SAAC Forum

Quote from: Bob Gaines on January 29, 2021, 12:39:26 PM

Quote from: 427hunter on January 29, 2021, 10:57:48 AM

Quote from: Bob Gaines on January 27, 2021, 06:27:53 PM

Quote from: gt350hr on January 27, 2021, 03:41:49 PM
   The more I look , the more I see. AGAIN I am not picking the car apart , just the description. BTW cross members were dipped in black and black plastic hole plugs weren't painted over with under body paint. This is not a "money " thing.

Are you talking about the painted over black plastic plugs in the replacement sheetmetal 67-70 trunk drop off panels ?   

Bob you have a really good eye, I missed the 67/70 drop off panels... Everyday on the SAAC forum I learn more and more you basically need to start inspecting a car from one end to another and point by point.

Thank you for the compliment. I have had some good teachers over the years. I am glad you gleaned some useful insight from my sarcastic remark which was meant to get a smile . I don't like over hyped descriptions of cars. Yes these cars need to be scrutinized so that there are minimal surprises especially when purchasing. The vast majority have been messed with and you just don't know what has done until you study them. The trunk drop off is a very common place where people fudge a proper repair on a 65/66. .

Well I apricate the education being given here, Thanks!

Quote from: Bob Gaines on January 27, 2021, 06:27:53 PM

Quote from: gt350hr on January 27, 2021, 03:41:49 PM
   The more I look , the more I see. AGAIN I am not picking the car apart , just the description. BTW cross members were dipped in black and black plastic hole plugs weren't painted over with under body paint. This is not a "money " thing.

Are you talking about the painted over black plastic plugs in the replacement sheetmetal 67-70 trunk drop off panels ?   

Bob you have a really good eye, I missed the 67/70 drop off panels... Everyday on the SAAC forum I learn more and more you basically need to start inspecting a car from one end to another and point by point.

Quote from: J_Speegle on January 27, 2021, 10:45:38 PM

Quote from: 427hunter on January 27, 2021, 06:08:19 PM
Rather then play word games, lets stick to the font. Do you have an example to provide ?

P.S. it would stand to reason that if similar date coded parts arrived at SJ for k code assembly to fill orders for cars sent to Shelby, the font should be the same.  This is why I am asking for someone to post some date codes of 65 SJ cars. Both above examples are from GT350's with very close date codes yet the car that was said to have inner fender work has different font, other examples may shed some light on this discussion.

Sorry didn't mean for the post to come across that way.


Yes agree that the font details should be the same from, the same stamping plant - the reason for the earlier post. Sorry didn't mean for the post to come across that way. Other Mustangs T through K built  Mustangs around the same time could have received radiator supports stamped at Cleveland the same day and included in the shipment to San Jose.  They are stamped from the engine side so they can be difficult to read or even find since the battery and tray can be in the way. During 65 were also located lower and differently orientated from the period where they were vertical as shown in the picture. During the days when they were stamping these panels they may have used multiple die sets with different date lug locations but have not run across that yet.

You will find Cleveland stamping plant also provided hood and trunk assemblies as well as floors during 65 if your looking for other locations to check

Thank you very much, I am glad to hear it just read that way to me, I really apricate the clarification.

To the font issue, I have not seen different fonts from the same plant. You have a lot more expertise then I do, have you seen different fonts from the same plant?

Also so far I can not find an example with an underscored number 1 or that shape letter C, further investigation is needed, hopefully some 65 and carryover owners can post some photos of the date code fonts on their car.

Quote from: J_Speegle on January 27, 2021, 06:06:16 PM

Quote from: 427hunter on January 27, 2021, 05:18:44 PM
This is the number font I would expect to see on a SJ date code these cars are 5 days apart.

Believe you meant to write "these two parts have dates 5 days apart" We don't really know when either were really completed. It's the date stamp that is the focus

As you have likely found front inner fender panels were stamped at another plant

Rather then play word games, lets stick to the font. Do you have an example to provide ?

P.S. it would stand to reason that if similar date coded parts arrived at SJ for k code assembly to fill orders for cars sent to Shelby, the font should be the same.  This is why I am asking for someone to post some date codes of 65 SJ cars. Both above examples are from GT350's with very close date codes yet the car that was said to have inner fender work has different font, other examples may shed some light on this discussion.

That looks like a no question, well cared for, original solid car.

This is the number font I would expect to see on a SJ date code these cars are 5 days apart.

vs the 65 in question.

Quote from: J_Speegle on January 27, 2021, 04:16:21 PM

Quote from: 427hunter on January 27, 2021, 03:45:58 PM
Do other 1965 date code number ones have an underscore like this? Or a number two without the little curl up at the end of the underscore?

Can someone who owns a 65 post the number font used.

If your going down that path suggest examples focus on same stamping plant and time period just to be sure

I agree - someone with a SJ 65 please post front inner Sheetmetal 1,2,3 and the letter C please..

Quote from: Coralsnake on January 27, 2021, 12:11:13 PM

Do other 1965 date code number ones have an underscore like this? Or a number two without the little curl up at the end of the underscore?

Can someone who owns a 65 post the number font used.

Quote from: 2112 on January 26, 2021, 02:34:07 PM

Quote from: 427hunter on January 26, 2021, 12:01:55 PM


It could be some optical illusion from the photo or paint work - whatever it is we would need to know if other gt350's have vins that far offset.

I think the star is affected by the paint. They look the same to my eye.

Do a layover with your computer then let me know what you think...

Quote from: shelbymann1970 on January 26, 2021, 10:59:30 AM

Quote from: 427hunter on January 25, 2021, 07:59:08 PM
Here is a k code vin..


The star on the gt350 vin does not appear the same as the other two.

All those stars appear to be the same  Ford unique star stamp to me. Why do you think they are different? A "star within a star" stamp. Do you think the star looks bigger in the "089"s pic.

Look at the size, shape and imprint of the star on the gt350 compared to the other two, they are not the same. You can do a layover with your computer.

It could be some optical illusion from the photo or paint work - whatever it is we would need to know if other gt350's have vins that far offset.

If the car did have inner fender work to accommodate a 427 it would explain things not lining up - either way the car is the car, lots of things happen over the years...

Here is a k code vin..


The star on the gt350 vin does not appear the same as the other two.

Compare San Jose 65 vin star on this t code San Jose car I found on the internet to the 65 gt350 star.

Quote from: camp upshur on January 25, 2021, 01:50:00 PM
1. I hold the ideal of a Registry in high regard. I refer to it frequently;
2. The Registry is a published document, widely referenced with presumptive credibility, with a Registrar, put out by a for profit organization. It is widely quoted in other media and auctions as a definitive source;
3. I full realize the registrar cannot authenticate every 'voluntary' submission. And I am all for getting information 'out there' and have no problem in putting info out unchecked initially. However, I do feel there is a de minimus editorial duty of fact checking when specific *significant* issues are brought to the Registrar's attention. While not exactly a 'reposing special trust and confidence' the Registrar's imprimatur can destroy the fidelity of your car and it's resultant value which is one of the reasons the name of the Registrar (whomever it may be)  is accorded credibility and elan throughout our hobby;
4. My previous posting had three announced sources: the Registry, the SAAC forum, and my personal inspection.  I did not ask anybody to believe me: my post reports -with specificity-  what I saw, what the Registry and forum have printed and implores any interested parties to make there own analyses;
5. '427 Hunter' you need, like a big boy, to get out there and check for yourself before you question someone (such as I have done regarding the Registry's description of 5S089), but, as a courtesy, I will herein post some unpublished images if 5S089's shock towers/ front clip attachment detail.

Steve Algorri
SFM5S339

Addendum:
Vern, I will resist into being drawn in to any ad hominem duel. My concern is the fidelity of the Registry and the Registrar, whomever ever it may be. I bear no individual any animus. To the degree a name has been used it has been within a quoted quote, and/or penned by others. This is an important distinction. My concern is the relationship between the car and the Registry.  Steve

Ha ha ha, you will "resist ad hominem attacks" and then you use them.... to quote the princess bride "You keep using that word; I do not think it means what you think it means."

From the photo's looks like a solid car needing a lot of clean up from the humid southern weather. If you know the owner you should advise him to spend the money to have a professional do surface rust removal and paint detailing under the hood etc, it would add untold thousands to the value of the car and make it far more sellable.

I sent a pm to the consigner and he said is going to post photo's in this thread of the date codes on the inner fenders, better photo's of the tag (also checking to see if the lettering is raised or not) and a clear photo of the exposed portion of the vin number.

No offense to "camp Upshur" but it would be very strange to disregard the registry and what we can see as potential issues based on his statement without any evidence to support it - in effect he is doing the same thing he is complaining about with the registry - making a statement without any proof.

I don't know why "Camp Upshur" has bad blood is with the registry, but on two 67's and one 66 that I looked to buy in the past, the information given was spot on correct and saved me from buying air cars.