Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Richstang

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 171

Wait until years end or the beginning of 2024 the wave is coming and it doesn't look good for our economy. Have your life preservers ready

"Fighting Negativity" my a$$

Practice what you preach in your fantasyland!

Originally, I thought the flat “Cougar” (named decades ago) trim was used first in production
My new THEORY is different. It is always evolving as new information comes to light.
I should add, there is no right or wrong answer here. I am still gathering data and seeking photos for more evidence. 

Years ago, I saw Greg Kolasa’s book with the photos and captions.
I asked him why he thought the flat “Cougar” trim parts were used later. He made three great points.
-1st the photo evidence; such as car #00723.
-2nd the timing; the ’67 flat ‘Cougar” trim came out after the ’66 Mustang Hi-Po trim.
-3rd cost and time savings; why would SAI go backwards in time to get the older Ford parts.
The flat “Cougar” parts were newer, easier to get from Ford, and would save assembly time and money

All were very good points…However, I didn’t just take Greg’s word. I’ve been looking deeper for years.

Trim #1; Brochure V-738-2 and #00176. Very thin, flat, and highly polished (or chrome plated).
These parts also appear to be on very early production cars, not nearly as thick as the flat “Cougar” trim parts.
They appear hand fabricated and very, very thin
Day one #00003 – #00018
Day two #00002 – #00019
Day three #00024 – #000031 (maybe…we see a handmade appearing flat part on #00031)

Trim #2; 1966 Mustang Hi-Po trim, production part.
Trim is cut about 60-65% down from top with visible top screw needed.
Has a tighter cut-out around exhaust and an inner area at the top covering the valance cut-out
#00004; SAI 10/3166
#00017; SAI 10/31/66
#00050 vintage magazine photos, no completion date
#00100 vintage magazine photos, no completion date
#0187; SAI 12/22/66

Trim #3; 1967 flat “Cougar”, production part
No inner section to cover the valance cut-out, thicker depth by approximately 4-5X
Requires a slight higher cut-out in the valance to fit the part
#00751; SAI completion date 2/13,
#00705; SAI completion date 2/17
#00702; SAI completion date 3/31
#0723; SAI completion date 4/3
#00881; SAI completion date 4/13
#000742; SAI completion date 5/11

All those Cougars were produced long after the January 1968 date on the drawing. I don't see any connection to 1967 Shelby production.

Yes, the AO Smith drawing doesn’t add up, but it mght have been for the 1968 Cougar XR-7S. 

The SAI drawing is print dated 10/22/1966, but had handwritten 1/9/67 with the initials OBS
That was shortly before we start seeing the Cougar trim appearing on the 1967 Shelby's.

We’ve found many cars with the Cougar trim that were completed in February 1967 and later.
Ford received the stamped GT valance change notice with a stamped received date of 1/25/67.

I imagine Ford's involvement offered the ‘67 Cougar trim to shorten assembly time at SAI.
We know that was part of Fred Goodell’s initiative upon arrival at SAI.
It also eliminated the time of cutting and modifying fitment to the '66 Mustang part.

As noted in the first post of this thread

The first few cars with the flat trim are not made from the Cougar Trim parts!

After some conversations with Greg Kolasa, and following his caption in one of his books,
   We agreed the Cougat trim part was added after the '66 Mustang Hi-Po trim was used.
   It did not need to be cut to fit, saving time, and was a natural progression from the '66 Mustang part used.

It appears the Cougar trim was used at the tail end of trim parts needed...around the transition to the stamped valance opening.
We see the Cougar trim on some cars in the 700 VIN range.
Cars with the stamped valance were arriving at that same time

The transition date is critical to note on the Shelby American 'Production Order' completion date and upper right circled date.
It will help to determine the trim type (if needed) that should be used in any restoration.
There were more than a few cars that had the Cougar trim part.

Thanks for posting those Company Car license plate from Venice!
I assume they are both 1965 model years

We talked about them about a week or so in an email (nice finds) and I didn't get a chance to update the list.
I will update the list in the first post in this thread. (Done)

The CSX3002 photos are larger than any I ever saw before. We can see the plate letter much clearer now.

Since Kyle has not replied yet...Thanks Bob

I was hoping someone might be able to help Kyle with his question on the coil mount location on a 12/16 SJ built GT500 automatic.
His car might have had it mounted on the head at SJ, but I recall that it was suggested to move on later cars to the intake.
There was no specific date or month noted as I'm sure that has more to do with build dates not VIN numbera
(We know they were not built in SAI VIN order at SJ or at SAI)

I'm guessing the bracket should be phosphate coated, but not certain on that either.

1991-93 SAAC Mk1, Mk2 Mustang / Re: Ponies in the Smokies
« on: April 09, 2023, 09:43:59 PM »
Five (5) SAAC cars on display in one place is quite the achievement.
Getting all three (3) models is another great achievement
(2 -MKIs, only white hatchback were made, 2-MKII convertibles, 1 red and 1 black, and 1 SAAC Snake, black
Whoever helped gather them all together deserves to be applauded.

I saw the photos. All of them are very nice cars!

Ford GT / Re: NGFGT 2016~2019 Race Results
« on: March 31, 2023, 06:14:45 PM »
I came across this data thought it should be compiled and archived.
Interesting chassis numbers similar to the prototype 1964 GT-40's that started the history!

A total of 8 racing GT chassis were built.

FP-GT01 : test and spare chassis in WEC for 2016 – 2017.
FP-GT02 : test and spare chassis in IMSA for 2016 – 2017, then car n°67 in IMSA and n°69 for Le Mans in 2018 – 2019.
FP-GT03 : car n°66 in IMSA and n°68 for Le Mans in 2016. Won the 2016 24 Hours of Le Mans in the LM GTE-Pro category and was then sent to the Henry Ford    Museum in Dearborn (Michigan) at the end of the IMSA season.
FP-GT04 : car n°67 in IMSA and n°69 for Le Mans in 2016 – 2017. Then became the test and rescue car in IMSA in 2018 before being sold to Ben Keating for    the 24 hours of Le Mans 2019 in LM GTE-Am class.
FP-GT05: car n°67 for all seasons in WEC.
FP-GT06 : car n°66 in WEC for 2016 – 2017, then test and rescue car in WEC for 2018 – 2019.
FP-GT07 : new chassis built in 2017, car n°66 in IMSA and n°68 for Le Mans 68 in 2017 – 2018 – 2019.
   2017 24hrs Daytona winner n°66, Dirk Mueller, Joey Hand and Sébastien Bourdais
FP-GT08 : new chassis built in 2018, car n°66 in WEC for 2018 – 2019.

Each of the two teams had two racing cars, plus a third to carry out tests and Use it as a replacement for one of the two racing cars entered, in the  event of excessive damage, for example.
After two seasons, the spare cars replaced one of the two racing cars because they were less worn and with a lower mileage.

jim p

Thank You for sharing this info!
Eight cars used over 4 seasons by two teams is impressive to me.

I recall one race (or practice) where one of the cars was wrecked.
I don't recall if it was rebuilt or not.
Based on info, it seems likely it was rebuilt for the next race.

1967 Shelby GT350/500 / Re: Z VIN prefix
« on: March 28, 2023, 07:02:10 PM »

So the Z prefix was an inventory marking during, or after, or both...... the SAI to FoMoCo transition ? 

Thanks in advance,


So far, we have not found any conclusive answer to the purpose of the Z VIN. We need to continue to gather documentation (such as the Shelby Production Orders and other papers to analyze. There are many theories that are out there. Some are very interesting and timely, such as the cars being compliant for all 50 states, with the mid-May added outboard grille lights.

Back in July of 2018, I suggested 4/27 ('67) was the date I observed, after analyzing hundreds of photos of the VIN plates
   (An exceptions was found where a completed car was already at a Ford inventory lot before it shipped to the selling deaelr) .
Brian Styles noted some of the other theories in his post on our SRG Google Group. His post was from May 2018.
  Clearly the Z stamp was being looked at again, to try and find an answer.

Our current theory is the Z stamps were added when the Ford takeover started and continued for the remainder of production at LAX, not before. I imagine the writing was on the wall and SAI knew it was coming. The bleeding had to be stopped and Ford decided it was time to step in completely at or very near that time. Again this is just our current theory. We continue to gather any available documents and photos to review, to get a better understanding.

Appeals / Re: Looking for color version of this picture
« on: March 15, 2023, 06:05:35 PM »
Pete, maybe it's just a typo, but the licence plate reads as 'XTK-387'.

1967 Shelby GT350/500 / Re: Z VIN prefix
« on: March 15, 2023, 02:58:34 PM »
Greek, I'm surprised you think the "Z' stamp on the VIN plate has anything to do with the train derailment.
Back in 2018, I mentioned while collecting VIN plate photos, I noticed they stated adding "Z" stampe on 4/27/67.

Back then, we were not sure of the meaning and there were a few ideas floarting around.
Our current theory (SRG) follows along that date, as we have reviewed many more cars VIN plates.
In just about every case all the cars have the Z stamping.
Any exception were likely missed, just like the door tags that were not removed on a few cars.
We think this was the start of the Ford takeover and a method of noting which cars were now on Ford's accounting.
Many other details suggest this to be true, such as invoices sent to Ford by SAI to capture as many $$$ as possbile before that time.


Not thinking that at all.  Merely suggesting that the car might have been inspected by someone at the California DMV.  That inspector may have noticed the Z on the VIN plate and made it part of the VIN for registration purposes even though it is not designated on the factory invoice.  The California DMV has always marched to a beat of a different drum when it comes to car registrations.  The rules even vary between DMV agents.  One never knows what the California DMV might do on any given day.

Hi greekz,
Sorry I missunderstood your reply. Thanks for the clarification reply. (I did notice your comments in the linked in post.
Your reply sounds all to familiar with unwrittten rules, designated by location.
We are trying to look at any unregestered cars from California (nearly impossible to find) for how they were initially documented.

(The derailment cars likely all had a Z stamp with the completion dates in May)

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 171