5S208 - on Bring A Trailer

[J_Speegle]

Are you saying it is NOT a real GT 350?

I almost asked "what is a "real GT350" was but thought that might reflect too directly on this specific car and auctions so let me try to respond the following way respectfully


Replying in general and not specifically about this particular auction or car.

The term "real Shelby/GT350" has come up many times before on this site as well as personal discussions  and there is not a clear universal description of what this means. Like "matching numbers" "restored" "rebuilt" and so on it depends on who is using the term and their definition IMHO. And why you have to, at times ask the speaker or questioner what they mean exactly by their use of the term.

For some they might describe a real Shelby as a car with every part and finish exactly as it came from the factory with no repairs or replacements. For others they might just be happy calling a car a "real Shelby" as having one of the three Ford VINs and a reproduction Shelby VIN tag attached to a body.

Again NOT referring to the car the thread is about and only continuing the line of discussion above. This always goes towards the discussion as to how much of a car can be repaired or replaced before it's "no longer a REAL Shelby" Same personal opinions come into play again with no common agreement to what that percentage is by everyone involved with the cars, business and hobby.

Best scenario is when there is full disclosure and as much information about the car's current condition, history and details as possible are provided through multiple ways to a potential buyer so that they can apply their personal definition as well as determining if the car is "right" for them.   

[Bob Gaines]

It's really too bad on how a car like this can go so sideways. All the seller had to do do was represent it for what it was. A 65 that had some race history. Was restored with some sheet metal work from 66. Has some R-model flare. Possibly has the tranny and engine from 5R211 and call it what it is. I particularly like that sort of stuff. My 66 was restored by Jim C in 1990 and we put a bunch on "non-correct" 65 / 65 R-model bits on it. I love it. Had I not been 1 year old in 66 and was buying a 66 new, these are some of the day 2 things I would have done. The reason being.... I drive it and enjoy it. There are 2 types of buyers, right? The originality "concourse" buyer who buys for the "investment" or the guy who buys for the pleasure of driving and enjoying. Neither is better than the other, but 2 different buyers. I think had the seller gone the "racing" driving route, this was a slam dunk car for the right buyer. I wish I had the cash to buy, at the right price, this is an awesome looking / sounding driver. The problem here is, the seller is looking for it to be an investment " best of all " car.... and it's not that. You guys here on the Forum do an awesome job informing everyone of the "investment" component shortfalls on many of the cars listed on the internet. I don't know why anyone buying any Shelby without having someone with extensive knowledge review that car and disclose what's not correct. Especially on a 65 where many of those components are just not available anymore. The potential buyer who walked away did just that after JB apparently got a cramp in his hand from the length of that list. Keep up the fight, as without you guys pointing this stuff out, the used car salesmen take over! Jeff-

You were hard pressed to find any 65 GT350 that didn't have some R model add on's up until about 20 years ago. About that time was when the emphasis progressed from race heritage to more assemblyline stock. Just a change in emphasis driven by resale price IMO. Now you only find tribute cars built with those add on's. Too bad the seller given the documents has to be ether clueless or tried to misrepresented the concours status on purpose. I will give him the benefit of the doubt and say he is clueless . When you try to make outlandish claims of high scoring concours as with this auction did with a car which is nether a high standard of concours correct historical details for a R model (which it is not ) or a stock street model (which it is) EXPECT push back from others that know better. If you think about the guys that go the extra mile to make their cars live up to those high originality standards it is a insult to those people (restoration shops and owners) when a car like the one in the auction (which is no doubt a excellent car in its own slightly modified condition) that is not very close to the claim of a car built to historical accurate stock standards claims that it is . It diminishes the hard work of others who have done the work more correctly.

[terlingua11]

15 min left over on BAT

[davez]

Says bid to 325k so no sale

[5s386]

Is there anyone, besides myself, that has seen the before and after pictures of the 2004 restoration?

[Bill Collins]

Is there anyone, besides myself, that has seen the before and after pictures of the 2004 restoration?

I owned #208 in 2006 - I am in the chain of title in the Registry.

I recall that I have a file on it but it is apparently in the deep archives. The car came to me after its earlier first "restoration" but not fully sorted out. I know it had a passenger door window to roof rail alignment problem that no one up to that point had been able to correct but we fixed it. I displayed it at the Atlantic City show in February of 2006. It was a nice car and fun to drive, not concours material at that point.

I believe there may be some print photos in my file showing it "as found" before any of the early work was done, plus maybe some other descriptive material. If anyone is seriously interested in the car, I invite you to contact me and I can try to find the file.

bill@bcfords.com
717- 558-9000