SAAC Forum

Quote from: Corey Bowcutt on August 14, 2021, 02:20:17 PM

Quote from: The Going Thing on August 14, 2021, 04:27:05 AM
They're billet 17X7 one-off to replicate the 1967 hubcaps. They are not the legendary-Drake wheels Illustrated. They're 3K a set.

So Kieth was that your car?

No, Corey, it is not.

If it was I would know all I would like to about those outrageously beautiful wheels!!

I remain very impressed with the wherewithal of whomever came up with that brilliant idea. I want one just for display since I don't have a '67 (yet!).

Quote from: deathsled on August 13, 2021, 03:08:24 PM
Agreed. 98SVT nailed it.

   

I have already posted this question in the SAAC 46 Convention thread, but thought I would also start a separate thread on it that may get more attention...

Who knows more about the beautiful wheels on this GT 500:



They look OUTSTANDING!!! They appear to be aluminum wheels CNC machined to replicate the 1967 Shelby hubcap!

Does someone here know the car - can you point me to the owner - or ask him for more info - like who made them, etc., etc.

Thanks,
Kieth

Can anyone offer some more information on these extraordinarily beautiful wheels:



I could hardly believe my eyes!
Has someone actually had CNC machined billet aluminum wheels made that look like 1967 Shelby hubcaps??

OUTSTANDING if so!!!

Thanks,
Kieth

Quote from: Bob Gaines on August 07, 2021, 03:44:17 PM

Quote from: SFM66H on August 07, 2021, 01:20:57 PM
Hi Cory,

I had made this captioned comparison photo of my emblems and posted it on Forum v1, but it was lost into cyberspace along with everything else after the big meltdown.

As stated by others here, the original emblem that I removed from my car in 1977 is the machined version shown at the bottom, and the one on top with the ejection pin marks is a late production / early service part.

Kieth

Kieth ,I would like to point out that there are early service parts and later service parts. Both emblems were in the Ford service system .Through attrition one replaced the other. I have had NOS (early service)versions of the earlier style with the machined backside and NOS versions of the (later service) of the later style with the mold marks. So that there is no misunderstanding NOS in this context is understood as New Old Stock which is a service part and not a part taken off a car in excellent shape unlike what some people like to assign incorrectly.

Okay - Thanks Bob.
So, you've had both emblem versions shown in my photo, and both of them are considered to be NOS/service parts.

What I'm wondering about then, is which version would be considered to be an "assembly line" emblem? Is it correct to say that the machined version is an "assembly line" emblem?

Hi Cory,

I had made this captioned comparison photo of my emblems and posted it on Forum v1, but it was lost into cyberspace along with everything else after the big meltdown.

As stated by others here, the original emblem that I removed from my car in 1977 is the machined version shown at the bottom, and the one on top with the ejection pin marks is a late production / early service part.

Kieth

Quote from: Szabo on April 29, 2021, 03:48:20 PM
Hello Kieth,

i am a little late for the party, but i hope i can help you ...

The Articel was in the Riverside Raceway Septembre 1965 issue, it was a 4 Site articel with
very impressive pics from the Super Coupe inside LAX on an unkown spot

and shows some nice Pics from inside the Race Hangar and the machines and parts used

Have fun

Stephan

Hey Stephan,

I'm having fun NOW! What a nice score you made!!

I have no idea how you knew about the source of that article, that's just amazing to me. I had searched all over and sent several emails to recommended sources, all with no replies whatsoever.

Boy, how I would like to get my hands on that race program to do some nice scans of the article. But just knowing the source now is a very fulfilling start.

Much appreciated - Thanks again very much,
Kieth

And then there's this theory (note the Shelby features!):

I'd say you don't need that advice though!

It's a four page article about the rebuilding of the front suspension on a 1965 Mustang.

It's astonishing to me that this Mustang strut rod information is not included in the 1965 or 1966 Ford SHOP Manual, so I'm coming here for confirmation, and to share the word of what (to me) is a rather important piece of install information. The flattened end of the strut rod is at a different angle on each side, depending on whether the reference mark faces up or down. This applies to only the 65-66 strut rods, as '67 and up are a completely different design and can only be installed one way.

Marcus Anghel's excellent suspension guide shows/states that the cast "slash mark" on the strut rod faces down when installed (I say correct). But next month's Hemmings Motor News shows/states just the opposite (I say wrong).

Responses from the experts here on the SAAC Forum should make this an important future reference for all strut rod servicers/installers.

Thanks,
Kieth 


_________________________________________________________________

Here is 6S1615's original San Jose assembly line battery post shield and plastic push pins.
It was shipped to Hi-Performance Motors on 3/31/66:

1. 6S1615
2. (O) Open
3. (A) No web
4. (I) Impact
5. (L) Long
6. (C) Chrome

Quote from: 6s1640 on February 16, 2021, 02:19:36 PM
Hi all,

Here is a correction on one of the images with labeling.  Thanks Keith, you pass the test.  I also added images to show closed and open loop on the latch.  Hope that helps.

Cory

Thanks Cory - all good now!

Kieth