The one and only "Little Red" in what is believed to be it's later updated version with numerous '68 styled features added such as;
-grille surround chrome trim, raised taillight panel painted silver, and the "SHELBY" letter added across the rear deck lid
These are the only 4 pictures I've ever seen of "Little Red". If anyone has better version of these or different photos of it please post them here.
front views
(http://www.saacforum.com/gallery/204-120218233259.jpeg)
(http://www.saacforum.com/gallery/204-120218233916.jpeg)
rear and side views
(http://www.saacforum.com/gallery/204-120218234119.jpeg)
(http://www.saacforum.com/gallery/204-120218234247.jpeg)
Rich,
This is a Polaroid photo of Little Red's engine compartment taken at some point during its development. I am told the photo was taken by Fred Goodell.
Thanks,
Eric
Eric,
Thanks for posting the engine photo. (That's a much nicer photo than what was posted in The Shelby American a while back)
Does you or anyone else know if those are thermactor hoses in front of the air box and over the passenger valve cover?
Perhaps they were added along with the Paxton supercharger as I thought it was a non smog built car?
Those are smog hoses.
Thanks Pete.
Interesting since the SA VIN is lists it as 67411H ... an A/C car with no smog.
Interesting that a similar paxton that was used on the GT350 was tested on the GT500. The early paxton maybe would build 5 psi on a 289 displacement engine. I would be surprised if it would build even 3 psi on the 428 displacement engine. Hardly enough boost to make any significant horsepower. If you remember SA used duel paxtons on the Cobra supersnake. Back then that was the only way to build more boast. Today the more evolved blower /air pumps can do it easily in something that is similar in size to the old paxton. Different sized pulleys can spin the blower faster will build boost faster that way. Consequently I think some of the old reports of the cars performance were exaggerated.
It is know what the final fate of this car was?
Quote from: Richstang on February 13, 2018, 01:05:00 PM
Thanks Pete.
Interesting since the SA VIN is lists it as 67411H ... an A/C car with no smog.
Hello Rich,
Here is some information quoted from Brian Styles' research on cars 0100, 0131, and 0139: "Ford records (DSO and Marti Report) indicate that all three cars were originally ordered with the Exhaust Emissions System. A Ford Change Notice, dated August 10, 1966 deleted the exhaust emissions system from DSO 2511 (#0100 - the Fastback). This deletion is also confirmed by the Shelby VIN for 0100. The Shelby VIN for 0131 (the Coupe) indicates no emissions option, though we're unsure as to whether that was deleted by Ford or at Shelby American before the VIN was created".
My guess would be the emissions equipment was installed as part of Fred Goodell's development and testing of various engine packages with Little Red.
Thanks,
Eric
Quote from: 2112 on February 13, 2018, 04:55:21 PM
It is know what the final fate of this car was?
Sure . It was supposed to be crushed. However there are instances of cars that were supposed to be crush that later were resurrected. Soooo maybe. ;)
Well, resurrected might night be a good word. Many cars were just never crushed. The story of crushing cars has been greatly exaggerated.
There is also a hand written note that this car was to be updated to 1968 specs, so it maybe hiding somewhere.
Quote from: Bob Gaines on February 13, 2018, 01:08:08 PM
Interesting that a similar paxton that was used on the GT350 was tested on the GT500. The early paxton maybe would build 5 psi on a 289 displacement engine. I would be surprised if it would build even 3 psi on the 428 displacement engine. Hardly enough boost to make any significant horsepower. If you remember SA used duel paxtons on the Cobra supersnake. Back then that was the only way to build more boast. Today the more evolved blower /air pumps can do it easily in something that is similar in size to the old paxton. Different sized pulleys can spin the blower faster will build boost faster that way. Consequently I think some of the old reports of the cars performance were exaggerated.
That's a small return for all the effort and cost to add a supercharger. The registry notes it had twin Paxtons. Perhaps that was done after this single configuration proved insufficient. Wonder what kind of power it had with two of them.
Quote from: 67411F--0100-ENG. on February 13, 2018, 05:07:28 PM
Quote from: Richstang on February 13, 2018, 01:05:00 PM
Thanks Pete.
Interesting since the SA VIN is lists it as 67411H ... an A/C car with no smog.
Hello Rich,
Here is some information quoted from Brian Styles' research on cars 0100, 0131, and 0139: "Ford records (DSO and Marti Report) indicate that all three cars were originally ordered with the Exhaust Emissions System. A Ford Change Notice, dated August 10, 1966 deleted the exhaust emissions system from DSO 2511 (#0100 - the Fastback). This deletion is also confirmed by the Shelby VIN for 0100. The Shelby VIN for 0131 (the Coupe) indicates no emissions option, though we're unsure as to whether that was deleted by Ford or at Shelby American before the VIN was created".
My guess would be the emissions equipment was installed as part of Fred Goodell's development and testing of various engine packages with Little Red.
Thanks,
Eric
Thanks for these notes Eric,
Its been a while since I've looked at Brian's website, especially anything about this Coupe/Notchback. There's a note this #0131 coupe was also ordered with the 413 package but was delivered as 411 just like the #0100 fastback. I'm inclined to agree with you that the emissions shown in your posted photo was added for testing by Goodell. We were just lucky someone took this photo and caught the car at this point in time.
Quote from: Coralsnake on February 13, 2018, 06:02:58 PM
Well, resurrected might night be a good word. Many cars were just never crushed. The story of crushing cars has been greatly exaggerated.
There is also a hand written note that this car was to be updated to 1968 specs, so it maybe hiding somewhere.
Wouldn't that be something to find! Little Red in full '68 disguise. After 50 years, my hopes are not very high.
Quote from: Richstang on February 13, 2018, 07:57:36 PM
Quote from: Bob Gaines on February 13, 2018, 01:08:08 PM
Interesting that a similar paxton that was used on the GT350 was tested on the GT500. The early paxton maybe would build 5 psi on a 289 displacement engine. I would be surprised if it would build even 3 psi on the 428 displacement engine. Hardly enough boost to make any significant horsepower. If you remember SA used duel paxtons on the Cobra supersnake. Back then that was the only way to build more boast. Today the more evolved blower /air pumps can do it easily in something that is similar in size to the old paxton. Different sized pulleys can spin the blower faster will build boost faster that way. Consequently I think some of the old reports of the cars performance were exaggerated.
That's a small return for all the effort and cost to add a supercharger. The registry notes it had twin Paxtons. Perhaps that was done after this single configuration proved insufficient. Wonder what kind of power it had with two of them.
A lot more on the duel paxton I am sure. How much more I am not sure. The problem is that in the confines of the Mustang engine compartment heat is a big problem . The more the air being compressed got heated the less HP it would make. It is my understanding that was the down fall of this setup . Same goes for the duel paxton Cobras(not much increase over normal aspirated). Modern higher capacity Paxton blowers (more efficient single units) do not have near as much problem and would make much more HP. I would think the high (relatively speaking)10.5 -1 compression on the FE would present problems too.
Hello Everyone,
I am sure that a few of you have probably saved the Little Red engine compartment photo that I posted to your computers. For those that did, I have a question for you. Use the "zoom" and enlarge the photo without losing good resolution. Does it look to you like the front radius of the passenger side shock tower across from the valve cover has been "dimpled" to provide a little extra clearance at that area? I think that it has been "dimpled". Please let me know what your eyes see. The shock towers on 0100 are "dimpled" and were that way when we bought the car back on 12/27/79. I have attached photos of 0100's shock towers so you can see what I am talking about. It looks to me like 0100's shock towers were "dimpled" when the engine was out of the car at some point. My theory is that it was probably done with a hammer and some heat by Engineering Department personnel who were doing development work on 0100 and 0131. Any thoughts?
Thanks,
Eric
Eric,
I'm not seeing a dimple in that original photo. Just a slightly angled reflection in a straight line on the front part of the tower. Even the slightly fuzzy photo in The Shelby Amercian back issue (not sure when that was published) doesn't seem to show any dimple in that spot. Both versions of that photo are really tough to make a call either way as that section is in the shadow.
Rich
I don't see it. The FE fits just fine without a need to modify anything
Quote from: Coralsnake on February 14, 2018, 07:52:09 PM
I don't see it. The FE fits just fine without a need to modify anything
Hello,
Yes, the FE does fit just fine, but as we all know accessing spark plugs, plug wires, and exhaust manifold bolts can be a real pain on these cars. Dimpling the shocks towers does provide some additional clearance for someone that may have been doing these things on a fairly frequent basis.
Thanks,
Eric
Quote from: 67411F--0100-ENG. on February 14, 2018, 08:02:25 PM
Quote from: Coralsnake on February 14, 2018, 07:52:09 PM
I don't see it. The FE fits just fine without a need to modify anything
Hello,
Yes, the FE does fit just fine, but as we all know accessing spark plugs, plug wires, and exhaust manifold bolts can be a real pain on these cars. Dimpling the shocks towers does provide some additional clearance for someone that may have been doing these things on a fairly frequent basis.
Thanks,
Eric
Probably more to the story that we don't know. The engineering of the 390 (same size as the 428) to fit in the Mustang body had all been done prior to production.
Quote from: Bob Gaines on February 14, 2018, 08:11:49 PM
Quote from: 67411F--0100-ENG. on February 14, 2018, 08:02:25 PM
Quote from: Coralsnake on February 14, 2018, 07:52:09 PM
I don't see it. The FE fits just fine without a need to modify anything
Hello,
Yes, the FE does fit just fine, but as we all know accessing spark plugs, plug wires, and exhaust manifold bolts can be a real pain on these cars. Dimpling the shocks towers does provide some additional clearance for someone that may have been doing these things on a fairly frequent basis.
Thanks,
Eric
Probably more to the story that we don't know. The engineering of the 390 (same size as the 428) to fit in the Mustang body had all been done prior to production.
Hello Bob,
Yes, I agree, probably more to the story. I definitely believe that my theory holds water though, especially since 0100 remained assigned to the Shelby American/Automotive Engineering Department for at least 27 months.
Thanks,
Eric
I wasnt unusual for the engineering cars to stay around for months or years. I would agree, we may never know the full extent of the program.
I wonder where the "dual" Paxton references come from?
does 100 have 66 style shock towers? if so they might / would need to be modified for fe
Quote from: gt350shelb on February 14, 2018, 11:04:04 PM
does 100 have 66 style shock towers? if so they might / would need to be modified for fe
Hello,
No, 0100 has '67 style shock towers.
Thanks,
Eric
More of the Lil'Red story can be found in the GT/CS registry book. It was given 4 pages by Pual Newitt. The photo of the engine compartment is in there. Funny about the engine color which seems to be Chrysler Aqua, or the same color used on old flat headed Fords in the late 40's / early 1950's
The car had a few iterations but the photos all seem to be of the latest example. According to the GT/CS registry, it did not have a twin Paxton set-up. According to the SAAC registry, it also had a four speed at one time as they left the clutch pedal on it. Since it was a November/December 1966 build I'm sure it had MagStar wheels at one point. It was shown at the January 1967 Los Angeles Auto Show. It is a wonder no photos of it there have yet to be posted.
Also from the GT/CS registry: It had the 67 Shelby steering wheel. Custom Connolly leather seats, Mouton carpeting, Magstars, The 3" wide seat belts (like the 65's), was used as the 67' Shelby de Mexico prototype.
I'm building a tribute of it down to the metal underlined hood and deck lid - since it is that early of a Shelby conversion.
Quote from: 67411F--0100-ENG. on February 15, 2018, 08:51:06 AM
Hello,
No, 0100 has '67 style shock towers.
Thanks,
Eric
Eric,
Since we started over from scratch on this site, any chance you can start a thread and share the interesting History of your car, including how you came to own it and what you have done with it since 1979?
Quote from: roddster on February 15, 2018, 12:21:25 PM
More of the Lil'Red story can be found in the GT/CS registry book. It was given 4 pages by Pual Newitt. The photo of the engine compartment is in there. Funny about the engine color which seems to be Chrysler Aqua, or the same color used on old flat headed Fords in the late 40's / early 1950's
The car had a few iterations but the photos all seem to be of the latest example. According to the GT/CS registry, it did not have a twin Paxton set-up. According to the SAAC registry, it also had a four speed at one time as they left the clutch pedal on it. Since it was a November/December 1966 build I'm sure it had MagStar wheels at one point. It was shown at the January 1967 Los Angeles Auto Show. It is a wonder no photos of it there have yet to be posted.
Also from the GT/CS registry: It had the 67 Shelby steering wheel. Custom Connolly leather seats, Mouton carpeting, Magstars, The 3" wide seat belts (like the 65's), was used as the 67' Shelby de Mexico prototype.
I'm building a tribute of it down to the metal underlined hood and deck lid - since it is that early of a Shelby conversion.
I'd love to see it in the Magstars. I've been searching for the 1967 January LA auto show pictures for years and still have yet to find anything showing even a hint of Little red there. There has to be photos out there of it!!!
I'm surprised that no one has found a picture of Cosby with it yet? He was always borrowing the car.
Quote from: shelbydoug on February 15, 2018, 01:38:03 PM
I'm surprised that no one has found a picture of Cosby with it yet? He was always borrowing the car.
Are you sure Cosby drove "Little Red", I thought it was the "Green Hornet" he talked about driving.
Quote from: Richstang on February 15, 2018, 01:58:32 PM
Quote from: shelbydoug on February 15, 2018, 01:38:03 PM
I'm surprised that no one has found a picture of Cosby with it yet? He was always borrowing the car.
Are you sure Cosby drove "Little Red", I thought it was the "Green Hornet" he talked about driving.
Yes, it was the red car. It was in LA, as was he. The green car is a Michigan thing.
It was said that Bill was often hanging out at the LA airport location and "often" borrowed the car.
I don't think anyone definitely defined what "borrowing" meant? It was said he was often at the Playboy Mansion as well. I can't imagine why though? ;D
Somebody had a great recreation of one at SAAC42
Quote from: Steve McDonald Formally known as Mcdonas on February 19, 2018, 06:36:04 PM
Somebody had a great recreation of one at SAAC42
I saw it. I'v always thought of building one for myself and really appreciated this car.
Quote from: shelbydoug on February 15, 2018, 04:09:31 PM
Quote from: Richstang on February 15, 2018, 01:58:32 PM
Quote from: shelbydoug on February 15, 2018, 01:38:03 PM
I'm surprised that no one has found a picture of Cosby with it yet? He was always borrowing the car.
Are you sure Cosby drove "Little Red", I thought it was the "Green Hornet" he talked about driving.
Yes, it was the red car. It was in LA, as was he. The green car is a Michigan thing.
It was said that Bill was often hanging out at the LA airport location and "often" borrowed the car.
I don't think anyone definitely defined what "borrowing" meant? It was said he was often at the Playboy Mansion as well. I can't imagine why though? ;D
DOH!
Of course that makes far more sense in the time and location.
I will start searching for Cosby in Little Red. You never know what may show up.
This replica/recreation ? was at the vintage races at Mosport back in 2014.
The car was out of Ontario, Canada
Mike
The notes regarding the updates to the car are on Brian Style's website...
I dont think the pictures shown in this thread accurately reflect what was done. I would call the original pictures shown....the 1967 version.
Quote from: Coralsnake on March 21, 2018, 08:25:57 PM
The notes regarding the updates to the car are on Brian Style's website...
I dont think the pictures shown in this thread accurately reflect what was done. I would call the original pictures shown....the 1967 version.
Well I like Little Red but with a 68 rear. The black vinyl roof is spiffy too. No hubcaps though. ;D
I reviewed all the notes I could find for the #0131 Coupe on Brian Styles website. It mentions the coupe was believed to be on display at the LA auto show on Jan 08. This was before the '68 features were defined. I agree, the original pictures posted (the only ones I've ever seen) don't reflect exactly how it was initially built. Yes it's still a 1967 version, but the details in those photos reflect a likeness to the upcoming 1968 styling. Specifically, the added grille surround chrome trim, the silver painted taillight panel, and the "SHELBY" letter on the trunk lid were not '67 features. The notes indicate it was built with Kelsey-Hayes Magstars, not 10-spokes rims. The large letter Goodyear tires support the rim swap. I don't think a date has ever been established when these photos were taken but it would seem that April '67 or later would be a fair estimate.
Wasn't the coupe a test mule? I can't remember ever having seen it with the 67 rear trim but even if it was, at some point they were mocking up ideas for the '68s.
The point is, I don't think there is a right or wrong way to build one?
By the same token I only remember little red with out board driving lights. Do you have pictures of it with inboards?
I forget. Did Little Red get sent to Michigan?
I read the changes to be a 1968 steering wheel and all 1968 fiberglass, front and rear.
Im not sure we are reading the same pages? Can you post what you have?
Quote from: Coralsnake on March 22, 2018, 04:55:00 PM
I read the changes to be a 1968 steering wheel and all 1968 fiberglass, front and rear.
Im not sure we are reading the same pages? Can you post what you have?
OK, I see the pages you are reading. Yes they are different. Here's what I was seeing on the timeline;
Scrolling down on the timeline page shows milestones http://1967shelbyconvertible.com/research/timeline.asp
Nov. 02: Coupe (#0131) serialized at Ford (VIN: 7R01S******), 7 – 1967, R – San Jose, 01 – Mustang Coupe
Nov. 08: G.T. 500 Coupe (#0131) completed a week ahead of by Ford's San Jose plant. (Shelby American VIN: 67411H9A00131)
Jan. 03: Coupe (#0131) reportedly makes appearance at Los Angeles Auto Expo
Feb.: Due to continued production delays, extensive warranty problems, financial woes, and reduced public interest, Ford makes the decision to postpone the mid-year Coupe and Convertible body styles until the following year.
Mar. 28: Date code found on Seat Load Deflection Data Tags. Ref: Both the convertible (0139) and the Coupe (#0131) were fitted with black Connolly Leather "Show Car" seats.
April: With the '68-styled fiberglass received from A.O. Smith Plastics, two Shelby American company cars were re-purposed as "1968 Photographic Cars" to be used for marketing and public relations events. The only convertible on-hand was #0139 and the January-built #0463 was chosen for the Fastback.
Aug: 1967 Shelby Coupe "Little Red" (#0131) reportedly shown at a sporting event at Los Angeles Coliseum.
Oct-Dec: The 1967 Coupe (0131) "Little Red" was air-shipped to Dearborn at the request of Henry Ford II. This car was originally supposed to remain with Carroll Shelby in California per handwritten notes.
next post the build info...
Scrolling through the Research page on "the First GT500 cars" notes the Ford and Shelby Supplied build information.
http://1967shelbyconvertible.com/research/the-first-shelby-gt500-cars.asp
DSO item # 3000, DSO number 2504, Package Original Order 413H, Package Delivered 411H, eng 428 w 2 4bbl carbs, C6 Auto, PS, PB, Courtesy Light Group, AM Radio, Black Interior Décor Group, Tinted Glass, Deluxe Seat Belts, 15" Kelsey-Hayes Magstars, Goodyear Bias Ply Tires (Speedway 350 Large Lettered) 3.25:1 rear axle ratio, Red Paint, Engineering Prototype, AC
Ford records (DSO and Marti Report) indicate that all three cars (0100, 0131, 0139) were originally ordered with the Exhaust Emissions system. A FoMoCo Change Notice, dated Aug.10, 1966, was issued to delete the exhaust emissions system from DSO 2511 (0100 - the Fastback). This deletion is also confirmed by the Shelby VIN for 0100. The Shelby VIN for 0131 (the Coupe) indicates no emissions system. Furthermore, no FoMoCo Change Notice was found, and there appear to be remnants of an emissions system in 0131's engine bay in a vintage photograph. This leads is to believe that 0131 was originally equipped with emissions at San Jose, and it was removed by SAI when the Coupe was transformed into a supercharged rocket.
Motor Code: 1967 Shelby big blocks were coded with an "S" in their Ford VIN which would normally denote a 390cid FE-series big block, however, these cars left the factory with a Q-code 428cid 8v (dual quad) FE-series "Interceptor" power plant. This information was verified both by the DSO and by the 1967 Shelby Registrar, Dave Mathews.
next post the hand written page I believe you are referring to;
(http://www.thecoralsnake.com/short)
Two pages cut and pasted together
Smith would have been supplying the 1968 front end and grille
I dont think the reference to 427 engined car applies to Little Red,but rather another car
Looking at the "Jobs to be Completed in California" notes (estimated date June/July 1967)
Point #5 notes "Little Red to be updated to 68 exterior.
I suppose this is where we could interpret things differently. The 2 sets of '68 fiberglass supplied for the #0139 convertible and #0463 fastback were sent in April. They were waiting for more of the '68 pieces but nothing appear in the billing info that would let us believe it was received. I would think this is when the factory '67 appearance was changed the give a close look to the '68 styling without having those part in hand. (The grille surround chrome trim, trunk letters, silver taillight panel paint and 10-spoke rim swap) The 10-spoke wheels are a particularly important point as a change, as we know that's not how both the convertible and the fastback were initially built.
http://1967shelbyconvertible.com/documentation/original-documents/ionia-move-jobs-yet-to-be-completed-in-california.asp
Since Smith was the exclusive fiberglass supplier for 68s, I think there is only one possible explanation.
I'm not sure I follow you, by the only one explanation. I do understand AO Smith was the exclusive suppliers of the '68 fiberglass.
I guess the question is did they ever send that 3rd set of '68 fiberglass parts to SA.
I'm thinking they did not, and thus SA updated the Coupe, to what we see in these photos.
First, I would ask ....when are those photos taken?
This magazine photo caption notes they were taken at Riverside with the '68 intro (July 7th, 1967)
(http://www.saacforum.com/gallery/204-220318192752-7431182.jpeg)
We also find the photographers name "Pete Biro" along side the photos in this clipping.
(http://www.saacforum.com/gallery/204-220318192752-744238.jpeg)
I think thats accurate. I think the hand written notes to "update" the car were written after the photos were taken.
I would place the notes in the JULY 67 time frame.
So, the first 1968s showed up at Smith in September 67
Quote from: Richstang on March 22, 2018, 07:32:27 PM
This magazine photo caption notes they were taken at Riverside with the '68 intro (July 7th, 1967)
(http://www.saacforum.com/gallery/204-220318192752-7431182.jpeg)
Also, I think it's important to note that this is the later tail light panel that shows up in mid production for '67.
To be shown in January at the LA auto show it would had the earlier flat taillight panel installed at that time.
Okay, thats reasonable. So you are saying there are likely at least two versions of the 1967 configuration?
I noticed those SHELBY letters are not the production font....
Quote from: Coralsnake on March 22, 2018, 07:41:28 PM
Okay, thats reasonable. So you are saying there are likely at least two versions of the 1967 configuration?
Yes, I believe so.
Something else to consider is the outboard grille shown in these photos. I've had conversations with the thought it was built with the slant inboard grille. By the SA completion date of 1/4/67 (as noted in the registry) that would indicate a 2 pc slanted grille with the light mounting plates (not the band/clamps).
However, The outboard grille is reported to be on a few cars prior to that build date. I think this is owner reported info from the registry. I can't be sure since this was noted on the old forum. What's interesting is that #0463 is one of the cars on the list. I'll look into the other cars and report back here.
EDIT#0243 was a 12/7/66 SA build date reported as purchased with outboards by current owner, but remnants of original inboard configuration were found
#0463 was a 2/9/67 SA build date so that doesn't mean anything here.
#0544 was a 2/3/67 SA build date so that doesn't help either.
Well, I'm a chump!
:-[
I should have double checked this old info before posting.
The correct SA completion date for the Coupe #0131 is
12/7/66 per the registry, not 1/4/67.
That said there is still one car built two days prior and one built two days after with a registry/owner reported outboard grille.
I need to check with Dave to see if they are believable facts. Other than these two cars, there is only car with the outboard in Mid January and then two GT500's from the Goodyear tire tests above, built in February.
Quote from: Coralsnake on March 22, 2018, 07:35:46 PM
I think thats accurate. I think the hand written notes to "update" the car were written after the photos were taken.
I would place the notes in the JULY 67 time frame.
So, the first 1968s showed up at Smith in September 67
I missed this post.
The date of the notes seems to be critical to this photo version. My thoughts for the moment are that they were written
before these photos.
My thinking is in haste the car was updated with these minor changes from a standard 67 appearance for the '68 private press intro.
I think the car was updated from the 1967 version to full blown 1968 version after August of 1967
Quote from: Coralsnake on March 22, 2018, 08:58:44 PM
I think the car was updated from the 1967 version to full blown 1968 version after August of 1967
I have never seen pictures of that? Have you? It continues to be a mystery car.
Have you see any information that it was sent to Michigan? I haven't. It just seems to have disappeared? It makes me wonder why the Green Hornet was built if Little Red still existed?
My understanding is the cars had very different purposes. There is always a newer, better version.
The two cars must have looked very similar at one point (other than color)
I'd guess and say that considering the perceived specialty of these cars even back in the day that Little Red will in some form or way show up in the future?
I don't remember anyone suggesting that it was stolen? Maybe it will be discovered someday abandoned alongside the Panamerica highway?
I dont think anyone ever said stolen. That was reportedly the 67 convertible, but it came back.
Quote from: Coralsnake on March 23, 2018, 04:43:29 PM
I dont think anyone ever said stolen. That was reportedly the 67 convertible, but it came back.
I realize that but it's disappearance seems suspicious to me.
Your copies of the notes refer to SA/LA waiting for 68 'glass. I'd actually expect that to happen in Michigan. Little Red was Goddell's car in LA. I'd expect it to go anywhere he did.
Is the convertible the first car to get 68 fiberglass? It would show it well enough. Why would they need to do the coupe also?
I'm forgetting the info on the California Specials (sorry Paul). That work was done in LA?
I think the 1967 convertible and the blue 1967 are recognized as the first cars to get 1968 fiberglass. The handwritten memo seems to indicate that the red coupe stayed in California, because they were shipping out parts from Dearborn and Smith. It does not give a time frame, but the memo is most likely July 1967...so sometime after that.
I wonder if a 427 car was really built? I know Shelby wanted an "airport car" and they even worked out gear ratios for it.
Since Goodell was going to Michigan at this time, thats probably why they built the Green Hornet. We know it had EFI and that was Goodell's program until well after Shelby ended his run
A curious note on Brian Styles website is that is was reportedly shown at a sporting event at Los Angeles Coliseum in August. I could imagine the car to be updated to '68 specs by that time. I'm not saying it was, it's just possible since it is 3-4 weeks after the press preview.
When was the Green Hornet completed?
If I recall correctly the base unit was completed August 25th by Ford.
Seems like Little Red would have no real purpose after this point, especially if it was reworked several times to try various components and tested/abused.
The best guess is the Hornet did not appear in Shelby form until after February of 1968.
The first 1968 Shelbys with 1968 serial numbers were in September of 1967, so I think thats the window...
Sept 1967-early 1968
Just my best guess
Quote from: Coralsnake on March 23, 2018, 07:57:22 PM
The best guess is the Hornet did not appear in Shelby form until after February of 1968.
The first 1968 Shelbys with 1968 serial numbers were in September of 1967, so I think thats the window...
Sept 1967-early 1968
Just my best guess
February is longer than I would have thought, (thanks) That could indicate a need for Little Red a bit longer.
One of the registries says it was a CS prototype! But, I dont have a source document for that.
Ah! So this is the significance of dating the photos? Check. Got it. ;)
It takes me a couple of extra minutes to get it? BUT..."I have fix ze bell from ze ringing! You're welcome!"
IF, you haven't read the three or four pages about Lil'Red in the GT/CS registry you might be projecting mis-information into the Lil'Red story.
Surely it had some time as a regular GT 500 coupe before the modifications started. As in the supercharger installation for the Los Angeles Auto show.. It was sent to Dearborn to the styling center. Might not have ever gone back to California as the Airport plant was shutting down.
Let's hope somebody bricked it up into a wall like that short 65 Fastback protoype that came out a few yaers back.
Quote from: roddster on March 25, 2018, 12:26:20 PM
IF, you haven't read the three or four pages about Lil'Red in the GT/CS registry you might be projecting mis-information into the Lil'Red story.
Surely it had some time as a regular GT 500 coupe before the modifications started. As in the supercharger installation for the Los Angeles Auto show.. It was sent to Dearborn to the styling center. Might not have ever gone back to California as the Airport plant was shutting down.
Let's hope somebody bricked it up into a wall like that short 65 Fastback protoype that came out a few yaers back.
Correct. It got sent to Michigan, then disappeared forever.
Those cars rarely if ever got crushed. They would find a way to a local used car lot.
Now here's the thing with Shelby's before the '68 model year, if you removed the Shelby VIN tag, they would be identified by the Ford number.
IF there was a way to check computer records of the states from back in the day, that's where I would go. They ARE accessible where the states kept the records. That's unusual though.
Then it could have gotten sold and taken over to Windsor, Ontario? Lots of possibilities.
Where do you a find a notation it was sent to Michigan?
Computer records back in the day???? That's funny. Not sure they used computers at DMV in the 60's and they sure didn't waste any effort putting 60's paper files on computer.
I believe he is correct on recalling that someone "recalled or thought" that but I don't remember the context of the source either? Did Goodell mention that in the interview that he did with SAAC?
I was under the impression it went to Michigan but don't remember why now?
Check this link for the Fred Goodell interview on Brian's website.
http://www.1967shelbyconvertible.com/research/interviews/fred-goodell.asp
Goodell is sure that Little Red and Green Hornet were scrapped, or supposed to be.
Scrolling down further, Fred mentioned the comptroller who was a penny pincher may not have followed through with those directives.
Well, there's my memory of 'one' of them being stolen?
All of the engineering cars were supposed to have been crushed.
One of the first Cobras was supposed to be also.
There are several points in the interview where Goodell's recollection was off the mark. He even mentions that at 72 years old he can't recall all the details. While the interview is very interesting, we can't take it for fact on every note.
example; The '69 GT500 painted pink for Playboy, was not a convertible!
Yes, the convertible was "stolen". There's a few stories about that.
Interesting that Fred states it was found dismantled with precision. The radio wires were unplugged not cut, etc...
I think most of us know why that is...
Quote from: Richstang on March 25, 2018, 02:34:23 PM
Yes, the convertible was "stolen". There's a few stories about that.
Interesting that Fred states it was found dismantled with precision. The radio wires were unplugged not cut, etc...
I think most of us know why that is...
Also insurance claim papers that Brain has indicating what parts were stolen off of the convertible.
Im thinking the "they were crushed" explaination has run out of gas.....
Quote from: Coralsnake on February 13, 2018, 06:02:58 PMThe story of crushing cars has been greatly exaggerated.
By the 80s Ford was very strict on crushing. I know here on the west coast a rep from Ford went the the crusher removed the VIN watched & photoed the car being crushed. That stuff went back to Dearborn. A lot of the cars were warranty and flood cars that had been used and or crashed in movies along with the few pre production test beds that were based at Stroppe's.
Quote from: Richstang on February 13, 2018, 08:11:44 PM
Quote from: Coralsnake on February 13, 2018, 06:02:58 PM
Well, resurrected might night be a good word. Many cars were just never crushed. The story of crushing cars has been greatly exaggerated.
There is also a hand written note that this car was to be updated to 1968 specs, so it maybe hiding somewhere.
Wouldn't that be something to find! Little Red in full '68 disguise. After 50 years, my hopes are not very high.
It's parked right next to Jim Morrison's 67.
No, I dont think it is...
;D
I think in Brian's notes that he dug up the term "Disposed of" is used, not crushed. My understanding is that units like this could be donated to schools, prisons, learning facilities, etc for a tax credit.
The donation route is a possibility. Remember, the 67 prototype of Lowell Otter's came through that route. But, like a lot of "coupe" things, dime-a -dozen....crush it. Would be excellent if found still around.
To me it is unlikely that any Shelby vehicle would be seen as "a dime a dozen". The green hornet is a good example.
When found, no one knew what it was but they knew it wasn't 'normal'.
Of course if you were talking about a Corvette or Mopar guy, that's a different story. Those two usually need to share a single brain and need to wait for their turn to use it?
From another thread...could this be what happened to it?
So far, we havent found any evidence cars were crushed , we have ample evidence cars were updated. The 69 pre-productions, the Green Hornet and the red, convertible to name a few.
So what cars are left that were deemed to be "disposed" of? For 1967 I can only think of two.
Missing / Disposed
67 #0176 GT350 Lime Gold prototype fastback (Later believed to be modified into a GT500
67 #0131 GT500 Candy Apple Red hardtop "Little Red"
Found
67 #V-732-8 GT500 Candy Apple Red fastback (possibly had the engine removed and put in #0176)
67 #0100 GT500 Candy Apple Red fastback / engineering / first GT500
67 #0139 GT500 Candy Apple Red convertible / aka the '68 GT500 prototype convertible
67 #0463 GT500 Lime Gold fastback used as the '68 GT500 prototype fastback
68 CS Lime Gold hardtop used for the Green Hornet
69 GT500 Black pre-production convertible
69 GT500 Black pre-production fastback
I think there were four 1969 preproduction cars, all have been found. But, I could be mistaken.
Pete, there are only 3 of the 4 pre production prototypes that have been found. The black convert, the black/red fastback and the gulfstream fastback that was used as 4 wheel disc brake test car. There were also 2 pilot cars in 69. Those 2 cars are accounted for.
I can't recall off the top of my head but I do remember seeing a picture of a 69 Shelby fastback in ont of the Shelby American mags that showed it on stands in a high school,work shop? We had several GM cars donated to our school that were GM test bucks, assembly line damaged, shipping yard damage and "body in white". Made more sense to donate than crushing them back then. 2-3 years of student ripping them apart and doing welding assignments on them they were done by then. I had a friend that also worked at the Chrysler parts depot, in the mid 80's a small crew was ordered to put a sledge hammer to old stock, "destroy" transmissions, fenders, any thing considered old inventory. Seems it had more value as scrap metal than parts taking up shelf space.
Quote from: Richstang on February 12, 2018, 11:41:51 PM
rear and side views
(http://www.saacforum.com/gallery/204-120218234119.jpeg)
Another detail to consider is the front fenders in this photo appear to be repainted in a darker red.
I suspect the earlier version '67 front fender emblem was removed and the holes were spot welded, thus the need for a repaint.
That would match closer to the two '67 prototypes (with '68 fiberglass exterior and interior styling) in their first '68 configuration.
Quote from: Richstang on April 09, 2018, 12:36:49 PM
Quote from: Richstang on February 12, 2018, 11:41:51 PM
rear and side views
(http://www.saacforum.com/gallery/204-120218234119.jpeg)
Another detail to consider is the front fenders in this photo appear to be repainted in a darker red.
I suspect the earlier version '67 front fender emblem was removed and the holes were spot welded, thus the need for a repaint.
That would match closer to the two '67 prototypes (with '68 fiberglass exterior and interior styling) in their first '68 configuration.
The end caps and side scoops look to be about the same shade as the front fenders.
Quote from: Bob Gaines on April 09, 2018, 04:12:05 PM
Quote from: Richstang on April 09, 2018, 12:36:49 PM
Quote from: Richstang on February 12, 2018, 11:41:51 PM
rear and side views
(http://www.saacforum.com/gallery/204-120218234119.jpeg)
Another detail to consider is the front fenders in this photo appear to be repainted in a darker red.
I suspect the earlier version '67 front fender emblem was removed and the holes were spot welded, thus the need for a repaint.
That would match closer to the two '67 prototypes (with '68 fiberglass exterior and interior styling) in their first '68 configuration.
The end caps and side scoops look to be about the same shade as the front fenders.
Thanks Bob,
If nothing else it shows us SA couldn't match the Ford San Jose paint on the added Shelby parts. I just realized, if this car was a complete car (like the photos of the #0100 fastback show) and not a knockdown unit, they would've had to spot weld the holes for the "GTA" emblem too.