SAAC Forum

For the record – a carryover is a car that started life as a 1965 Mustang chassis and was transformed at Shelby American into a 1966 GT350. The first 252 1966 GT350s fit into that description. That would be 6S001 through 6S252.

Also for the record, all carryovers are 1966 GT350s – not 1965.

So, in addition to being a special Hertz prototype, 6S048 is a 1966 GT350 carryover (albeit the Hertz version of the GT350). It was ordered from Ford by Shelby American on the same DSO as my 6S087 and 65 other cars. It was pulled at random from that batch to build into the first Hertz prototype.

How do I know that? Because I’ve been studying those 252 cars for 45 years. At one time those cars were referred to as leftover 65’s, 65 1/2,’s, crossovers, change-overs, and early 66’s among other names.  I and the Carryover Owners Group were instrumental in getting the automotive community to unite on the term carryover, as it seemed to most accurately reflect the history of those special cars. If you’d like to learn more we have a web site:

www.CarryoverGT350.com

The “Unique Features” page is the result of my decades of research into these cars.

Over the years I’ve learned a lot about these cars, but I’ll be the first to admit that I don’t know it all. So if you think I’m wrong let’s discuss it. If your presentation is strong enough I’ll admit my error and give you credit for teaching me something. I’m always ready to learn something new, especially when it involves carryovers.

Steve

Without weighing in on the discussion regarding 6S240 having backup lights from the factory, there is a plausible reason why the car was restored with them.

MOT regulations in the UK require that turn signals be physically separate from the taillight, they cannot be functionally combined using the same lens as in the US. Since 240 was restored in the UK, it was finished in compliance with this requirement. It is common UK practice to adapt the backup lights on early Mustangs to function as signals. This is the reason for the amber lenses in the backup light housings.

Bill, I checked with the owner of this car and got a little additional information. The turn signal lights in the UK cannot be red - must be amber. So even if the law didn't require a separate turn signal light, something would have to be done to the early Mustangs because of the all red taillight lens. The amber lenses in the backup light housings solves both those problems.

Steve

The research I’ve done indicates that the 250 non-prototype carryovers were originally built without backup lights. That was ascertained from a combination of the DSOs, some of the 1966 GT350 planning meeting notes, and period photos of actual cars.

Of the two prototypes, 6S001 has been presented without backup lights for many years now. I assume that’s correct for that car. And 6S023 has disappeared, so we don’t know about that car.

Several of these cars have had backup lights added at some point in time. And if that suits the owner I certainly have no complaint.

Steve Sloan

I think the '66 carryover is 6S230.  I only found 2 carryover's shipped to Archway Motors, the other was 6S248, but there is no mention of LeMans stripes.

The '65 is one of these:
5S505
5S471
5S358

I agree with you about the 1966 car. It's a carryover for sure because it doesn't have backup lights. And, as you mentioned, only 2 carryovers shipped to Archway - 6s230 with Cragars & stripes, and 6s248 with Cragars but no stripes. Making this car 6s230. Great research on your part. I was all set to do a deep dive to figure out which carryover that was, but you already did that. Thanks!

Steve

Jeff, Thanks for the pictures, and the info about which scoop is the early and later version.

Jeff & Randy, Thanks for adding to my education!

I'm now reasonably convinced that the early hood version had the deeper scoop opening like the gold hood Jeff posted, along with NO "gussets" under the leading edge. And the later hood version had the shallower scoop opening like the blue hood Jeff posted, along with the 4 "gussets" under the leading edge. Does anyone disagree with that? Have I gone off the rails with that generalization? Maybe those two features do not need to be linked to each other?

Also, has anyone linked the clocking of the hood pin plate rivets to these two hood types? Could the 12-3-6-9 clocking go with the early hoods and the 2-4-8-10 clocking go with the later hoods?

Steve

Here's a picture of the other corner of my hood. It has a sharper cutout angle where the scoop meets the body of the hood. The other side looks more rounded at that joint. Could be that one of these areas has had some past repair work. I don't know the history of this hood except that it's from a 1966 GT350 - as told to me by Jim Cowles when he purchased it to use during the restoration of my car.

In any case, I post these pics here for the more knowledgeable forum members to use as examples to teach us something about the different versions of the fiberglass over steel hoods.

Steve

Hey Randy, do you have any pictures that would show the 2 different scoop openings? That’s something I was unaware of and would like to understand better.

Thanks,
Steve