Barrett Jackson, 1967 Trans am Mustang sold

[shelbydoug]

SOmeone got a bargain unheard of these days

TBD

Extreme caution is advised on the T/A cars. It's difficult in SOME cases to even determine what is the original car and what is a recreation. Even discussing these things publicly can wind you up in a defamation lawsuit.

[acman63]

I talked to one of the previous owners of this car and he said at one time Rodek was planning on building a car starting with paperwork , that was until he uncovered the original car, He has pics hes going to email me of the way he found it

[TA22 (Gary Goeringer)]

Jim(acman63).............I would LOVE to see these photos you speak of and encourage you to post them here.  I've been promised those photos for years...................

And......how many previous owners/drivers/mechanics of this car are still alive  ??

ps..............is the new owner planning on joining the Historic Trans Am Group   ??  And why has it not run with them previously............ ??

pss.........and thanks for posting all the '67\68 VINs on a public forum.

[JD]

Jim(acman63).............I would LOVE to see these photos you speak of and encourage you to post them here.  I've been promised those photos for years...................

And......how many previous owners/drivers/mechanics of this car are still alive  ??

ps..............is the new owner planning on joining the Historic Trans Am Group   ??  And why has it not run with them previously............ ??

pss.........and thanks for posting all the '67\68 VINs on a public forum.

^^^ all good points

[Richstang]

Interesting to see the prototype is a C-code. I doubt that car was ordered by Shelby on any DSO.
It was probably built up from a Mustang that was found locally or already on hand to test fit all the parts.
I guess a Marti report could tell us more of the story on that one.

[gt350hr]

7R01A164685 (History and Whereabouts Unknown)

7R01K164685 (Re-numbered 8F01D164685 and modified for the '68 Season, painted blue, Car
Number 2 for Daytona 24/Tom Tlusty-Matt LaFond-Dave DeHammer-Bill Ockerlund

Just pointing out  that you have sequential vin 164685 listed twice with different information and engine codes.

      The restamp is "legal" because the cars  (two were done) were owned by Ford Motor and the vin changed per Ford Motor Company.  Similar to 69-70 Shelby conversion, A prototype '71 Boss 302 Mustang changed to a 351 2V engine code, various assembly plant mistakes ,etc.  The two restamps were done to satisfy SCCA scrutineers as D was to be the engine code for the ill fated "production" Tunnel Port 302 engine. Obviously a change AFTER a sale to the public is NOT legal
    Randy

[tesgt350]

I am not trying to dispute the car in question but the 1967/68 Shelby and Mustang notchback racer website says that the original car was crashed in 1972 and the paperwork was bought by Richard Rodeck and the car presented in the recent decade is not the same as the original. The SAAC registry says the car was destroyed in a race accident and the paperwork was purchased by Rodeck with the intent of recreating the car to original specs. Does this mean rebody? Has new information surfaced on this car or is that the reason for the low selling price?

Didn't this one get rebuilt?

[shelbydoug]

7R01A164685 (History and Whereabouts Unknown)

7R01K164685 (Re-numbered 8F01D164685 and modified for the '68 Season, painted blue, Car
Number 2 for Daytona 24/Tom Tlusty-Matt LaFond-Dave DeHammer-Bill Ockerlund

Just pointing out  that you have sequential vin 164685 listed twice with different information and engine codes.

      The restamp is "legal" because the cars  (two were done) were owned by Ford Motor and the vin changed per Ford Motor Company.  Similar to 69-70 Shelby conversion, A prototype '71 Boss 302 Mustang changed to a 351 2V engine code, various assembly plant mistakes ,etc.  The two restamps were done to satisfy SCCA scrutineers as D was to be the engine code for the ill fated "production" Tunnel Port 302 engine. Obviously a change AFTER a sale to the public is NOT legal
    Randy

The story is that the serial number changes on those two cars were done at Kar Kraft. The Registry has been challenged before and in all fairness to everyone, the Registry often only reports what it was told and often has no documentation. Sometimes it only has copies of what an owner wants to show to the Registry and nothing contradictory.

When these cars were just very, very used race cars they were treated just like any junked car would be. Even when there are records, often they are just a bill of sale and you could write that on a paper napkin from the local diner.

As values rose, some suddenly and mysteriously appeared from storage containers or anonymous owners in Mexico. Are they legit? Sometimes it's difficult to prove and sometimes it's just a matter of probability.

Many have been repaired so many times you can't tell where the repair ends and the original car starts. One of them shown to me was going through a process of having the many layers of paint stripped off one by one to try to determine the original color.

They all started as "basic white" cars and one of them, in question, hadn't a trace of white present anywhere. That went right by that owner.

I can only wonder if someone got a hold of the serial numbers or maybe guessed after seeing two or three and someone had a factory stamping machine. Probably not within the continental US, but somewhere close by where that local law enforcement doesn't care?

SAAC has never published the Ford numbers on any of the cars, Shelby's too, and for good reason. Once the Genie is out of the bottle, there is no telling how many clones will turn up claiming to be the original car.

Just think what a person like Pookie could do with that information?

Some of these cars are very highly valued.   Any challenge to  their "pedigree" is threatened to be defended in court, at your expense. Even casual discussion demeaning one in print can wind "you" up in court in a defamation suit and HAS. Be careful. In the case of these cars it's better to just be a fly on the wall, watch and say nothing. Too many of them have just been trouble and that's only worthwhile if you have specific interest in a specific car. 

[gt350hr]

  Doug ,
      You ( and the registry) are right. I left out the where just because it was irrelavent ( IMHO) to the fact that FORD directed an employee to do it. The T/A registrar has ALL the info and this is nothing new to him. Again FORD authorized to satisfy the SCCA . Strangely , after '68 , any engine code was OK ! Rs and Ms were used for factory cars in '69 and Ms or none in later years. Go Figure. Speculation is that the SCCA caught wind that the engine wasn't going to be offered ( ultimately we know it wasn't) and Ford countered by "providing" two cars as proof. IF the engine had been a hit , I'm sure there would be protests instead of laughter at it's pathetic race finish record.
   Oh well , that's history.
       Randy