africa taking the elites of the world on hunting expeditions on his "reserve".

HIS car was the Cobra. He accepted the GT40 project to beat Ferrari and the initial GT350 to as Iaccoca said "jazz up the Mustang".

What precisely happened within Ford Corporate is likely very similar to what was speculated in Ford v. Ferrari.

All of the "Shelby's creations" are forever iconic and still remain influential. They likely always will. Ford is the elephant in the room here and whether or not one accepts that doesn't change anything.



The other significant factor that is present is how Shelby influenced Ford's thinking as well as other manufacturers AND THE MARKET PLACE and that IS an almost "God like achievement" for a mere mortal who rose from chicken farming.

Ford jumped on an opportunity with Shelby and renamed an arm of their production train, the Shelby train. It can be said of Ford that they are a lot of things, some of which are kind of ugly but you can't criticize Ford with lacking vision, at least at that time.


Like in the story of the "Frankenstein 'Monster'" to this day, they are attempting to resurrect those 'monsters' by shooting new life into identifiable product names that they created that in fact may be only distant relatives of the originals.

As the quote at the end of the Le mans race goes Miles says "they are out there selling cars already aren't they Shel?" to which he replies, "that's what they do Bulldog".




There is another "story" that is involved in this that so far none have mentioned and maybe should? There was a novel, you know, a book. Those things with way too many printed pages with lots of words on them bound together?

It was called "The Betsy". Now in this story a powerful automotive industrialist gives a job to the son of a distant friend out of keeping a promise to his friend. The "rumor" or suggestion was that the industrialist was Henry Ford and the friend's son was Lee Iaccoca.


Which player in all of this is the critical factor and which is a catalyst? Quite a debate and maybe there should be a book or a movie about it to stimulate further "discussions"?

I vote movie. Those books can get heavy and if you drop one on your foot can do a lot of damage. Plus I already have one book. How many do you really need?

The reality is there is no SIMPLE answer. It's complicated.  ;)

I think what actully happened from 1962-1970 invalidates those quotes you cite.

In what way? He made them well after that when he was around us.

If you are unaware of where 65,66,67 were made and the production changes, SA's involvement in SCCA, AHRA, sponsored drivers, etc (too much to list) then I don't know what to tell you. The man had his hand in everything racing during that period. SA was his company and that is his direct involvement; under your way of thinking he had zero involvement in any car, because in reality he didn't turn a wrench.

I am quite aware of it. Apparently you aren't aware of what he said after all of that ended?

He didn't turn a wrench on a 65 either so what's your point ?

There is no point in attempting to talk to you. It's like talking to a rock.

Quote from: shelbydoug on September 15, 2021, 05:09:35 PM

Quote from: 427hunter on September 15, 2021, 05:07:34 PM

Quote from: shelbydoug on September 15, 2021, 03:41:07 PM

Quote from: 427hunter on September 15, 2021, 03:00:00 PM

Quote from: shelbydoug on September 15, 2021, 01:08:20 PM

Quote from: 427hunter on September 15, 2021, 11:15:46 AM

Quote from: shelbydoug on September 12, 2021, 08:03:36 AM
Shelby was quoted as saying many times more then once, that "the only GT350 I had anything to do with was the '65".

Another quote was "I don't care anything about the Trans Am and those cars".

I love the guy and miss him but I look at the reality as much as I can but Ford was and still is the "money man" and runs the show.

Even Iaccoca was just an employee as "Ford v. Ferrari" attempts to illustrate.



I didn't keep track of when Iaccoca departs Ford but by the time of the end of the "Shelby GT" run, Shel was done and already in Africa taking the elites of the world on hunting expeditions on his "reserve".

HIS car was the Cobra. He accepted the GT40 project to beat Ferrari and the initial GT350 to as Iaccoca said "jazz up the Mustang".

What precisely happened within Ford Corporate is likely very similar to what was speculated in Ford v. Ferrari.

All of the "Shelby's creations" are forever iconic and still remain influential. They likely always will. Ford is the elephant in the room here and whether or not one accepts that doesn't change anything.



The other significant factor that is present is how Shelby influenced Ford's thinking as well as other manufacturers AND THE MARKET PLACE and that IS an almost "God like achievement" for a mere mortal who rose from chicken farming.

Ford jumped on an opportunity with Shelby and renamed an arm of their production train, the Shelby train. It can be said of Ford that they are a lot of things, some of which are kind of ugly but you can't criticize Ford with lacking vision, at least at that time.


Like in the story of the "Frankenstein 'Monster'" to this day, they are attempting to resurrect those 'monsters' by shooting new life into identifiable product names that they created that in fact may be only distant relatives of the originals.

As the quote at the end of the Le mans race goes Miles says "they are out there selling cars already aren't they Shel?" to which he replies, "that's what they do Bulldog".




There is another "story" that is involved in this that so far none have mentioned and maybe should? There was a novel, you know, a book. Those things with way too many printed pages with lots of words on them bound together?

It was called "The Betsy". Now in this story a powerful automotive industrialist gives a job to the son of a distant friend out of keeping a promise to his friend. The "rumor" or suggestion was that the industrialist was Henry Ford and the friend's son was Lee Iaccoca.


Which player in all of this is the critical factor and which is a catalyst? Quite a debate and maybe there should be a book or a movie about it to stimulate further "discussions"?

I vote movie. Those books can get heavy and if you drop one on your foot can do a lot of damage. Plus I already have one book. How many do you really need?

The reality is there is no SIMPLE answer. It's complicated.  ;)

I think what actully happened from 1962-1970 invalidates those quotes you cite.

In what way? He made them well after that when he was around us.

If you are unaware of where 65,66,67 were made and the production changes, SA's involvement in SCCA, AHRA, sponsored drivers, etc (too much to list) then I don't know what to tell you. The man had his hand in everything racing during that period. SA was his company and that is his direct involvement; under your way of thinking he had zero involvement in any car, because in reality he didn't turn a wrench.

I am quite aware of it. Apparently you aren't aware of what he said after all of that ended?

He didn't turn a wrench on a 65 either so what's your point ?

There is no point in attempting to talk to you. It's like talking to a rock.

Not everyone can be as enlightened as you  ::)

With C.S., A. O. Smith and FOMOCOs collaboration on this model it makes them so unique as no other year had so many entities in a production Shelby.

These Shelbys always retained a unique identity and for 1969, featured probably the most unique add on items. A longer fiberglass front end, special grille, unique hood trim, unique fender chrome eyelets, a truly unique front bumper, sequential taillights and revised exhaust outlets, plus an aggressive unique hood with no less than five functional NACA-style air scoops, rear fiberglass deck lid with end caps with the mesh and S H EL B Y lettering.

Front and rear air scoops ducted cool air to the brakes and inside, a roll bar, inertia-reel racing harnesses, luxurious amenities, and special trim maintained the performance-oriented and limited production. Makes theses Shelbys so interesting, beautiful and special.

Simply the best

Going to close this topic for a while... sanitize the garbage ...and reopen it later