SAAC Forum

I'm looking for (4) headlight retaining rings (stainless part that holds light in bucket) I have some but would like to find better ones

Quote from: J_Speegle on August 11, 2023, 05:06:16 PM

Quote from: imming1965 on August 11, 2023, 03:13:51 PM
....... if someone has proof of this or came across this the info would be great. if you have a can in the 1400's that has not been restored can you please look inside your lower scoops and if you see the rivets going inward I would like to see the pictures

Yes have seen this before but on only a very few and never looked into it before this to see if there was a pattern. You have two examples in pictures and I have at least one more with pictures to document this practice or experiment by Shelby. Would suggest that you don't focus on cars in the #1400's but on cars completed at Shelby in very early (or around that period) April 67. Example I found in a quick search was a car from the 900's but has a Shelby date of 4/3/67

Why they tried this, who knows. Really does not have to make sense to us today but instead our task is to document and come to the acceptance or non-acceptance of where the facts and clues lead us.

Think we've discovered another running change to add to the ton of others. Will post a picture later. Appears IMHO that the common factor is the large headed rivets used similar to the ones for the front fiberglass to front cross member or the stud retainers in the other version since they are not like what most shops or owners could easily find at the corner hardware store in the day.

Added. Shows the two piece design and the rivet head and stems used to attach. Very unrestored car though not in the best condition but that did not affect the fiberglass nor the ducting, ducts or attaching holes found

thanks Jeff, it didn't seem to be a re due to me either, I hope we will get more people to look at their cars in the early April time frame and see how many we can find. when i did 1453 back in 07 I wasn't sure about the side scoops because car had been worked on but not restored and I didn't have as much knowledge about 67 back then.

here are a few picture of driver side also. please I'm not trying to be argumentative just seeing something different than I remember. after going back and looking at 1453 pictures I believe it was the same way, but back in '07 when I did that car, it was the first 67 i had restored, I didn't know any different, and the car have been worked on and painted and taken apart at some time before and messed with so it didn't seem odd. if someone has proof of this or came across this the info would be great. if you have a can in the 1400's that has not been restored can you please look inside your lower scoops and if you see the rivets going inward I would like to see the pictures

 4/6/67 or even weeks earlier seem late for a functional lower brake scoop. Regardless it is a very unconventional installation of riveting on a base and then gluing on a painted scoop onto the base. It seems very problematic installation let alone replacement from a accident etc. . There must be information missing that would make sense out of all of this.
[/quote] I restored #1453 back in 2007 which was completed on 4/6/67 and it was a inboard and functional lower scoops. I went  back through the few pictures I took of that car and realized the lower scoops were the installed the same. it looks to me that there must have been some cars that had the scoops installed this way. two pieces, inner was installed then outer was glued on after...only way it makes sense as to why rivets are the direction they are, also if you look at inside of scoops they appear to be glued together very crude and not attached before installed.
       the picture below with black painted inside quarter is from 1453 and you can see it is installed with rivet coming from outside, unfortunately I do not have any other pictures of these scoops because I was not as good at taking picture in '07 as I am today

Quote from: JD on August 10, 2023, 10:50:43 PM
Have not seen that method of attaching (riveting) lower or upper scoops to the body. 

Very atypical, if taking them off the car it would be interested in seeing the hidden part (just because).

Are there any typical or atypical part numbers on these - both sides the same??

JD, it is very weird way but I'm not seeing the typical larger holes for the studs, it like the only way these would have been installed is in two pieces, I posted right left side on reply to bob and here are the right side pictures

Quote from: Bob Gaines on August 10, 2023, 07:20:33 PM

Quote from: imming1965 on August 10, 2023, 05:50:42 PM
Has anyone seen lower scoops attached like this? I'm restoring this January 67 gt350 with functional lower scoops and I can not figure out how these were installed the way they are. I can only assume the inner part was installed and then the outer part was glued on. because there is no way to get rivet gun inside scoops to install the rivets??? quarters are original and it appears the scoops have never been taken off and reinstalled. anyone seen these scoops installed this way before? any ideas or thoughts?

At least not taken off since the forever scoops were installed.   I haven't seen one done the way described. It seems strange that there were successful scoop installs before a January 67 build and after that didn't include gluing together a scoop on the car which would seem counter intuitive to efficiency IMO.

car was "completed" according to registry on 4/6/67 not January as I thought. I understand your skepticism Bob, i have those same thoughts on everything that doesn't seem normal or done like normal. i just going by what I'm seeing in person. the quarters are original to the car, like I said the scoops do not look like they have been changed, that is just my opinion from what I'm seeing in person. the scoops are original. the holes that were drilled in quarter were only drilled big enough for the rivets and not for studs

Has anyone seen lower scoops attached like this? i'm restoring this january 67 gt350 with funcational lower scoops and i can not figure out how these were installed the way they are. i can only assume the inner part was installed and then the outer part was glued on. because there is no way to get rivet gun inside scoops to install the rivets??? quarters are original and it appears the scoops have never been taken off and reinstalled. anyone seen these scoops installed this way before? any ideas or thoughts?

Quote from: Richstang on January 19, 2023, 02:24:29 PM

Quote from: imming1965 on January 19, 2023, 12:17:47 PM
car build date is actually 4/12/67 and not march as I stated, I was mistaken that scheduled date was 3/20/67, sorry for confusion...

The car 'Imming1965' is working on was built at SJ 4/12/67    and completed by SAI 5/19/67


R

thanks Rich for the clarification, I often wondered that...
     With all the variations of tail light panels and trim bezels and inner brackets, did any car with the raised panel come with stud version of trim ring? Or is that the same time they started using screw on type trim bezels? Because what I am seeing/working with, I cant make these stud version work with raised panel and shallow inner brackets that are supposed to be correct with raised panel.

car build date is actually 4/12/67 and not march as I stated, I was mistaken that scheduled date was 3/20/67, sorry for confusion...

Quote from: Bob Gaines on January 17, 2023, 11:11:37 PM
Can you take a side profile shot of the end of ether tail light box?

This is the best I can get right now. It is the later flat style from what has been said already.

Quote from: Bob Gaines on January 17, 2023, 04:05:30 PM

Quote from: imming1965 on January 17, 2023, 03:17:27 PM
    Bob, Jeff or JD, can you give me some kind of idea of the period(group of cars) that would have been the change over from studded trim rings to screw mounted trim rings???
     Bob there is not any obstruction that is not letting panel go tight to body (buckets are bottomed out on inner brackets), these are not the original parts from this car, its been worked on before me, that is why I believe I have the wrong mix of parts. I believe the issue I'm having is I need the deeper inner brackets which I believe would correct this issue, I also want to make sure I have the correct taillight panel and trim bezels for this particular car. I don't know which pieces the last person working on it car used from original and which ones they replaced.

It may have to do with how the Cougar light base and how it fits in the fiberglass panel. The stud bezel was discontinued about the time of the raised taillight panel. SA was trying to fix a hand full of problems at the same time. In the case of the bezel it was broken studs during lens replacement. In the case of the tail panel ,the raised panel was integral to the narrow boxes so as to move the assembly further out of the trunk space and give more room for the spare tire to fit. I know others have solved their fit problem with the wider boxes and this would be a simple solution for you however that is not how SA did it that is if you are going for historical accuracy. The narrow boxes where made to pair with the raised panel and the wider boxes were made to pair with the flat tail panel. There is apparently something else causing your fit problem given that original tail panels and the original boxes are made to work with each other. I am not sure if this applies to your situation or not but we all know how repro parts typically fit.

Bob the parts I have are all original parts and not aftermarket but not sure which ones are original to this particular car, I'm guess if the inner buckets I have are original to this car that I should be using the screw mounted trim bezels, and i say this because the way the stud mounted bezels attach to the fiberglass panel is the reason i can not get the fiberglass panel to go back and meet up to the body of car.

Here is pictures of 2845 May '67 build I believe.
     It has shallow inner brackets, taillight panel with raised lip, and trim bezel with screws.  This combination works and was original. I'm thinking I either have to use deeper inner bracket or trim bezels with screws. I don't think they work together in any way.
      So basically the question I need help answering is does this March '67 build i'm assembling now, use trim bezel with studs or with screws? knowing that will help me determine which parts I need to replace to make this assembly go on car correctly???
      another question does the stud type bezels only go the the early flat tail panels or were thay also used on the taillight panels that have raised lip also?

thanks JD, I like the info you gave, it helps...

    Bob, Jeff or JD, can you give me some kind of idea of the period(group of cars) that would have been the change over from studded trim rings to screw mounted trim rings???
     Bob there is not any obstruction that is not letting panel go tight to body (buckets are bottomed out on inner brackets), these are not the original parts from this car, its been worked on before me, that is why I believe I have the wrong mix of parts. I believe the issue I'm having is I need the deeper inner brackets which I believe would correct this issue, I also want to make sure I have the correct taillight panel and trim bezels for this particular car. I don't know which pieces the last person working on it car used from original and which ones they replaced.

I'm having an fitment issue on the taillight assembly for a  1967 Shelby I am currently restoring. I'm looking for several answers for basically the same question
    I pretty sure I have the wrong combination of parts and that's why it's not fitting correctly. And I also already know as most of us with these cars, that are are several changes and versions to deal with according to when it was built..
      I am working on March built car and need to know correct version of taillight panel, trim type and inner bracket combination for that time frame?
     I have raised panel, taillight panel with studded trim bezel with flat  or L shaped inner bracket now and as in picture below you can see it doesn't want to go far enough in to pop rivet up. So I'm guessing I need the other inner brackets to fix this issue. But I want to make sure I have the correct outer parts for when car was built....
      Could use some knowledge of this taillight changes and combinations of parts, thanks Jeremy