I believe the fiberglass of the '69-'70's to be one of the most inspired, beautiful designs to ever come out of Detroit (Dearborn) and enjoy discussing them with my buddy of 41 years.
With that said, we came to a question I wasn't sure about. I always thought the overall design was an in-house Ford design that was never really credited to one team or individual.
Am I mistaken?
BTW, this is in the latest Hemmings Muscle Machines, a fantastic publication.
Edit, ugh, I don't have my iPhone here to edit the picture, if JD Doesn't save me, I will upright it later today
Here it is, (I get that mag too)
I agree a beautiful design. Certainly the best looking Shelbys
Thanks JD 8)
Quote from: Coralsnake on August 07, 2020, 11:51:32 AM
I agree a beautiful design. Certainly the best looking Shelbys
It was the first Shelby design I was exposed to in early 1969 in 8th grade when a family member bought one. I have been enamored with it ever since.
Like I have said before I gravitated to 69 Mustangs in HS. While owning many brand x cars I always have had at least one 69 Mustang since 1977. I loved the Shelby design as much or more as the Mach1/Boss. Funny in that I like the Mach1 more than the FB and the Shelby Vert more than the Mustang vert. That is why I kept my vert for 35 years now. I have owned Boss 429s, Boss 302 GT500FBs etc but my vert has never left nor do I plan on selling it. I added a 69 drag pack 4 speed Mach1 after searching for one for years. Didn't want an auto unless 430 geared. Didn't want a Q-code and as luck would have it through friends and other SAAC members(Bill S-to Kerry W to Dan Reiter) I was able to purchase my current 69 R-code Mach1. OK, long enough, I also wonder if it was an in house design since the 71 fronts are pretty similar to the 69-70 Shelby and we know how far designs are done ahead of time so I'm betting Ford designers. Gary
I personally think the 68 shelbys look the best.
I have owned one of each year and I would say in the American car world the 69 Shelby is a 10 out of 10 for me in the looks department. I prefer driving the 66 gt350 though. The 66-68 mustangs are nice looking cars as well but the 69 is more exotic in comparison. As I recall the hood and fenders and exhaust outlet were Shelby in house design the rest is a continuation of the prior year.
Actually designed two years prior. So, the 69s were designed as early as 1967!
Quote from: 427hunter on August 07, 2020, 12:55:16 PM
I have owned one of each year and I would say in the American car world the 69 Shelby is a 10 out of 10 for me in the looks department. I prefer driving the 66 gt350 though. The 66-68 mustangs are nice looking cars as well but the 69 is more exotic in comparison. As I recall the hood and fenders and exhaust outlet were Shelby in house design the rest is a continuation of the prior year.
I have some of every year as well and love what ever one I happened to be working on or driving at the time the best. ;)
(http://www.thecoralsnake.com/claymodel.jpg)
Fiberglas model January 1968, so you know there were drawings prior.
There was also a fiberglas convertible, but no photos have turned up yet.
Simply the best aesthetically designed cars of the 1960s
I was 12 when this ad came out. Owning a Shelby was on my radar ever after. I thought, and still think, this is one of the coolest looking cars of all time.
Jeff
69/70s - balanced and sleek look, going fast while standing still. AND doesn't look like a Mustang with addons. But I still like and enjoy the KR. ;D
What if there was a 1969 KR ?
I often wonder why they did drop the KR moniker in 69? Doesn't the 69 GT500 use the 428CJ?
In the history of the muscle car I believe one of, if not the most underrated options was the drag pack option in 1969 and 1970
For 1968 the changes from a GT500 to a GT500KR were also very significant. However.....everyone knew as it was prominently displayed in the stripes on the side of the car. Visual impact is something that let others know what you had. Mopars had options like a shaker hood on a Challenger (on the Hemi Cuda it was standard), billboards, wings and louvers. On a Chevy, cowl induction hoods, racing stripes, front and rear Camaro spoilers.
On 428 ci 69-70 Mustangs and Shelbys there was nothing externally to let you know if it was a CJ or SCJ unless you count the oil cooler behind the grille, but that's a stretch.
The differences of these engines and supporting bits and pieces are getting very difficult to find....
deeper groove pulleys
gear reducers on speedo
oil cooler and related hardware
lemans rods
external dampening
etc
They are complete sleepers and especially considering the price in period.....it was practically free.
Great option and now I know why guys like Ed gravitate towards it.
Quote
I often wonder why they did drop the KR moniker in 69? Doesn't the 69 GT500 use the 428CJ?
There are drawings for 69 KR emblems
Quote from: Coralsnake on August 07, 2020, 02:08:10 PM
Quote
I often wonder why they did drop the KR moniker in 69? Doesn't the 69 GT500 use the 428CJ?
There are drawings for 69 KR emblems
You learn something everyday....
Quote from: Coralsnake on August 07, 2020, 01:05:32 PM
(http://www.thecoralsnake.com/claymodel.jpg)
Fiberglas model January 1968, so you know there were drawings prior.
There was also a fiberglas convertible, but no photos have turned up yet.
Was any particular individual or team credited for the design?
Pretty cool! Some great history there!
AOSmith won the design of the year award with the 69 Shelby design and the award was at the unveiling of the 69 black vert gt500 at mcacn show and the trophy ended up staying with the black gt500 vert after some $ was exchanged!!
Well, somebody did it.
Hopefully, whoever he/she/they are will not be lost to history.
- Phillip
(http://www.saacforum.com/gallery/134-070820185436.jpeg)
^^^ are these posts implying A.O. Smith were the designers?
I thought they were just the contract builders.
Quote from: 2112 on August 08, 2020, 12:18:17 AM
^^^ are these posts implying A.O. Smith were the designers?
I thought they were just the contract builders.
It was not an A.O. smith design, they did the glass and assembly. The money was paid to A.O. Smith through Shelby not Ford, apparently Shelby was not paying so A.O. Smith severed ties.
Actually, the exterior surfaces were designed by Shelby/Ford and the support and interior surfaces were designed by Smith. So, its a joint venture.
One of the Smith designers has been to several SAAC events. He even brought full scale drawings of the Shelby hood.
AOSmith provided more than just assembly labor in the form of engineering services. Its the Shelby engineering section where things get interesting in my opinion, they were now free to go in different directions.
And at this juncture, Shelby Engineering was in Dearborn/Detroit as a division of Ford?
There was an office / shop in Ionia inside the COE building
Quote from: Coralsnake on August 08, 2020, 12:10:07 PM
There was an office / shop in Ionia inside the COE building
What is COE building ?
Patrick
http://www.thecoralsnake.com/Ionia
69/70's....Good looking cars. I'm glad they put the GT350/GT500 forward of the fender side scoop. Looks better.
And yes, a 69/70 GT500 with a 428 should have carried the "KR" moniker.
I think the KR moniker should have been used on the SCJ since most 69-70 500s had the 428cj So as the difference the standard 500 from the KR. JMHO
Quote from: SChatman on August 10, 2020, 11:54:42 AM
I think the KR moniker should have been used on the SCJ since most 69-70 500s had the 428cj So as the difference the standard 500 from the KR. JMHO
Ironically I do not think the drag racers back in the day preferred the SCJ drag pack options besides the low gears ?
Bob ,
Back in the day drag racers were not interested in spending the extra bucks to get a Shelby for drag racing. Those who chose to run NHRA Stock Eliminator , shied away because the Shelby's were in a tougher class than a regular Mustang. You are correct that "most" guys did not do the "drag pack" because they didn't need the oil cooler , the Lemans rods were heavier , and 4.30 wasn't the "perfect gear". The rules were far more strict back then.
Randy
Quote from: gt350hr on August 10, 2020, 02:22:20 PM
Bob ,
Back in the day drag racers were not interested in spending the extra bucks to get a Shelby for drag racing. Those who chose to run NHRA Stock Eliminator , shied away because the Shelby's were in a tougher class than a regular Mustang. You are correct that "most" guys did not do the "drag pack" because they didn't need the oil cooler , the Lemans rods were heavier , and 4.30 wasn't the "perfect gear". The rules were far more strict back then.
Randy
Exactly ;).
Randy,
Being an x-drag racer 68-71 i have photos of this 1969 Shelby 500 4-sp holding track records and i even have photos of tear down to check specs!
9F02R480744. GT500. E70x15 tires. Shipped to Sud Automobile, Inc. (Longueuil, QC, CAN) 2/22/69. Bill of lading dated 2/22/69 for Nu Car Carriers Inc (Wixom, MI) for 6 shelby units picked up A. O. Smith for delivery via E&L railroad to dealership. Straight Bill of Lading dated 3/4/69 from E & L Transport Co 2 Shelbys delivered Windsor, Ont CAN via Maris Transport to dealership. IBM 10 day report indicates U-01 wheel recall campaign. Warranty service 3/20/69 for damage loss claim for fog lamps and wires missing; 6/13/69 for wheel recall campaign U-01 with 17 miles. Purchased by the original owner Alban Gauthier (Montreal, QC, CAN) who was a professional drag racer in Canada and ran this car "Invader III" in E/SP (sports) with an et in 11.90 and a record miles per hour of 118.11 at Cayuga Can-Am on July 5. 1969 and ran a faster et of 11.81.
Mongo
Mongo ,
Yes VERY familiar with SUD and it's excellent drag race presence in the day. Alban went on to run Pro Stock in later years.
All things considered 11.8s was very good given the tires we had back then. We were just into the "softer" wall slicks and dropping air pressures. The "Sports" class rules were easier than the "stock" class rules we raced under. They could run a wider tire too. We were stuck with a 7" wide "cheater slick" . They had to be "grooved" to be legal.
The Cobra Jet with it's lowered HP rating was a natural in many classes. In my case the 306 or 390 hp engines made my '66 un competitive with the NHRA so I raced AHRA where I had a chance at all.
Randy
(http://www.thecoralsnake.com/c556.jpg)
that's still fast for a 1969 Shelby!
Mongo
Do you have to convert it to US mph?
😝 lol
A couple of years ago I had the chance to spend a few minutes talking to retired Ford designer Gale Halderman. Among the things I asked him was whether the '69 Shelby design came primarily from Shelby or from Ford. He said 10% Shelby, 90% Ford. I asked if he could name anything specifically that came from Shelby, and he said "primarily logos and such." I mentioned that Larry Shinoda is generally credited with the design of the Boss Mustangs and Cougar Eliminator, and I asked if there was anyone that deserved similar credit for the '69 GT350 and GT500. He said no, it was very much a team effort with a lot of people contributing. "But I was responsible for the team!" I suspect he was being overly modest, based on some of his sketches.
Many of the signature design features, such as the extended front fenders and grill shape, front fender vents and central exhaust are present in his work.
I wish I'd had a way to record our chat, and of course I thought of many more questions later on, but I still found his responses most interesting.
(http://www.saacforum.com/gallery/487-100820200405.jpeg)
Note: Sketches and captions (I have no idea why they're the same) from his book "Mustang by Design."
I see a lot of the '71-'73 Mustang in those sketches.
Also note the MACH I emblem
Thanks for sharing those.
I have also seen a prototype that looks similar to the second car. Thanks for sharing.
Good stuff - Thanks for sharing cj750!
- Phillip
The Hemmings Muscle Machines article is finally up for internet viewing;
https://www.hemmings.com/stories/article/1969-70-shelby-g-t-350-and-g-t-500
(https://img.hmn.com/fit-in/900x506/filters:upscale()/stories/2020/08/06101018/MM205-BUG-01.jpg)
(https://img.hmn.com/900x0/stories/2020/08/06101053/MM205-BUG-12.jpg)
(https://img.hmn.com/900x0/stories/2020/08/06101047/MM205-BUG-10.jpg)
And an older but good article as well;
https://www.hemmings.com/stories/article/best-of-the-last-1970-shelby-g-t-500
(https://img.hmn.com/900x0/stories/2020/08/06101022/MM205-BUG-02.jpg)
Quote
Carroll Shelby, tired of the program by 1969, talked Ford into its discontinuation after the 1969 models were complete.
Im wondering where this comes from?
A pink GT350 in 1969?
If I were going to write an article about something I dont know about, I would ask for some help.
(http://www.saacforum.com/gallery/8-220820144054.jpeg)
This letter shows Smith declining to proceed with a quote on the 1970 cars.
This ended the program.
This is after two years of not being paid ( including storage cited above) in a timely manner, being blamed for all quality issues, it was AOSmith that taped out.
The program end had nothing to do with Shelby convincing Ford. Remember these cars were expensive and not selling well.
1971 models had already been planned.
Quote from: Coralsnake on August 22, 2020, 02:49:01 PM
This letter shows Smith declining to proceed with a quote on the 1970 cars.
This ended the program.
This is after two years of not being paid ( including storage cited above) in a timely manner, being blamed for all quality issues, it was AOSmith that taped out.
The program end had nothing to do with Shelby convincing Ford. Remember these cars were expensive and not selling well.
1971 models had already been planned.
That fact will not stop the urban legend spouted by the uninformed to come up again and again. The article was better written then then many I have read but they should have had someone proof read it that was more familiar with 69/70 details IMHO. The subject deserved only the best IMO.
Coralsnake's knowledge and docs tell the history.
I can't imagine CS ever opting out of a deal where someone paid him.
Ok I will cut him some slack, overall a good article.
Quote from: Coralsnake on August 22, 2020, 03:34:42 PM
Ok I will cut him some slack, overall a good article.
Especially considering (as with most muscle car publications) HMM is mostly focused on MOPAR and GM products.
It has improved quite a bit Since Joe Oldham passed. That guy
Hated Fords.
Lots of Mercury Cougar features in HMM since its inception.
More than a few have made the cover.
- Phillip
Perhaps people get the idea that Shelby asked Ford to discontinue the program after '69 because that's what he himself said at the time. (Sports Car Graphic, Feb. '70 issue.)
(http://www.saacforum.com/gallery/487-240820083248.jpeg)
Can we open the "Things Shelby said" can of worms now? Lol
A valid point though... once its in print, very difficult to correct the record. Most likely it was several events and not a single one that ended the peogram
Quote from: Coralsnake on August 24, 2020, 09:38:36 AMMost likely it was several events and not a single one that ended the peogram
Exactly. I have no reason to doubt Shelby's claim, the reasons he cites make perfect sense in the context of the times. None of it is incompatible with AO Smith's desire to withdraw for valid reasons of their own. In any event, if actual '71 Shelbys would have resembled this prototype, we're fortunate the plug was pulled when it was. (http://www.saacforum.com/gallery/487-240820103836.jpeg)
Awe, you wouldnt drive that? ;)
That would be a fun project to build that car!
I think I saw a photo of the left side of the car and it looks a different? A+ if you can find that photo.
Quote from: Coralsnake on August 24, 2020, 09:38:36 AM
Can we open the "Things Shelby said" can of worms now? Lol
A valid point though... once its in print, very difficult to correct the record. Most likely it was several events and not a single one that ended the peogram
+1 . Better for CS to put the last nail in the coffin himself as the reason then have the embarrassing task of explaining all the factors including Smith not wanting to build anymore most likely for the reasons of non payment of services.
Quote from: Coralsnake on August 22, 2020, 02:44:15 PM
(http://www.saacforum.com/gallery/8-220820144054.jpeg)
Thanks Pete. I have been living under a rock on this. Now I see there was more to the story. Gary
Quote from: Coralsnake on August 24, 2020, 10:55:14 AM
Awe, you wouldnt drive that? ;)
That would be a fun project to build that car!
I think I saw a photo of the left side of the car and it looks a different? A+ if you can find that photo.
Pete,
I had posted this second concept photo on forum 1.0, before it was lost.
Ford typically took eight photos of each design so I know there are 6 more (angles) out there.
(http://www.saacforum.com/gallery/204-240820125535.jpeg)
Nice job! That spoiler blends in on the other photo. Also interesting they dont include side marker lights, when they were a federal requirement
Lets build it
I think that last number is the photo number, so possibly 22 more photos!
Im here for you Gary 🤗
Based on the Ford concepts block date and designation -19 and -24 this was the third design concept.
I've even figured out the other views and their dash "- #" we would see for each of them
I'd love to see what the other concept designs were. This concept's nose piece is really off putting for my tastes.
There are other "Mustang" design concepts of the time period that clearly show some Shelby influence from the 69-70 GT350/500s.
Quote from: Side-Oilers on August 22, 2020, 03:12:39 PM
Coralsnake's knowledge and docs tell the history.
I can't imagine CS ever opting out of a deal where someone paid him.
CS was no longer involved in the street cars beyond being a smiling face for ads. He was a contract race team only by this time. Ford had taken over all the assets (cars, tooling, trademarks, etc) mid way through the 1967 production.
A. O. Smith
A. O. Smith