Fake Shelby for auction

[Coralsnake]

"Its for decoration"

https://bringatrailer.com/listing/1966-ford-mustang-fastback-100/

Quite honestly dealers selling this stuff should have their licenses suspended

Just my opinion, others are probably not thinking clearly

[CharlesTurner]

 

Makes no sense at all for a '65 number plate to be on a tribute '66.

[Coralsnake]

I appreciate you 😉

[HistoryBuff]

If the VIN number has been altered, the FBI will have something to say about that. I do think having id plate  for a '65 someplace is misleading--maybe a later buyer won't know it started out as a '66. And as for it coming from a state where not a title is not necessary, that's mighty convenient! All a fraudster has to do i get it re-tiled as a '65 to raise is value...

[6R07mi]

I'm no expert to the level others are here,
   but i have strong suspicions the door tag (reproduction) codes don't reflect how the car was built !

Why would a Dearborn built car be sold to the San Jose district when the Milpas plant was churning out cars by 1966?
C engine code 289 2v with a 4 speed is not common,  more likely a 3 sp. or C4 auto
Locking diff axle with 289 2v, ....... I'm not buying that either .....  just say'in

6F09C170159 -

Body 63A — Fastback w/standard interior
Color M — Wimbledon White paint
Trim 26 — Black interior w/black trim
Date 02C — Built March 2, 1966
DSO 72 — San Jose district sales office
Axle A — 3.00 locking differential
Trans 5 — Four-speed manual transmission

jim p

[8T03S1425]

I wonder how the current owner of 5S146 feels about a reproduction VIN tag, stamped as being 5S146, being used on a tribute, as decoration and what recourse (s)he has?

[FL SAAC]

simply scandalous  !

[CharlesTurner]

The door plate codes are likely a fabrication since it's a reproduction plate.

5S146 is still around, according to registry, restored in 2008.  I sent a message to Howard with the info...

[carlite65]

I'm no expert to the level others are here,
   but i have strong suspicions the door tag (reproduction) codes don't reflect how the car was built !

Why would a Dearborn built car be sold to the San Jose district when the Milpas plant was churning out cars by 1966?
C engine code 289 2v with a 4 speed is not common,  more likely a 3 sp. or C4 auto
Locking diff axle with 289 2v, ....... I'm not buying that either .....  just say'in

6F09C170159 -

Body 63A — Fastback w/standard interior
Color M — Wimbledon White paint
Trim 26 — Black interior w/black trim
Date 02C — Built March 2, 1966
DSO 72 — San Jose district sales office
Axle A — 3.00 locking differential
Trans 5 — Four-speed manual transmission

jim p

i have seen this several times. completely legit. it depended on who had all the parts on hand to fill the order when the order was entered. agreed it was not the norm but did happen.

[67 GT350]

Shame on BAT....How come SAAC has not contacted BAT? Or have they?

[Side-Oilers]

Where's the robot from Lost in Space when we need it?   

"Danger, Will Robinson! Danger!"

[98SVT - was 06GT]

It's being sold on the Ford VIN. They show the FORD VIN. They should just toss the SA tag in the trash.
I also doubt from the lousy stamping job on the engine that it's not really a K block.

[CharlesTurner]

I also doubt from the lousy stamping job on the engine that it's not really a K block.

Looks like a coupe Dearborn VIN, which were usually crooked like that.

[557]

Too bad,looks like a pretty faithful replica,nice car.Why they had to screw that up Will the silly vin tag....

[557]

But,honestly, they had me at "Shelby branded fire extinguisher ".LOL