SAAC Forum

The car is question is 1967 GT 500 #67410F7A01246 being advertised in Vancouver BC.
Dave

What a shame. RIP.
Dave

#3186

Nothing in the current database for that name.
Dave

They don't look the same. The polished aluminum does not look like chrome. I would rather use old crappy Magstars if you can't afford the new wheels. I may know of a set.
Dave

SAAC is still working on it. Hopefully to the printer soon.
Dave

This is a one piece aluminum wheel and I do not recommend them for a Shelby. They do not look the same. The originals had an aluminum center with a chrome plated steel rim. The closest to original are the Paradise Wheels.
Dave

Lfino,
I know where there is a very early date coded radiator . If that is of interest, email me and I will give you the contact information for the person who has it.  dmathews@prodigy.net
Dave

Marti gets his 1967 Shelby wheel information from SAAC. Check with the registrar.
Dave

Rich,
I believe that car is #3070.
Dave

Rich,
I show 31 Nightmist with black interior and 10 spokes and none with parchment interior.
Not sure why the numbers are off, especially the parchment cars.
Interesting photo. I wondered if it was my car. I never met the original owner.
Dave

That happens. Start it in gear and it will brake free  in 20-30 ft.

Quote from: camp upshur on May 22, 2021, 02:16:56 AM

not only where do you stop w such a list, but where do you start?
another gossip column like 'the registry'? without editing, fact checking, or attribution - look at the damage done to cars (such as SFM5S038, thankfully not mine) without a scintilla of verified fact? because some passerby spit put a speculative cheap shot? thence codified in 'the registry'?
conversely, since our hobby relies on unverified submissions as fact what's to prevent the publishing of pap such as the gaudy narratives we see the auction houses churn out?

a buyer simply must educate themselves on what they are looking at.
regarding suspicion of a 'rebody' which would presumably have all of the authentic SAI pieces from the donor/original: it would come down to an analysis of the unibody. when was the original donor created? when was it delivered? from that one could deduce the Dearborn/Nashville date code stamping range of the panels/glass. that should be enough one started....from there it gets to be fun. especially if you're thinking of dropping a couple hundred (large).

Camp upshur,
I reread your above post and did the homework you should have done by calling the 1965 Registrar. your "another gossip column like the Registry? without editing fact checking or attribution - look at the damage to SFM5S038, thankfully not mine) without a scintilla of verified fact?"

The information about this car came from an article in Mustangs and Fords 1/99 and discussions with previous owners. It is accurate and your assessment is not.
Call the 1965 Registrar before you throw rocks at the Registry and Registrar and get your facts straight. You owe it to him after slamming his credibility on a public forum. The only cheap shot was yours.
Dave

That's why you contact a Registrar. Not everything is in print. We Registrars also believe strongly in inspections.
Dave

No Cover.
Dave