5S089 on Craigslist

[J_Speegle]

Rather then play word games, lets stick to the font. Do you have an example to provide ?

P.S. it would stand to reason that if similar date coded parts arrived at SJ for k code assembly to fill orders for cars sent to Shelby, the font should be the same.  This is why I am asking for someone to post some date codes of 65 SJ cars. Both above examples are from GT350's with very close date codes yet the car that was said to have inner fender work has different font, other examples may shed some light on this discussion.

Sorry didn't mean for the post to come across that way.


Yes agree that the font details should be the same from, the same stamping plant - the reason for the earlier post. Sorry didn't mean for the post to come across that way. Other Mustangs T through K built  Mustangs around the same time could have received radiator supports stamped at Cleveland the same day and included in the shipment to San Jose.  They are stamped from the engine side so they can be difficult to read or even find since the battery and tray can be in the way. During 65 were also located lower and differently orientated from the period where they were vertical as shown in the picture. During the days when they were stamping these panels they may have used multiple die sets with different date lug locations but have not run across that yet.

You will find Cleveland stamping plant also provided hood and trunk assemblies as well as floors during 65 if your looking for other locations to check

[carappraiser]

Would it be reasonable to assume that several different stamping machine were used to stamp the same part? with nearly 680k mustangs produced in 1965 i find it hard to imagine one machine stamped every single left front fender apron for example. There must have been dozens of machines stamping the same part, and possibly in several different locations, and therefore different stamps on the same part, after all we see different dates on the same car, so why not different stamps ?

[427hunter]

Rather then play word games, lets stick to the font. Do you have an example to provide ?

P.S. it would stand to reason that if similar date coded parts arrived at SJ for k code assembly to fill orders for cars sent to Shelby, the font should be the same.  This is why I am asking for someone to post some date codes of 65 SJ cars. Both above examples are from GT350's with very close date codes yet the car that was said to have inner fender work has different font, other examples may shed some light on this discussion.

Sorry didn't mean for the post to come across that way.


Yes agree that the font details should be the same from, the same stamping plant - the reason for the earlier post. Sorry didn't mean for the post to come across that way. Other Mustangs T through K built  Mustangs around the same time could have received radiator supports stamped at Cleveland the same day and included in the shipment to San Jose.  They are stamped from the engine side so they can be difficult to read or even find since the battery and tray can be in the way. During 65 were also located lower and differently orientated from the period where they were vertical as shown in the picture. During the days when they were stamping these panels they may have used multiple die sets with different date lug locations but have not run across that yet.

You will find Cleveland stamping plant also provided hood and trunk assemblies as well as floors during 65 if your looking for other locations to check

Thank you very much, I am glad to hear it just read that way to me, I really apricate the clarification.

To the font issue, I have not seen different fonts from the same plant. You have a lot more expertise then I do, have you seen different fonts from the same plant?

Also so far I can not find an example with an underscored number 1 or that shape letter C, further investigation is needed, hopefully some 65 and carryover owners can post some photos of the date code fonts on their car.

[shelbyluva]

Now a no-sale on eBay for $100,100.