SAAC Forum

Just guessing but the problem may be a new one if the supplier of the hose is not metric and or the walls are now being made thinner.  Don't recall this being a major issue that had been asked in the past

Quote from: kingchief on June 27, 2018, 03:26:18 PM
Photos are always good!

Here are a few to assist with the discussion. Labeled each so discussing/referencing a particular one is easier

Header #1



Header #2



Header #3



Header #4



Header #5



Header #6

Quote from: Bob Gaines on June 26, 2018, 04:25:24 PM
Just to be clear I agree some early rear battery cars did not have the clips riveted to the floor to hold the jack and the handle/handles. I don't believe all were done that way without .   

+1

Thanks guys for all the kind comments. Hope many find these helpful 220 views and I don't know how many downloads within 24 hours is pretty good. Remember that there are always updates and corrections, seems never ending in an effort to keep the best info out there, so always check for a new version before you apply anything

Quote from: Doug C on June 25, 2018, 11:16:11 AM
One question would this information be correct for a 66? 

Might want to check here I posted the 66 version on SAAC also since the demise of the old forum

http://www.saacforum.com/index.php?topic=380.msg1914#msg1914

Next up will be 67 San Jose .....go figure    Then moving on to 68 NJ ........ I see a pattern here lol

There was one on Craig's list last year. Unrestored and they were not asking much. Passed on it

Next chapter/article as promised.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Not specifically a 65 Shelby's only document but our cars share the same details as a Mustang produced there if you pay attention to production periods.  You will note that it does not reflect the changes/modifications made at SA but those are few in this part of the assembly of the cars. Hope this helps others


This is an article I've written and rewritten a dozen times over many years. Found it was easier to have a prepared document when I got questions related to the subject rather than going through the whole thing every time. It proved to be a challenge as your always discovering new details, sub patterns and such along the way so it has only been share privately in the past since I never felt it was finished. Not sure anything I do is completely

Also just limiting the coverage to one area of the car was sort of difficult when you want to help and describe everything that was going on at that point at the car plant.  See allot of related requests here so thought it would be a good time to try and wrap it up then focus on some of the other years and plants. Hope some here find it useful in there related endeavors.

This one is still marked as a draft. Will be updates as new information is discovered and accepted as well as mistakes, typos and such are found which I'm sure many of you will find.  I invite anyone to send me typos and issues since these all sort of start looking very similar and plenty of other things going on that can take my focus away just at the wrong time

https://docdro.id/ZJzg67n


For those that are also members of CMF the article is also located in the Library there with all the other articles listed by model year

Its a Big file with plenty of pictures so will take some time to load. Be patient 

Hope it helps others

Thanks for looking

During 1967 production Ford had a problem with the new 390 Mustangs with the new 70 series (wide oval)  tires and at one point issued a Special Service Letter stating they would start rolling fenders on cars equipped with those tires and for dealers with cars in stock and customer cars (if they complained) to use the base ball bat trick to roll the edges but not fold them over. This was not like the 69 Boss 302 rolling of fenders by the plant since in 67 they didn't insert a arched rod in the edge/fold to keep it from folding over.

http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/index.php?topic=16529.msg103485#msg103485

Quote from: Bob Gaines on June 22, 2018, 01:14:27 PM
.............The assemblyline type open emmision base came with one small 1/8 nipple that was plugged. It was located in the same area that the larger nipple was located on at . I believe we have discussed this before after the big crash.

Posted this on the CMF a couple of weeks ago. Figured it would help here also. Not certain what other applications is was used on - notice what appears to be an old gold paint job. Hope this helps

Quote from: gt350cs on June 19, 2018, 03:29:31 PM
Jeff,

It was the link that you provided. I clicked on it again and a number of pictures were now visible that did not work before.

However I could not see the pictures in post number 13. I will try again later, it may just be my computer.

That was TOBKOB that share a link to one of the threads related to the restoration but in any case feed back is helpful since my computer shows all of the pictures and if someone can't we need to address that issue if its on our end

Reply #13 in that thread was posted by the owner Dan and doesn't include any pictures

Quote from: gt350cs on June 19, 2018, 02:06:42 PM
Jeff,

Thanks for the VIN. I did look at your site and saw several pictures. However a number of pictures do not show.

Odd since I though the new management at PhotoBucket had removed the blocks.  If you can identify the thread and even the post I will rebuild the post so that pictures can be seen.  Just part of the job     Without photos its not as helpful and have rebuilt many during the PhotoBucket mess .

The article is new though the restoration is now about 7 years old. As I understand it was first published on Mustang 360 a couple of days ago and now picked up by other internet car sites.  I understand its going to be in Mustang Monthly in the coming months

As far as identifying the car it's -481897.  During the research we discovered is/was one of the first cars to get the "big" suspension 69's. We also found that Ford saved a few dollars by slapping on the narrower earlier tires on the cars that they leased to Hertz. Car presently has the wider tires though. I posted allot of pictures of the build when it was being restored and those threads have become very popular with one getting over 11,000 views so far.

Guess we should ask, rather than assume, what transmission your running just to establish a base line to work from

Quote from: Bossbill on June 18, 2018, 05:54:06 PM
Since there is a many month lead time between head introduction and delivery of the car this suggests that some HiPo engines may have been delivered in the April/May (or even later) time frame with the C7ZE plugged heads if the supply of T/E heads was greater than non-T/E heads.

I think this may be an assumption without a basis.  Many things "could" have happened but the availability of parts does not mean IMHO that something did take place.  Not like the plant could not just make more head or would use heads designed for another application in the middle of the production year. Just saying

I've not see evidence of this on Hipo nor non-hipos delivered to states and regions that didn't require thermactor systems over 40 plus years

Ones I have from in the trunk on 66 San Jose cars are normally long gone and as described. Circle reinforcement for the tag and the wire. One attached to the trunk spring, one attached to one of the inner trunk panel passenger side, one attached to the inner structure drivers side. Another example from  67 was sandwiched (welded) between the wheel house reinforcement bracket and the divider panel it appears

So no good hanging tag pictures from me at the moment from 66 trunk. The OK for shipment tag has been reproduced a few times in the past. Have seen it printed on a couple of different colored paper also

Quote from: J_Speegle on June 12, 2018, 07:43:10 PM
Likely the remains of a READY FOR SHIPPING tag (or similar wording).

A little correct to be more accurate

Have also seen and or found  (in addition to the one Bob G posted)

ROUTE TAG

IN PLANT OK

TEST STAND OK

INSTRUCTIONS FOR LEAKAGE TEST