French 1966 Carroll Shelby Interview

[J_Speegle]

Following up on your earlier request. First would mention that the form references 71-2502 as the earlier build group but the identification for  this group was 71-2504. Sorry. Lots of numbers and as you have found not all easy to make out

Thank you so much for the excerpt from DSO 71-2502. That's exactly what I've been looking for. Some evidence related to this topic that I was previously unaware of - something new to learn. Yee Ha! The copy you posted is not very clear, and I have to admit I'm not experienced at reading DSO sheets. Would you please devote one of your replies exclusively to explaining what's written there and what it means. Also, I'd like to know the date of that DSO and which 1965 cars it's for. You don't have to reveal the actual SFM numbers if you don't wish. But if you know roughly where those cars fit into the 1965 run that would be helpful. Were they early, middle, or late in the production run of 1965's? Again, thank you for posting that!

As I read the first page  I can make out about 98% of the typed and handwritten details as follows


Top of the form shows SPECIAL ORDER. Some refer to these as Add/Delete, SVO (Special Vehicle Orders) and other terms. We copies of them throughout Shelby production, 69's are the latest I've seen copies of.

ALL SPECIFICATIIONS TO BE IDENTICAL TO DSO 71-2502 EXCEPT AS FOLLOWS:
Two columns to the right show 5393020

- First line text is struck-through with the note STD PER SUPP #1

- Holley carb (xx259?)

- Special intake manifold

- Special fuel line – XXX 9A2774-F (Franklin Products)

- Cast rocker covers LH - C3RA-6582-C  RH – C4RA-6582-A

- Rocker cover washers –(354610- ?40 (?crrett)

- Rocker cover bolts (20364-? (?ird??ll and Ford)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

To the right we see someone grouped these items together and signed off on them 3-2-65 with the initials RA. In addition to these we see the group identified by the number 5393061

The date dial in the top right shows the form was received on Jan 11th 1965 and initialed by "B"

Other dates from the top of the form

Date typed – 12/30/1964

Date order received at Ford – 12/29/64

Wire Inquiry No. Previous DSO No. – 71-2502

DSO No. (PSO No.) 71-2504 My addition – for this order.

Other hand written initials for sign off "JP" (might be something else) and "WB" then 1-27 and 1-22

At the bottom we have Req Release Date From Fleet: 3/15/65

Order Accepted by followed by a signature and the date 1/16/65

[J_Speegle]

I don't generally get to the conventions so if you have something you wish to share that should not be posted in public we'll need to work out some other arrangement. You could email me a copy. Or you could just describe what you have in an email. If you just tell me the type of document, date, and pertinent info I'll take you word for it. You don't have to send an actual copy if you don't want to.[/color]

The picture is of the shipping dock at Cleveland Engine plant.

The picture shows just under 100 engines (likely 289's) on shipping cradles and and in racks. A rail car, with its doors open is sitting at the loading dock loaded with empty engine shipping cradles being returned to the plant - waiting to be unloaded. Engines are all small block engines for manual and automatic installation.

In the middle of the picture (likely staged) there is a worker with a clipboard appearing to be checking some detail on an engine.

Since I was describing how two engines identified by the same engine ID sticker/label could be identified as a different or special engine of the same type, there is a small group of engines in the last couples of rows so they are not as clear as other, closer engine combinations. But looking closer you can see all of this group are manual transmission destined engines. Two of these engines have a large label applied to the driver's side valve cover with a large DSO lettering identifying that they are different in some way from all the others in view.  These two also have chrome valve covers. In the row right in front of these two is another 289 with what appears to possibly be aluminum valve covers and the clear plastic bag used to cover the carb may have a longer and different shape than others around it.

In the back of the room there are stacks of exhaust manifolds and other engine parts likely received but not yet entered into stock and eventually to the assembly area

That's my best effort to describe this picture. Was very excited when this one was located

There are no notations on the back side of the 8x10 BW picture other than the picture was provided by Ford's North Central public Relations Office located in Cleveland. Picture is dated (possibly when published) by Cleveland Press Reference Dept. paper April 22 1966. Easy to see the picture was taken allot earlier that that. 

[SFM6S087]

In reply to Bob's 3 most recent posts:

Yee Ha! Research gold!

Well done, Bob! Thank you so much for the time you spent digging all that out and then posting here – with explanations. I knew all along that you had to have something solid to base your opinion on. And it had to be something that I was unaware of. Hence my continual prodding to get you to share what you had. It was worth it to get this treasure trove of documents along with your expert interpretation to put them into context.

I may have some questions later, but for now let me summarize my thoughts based on this new information.

The basic evidence I opened this discussion with appears to be accurate, but incomplete. (I figured that all along. That's why I kept asking for anyone with more info to post it and prodding you for your evidence.)

The engine tags/decals that I posted about later (and gave some credence to) are of no value in this discussion, since Ford used the same tags/decals for engines with and without Shelby components. Both you and Jeff have educated me on that point. Thank you to both of you.

The case looks solid that Ford installed the intakes on some of the 1965 cars. Then Shelby American did that on the carryovers. Then Ford did that on the 1967 cars and later.

The case is pretty good, but requires a few assumptions, that Ford installed the intakes on some of the full spec 1966 cars.

The "SE370" that I spotted on DSO71-2510 does designate a Shelbyized Engine. Only having that one document as a reference, and based on his knowledge of Ford part numbers, Jeff thought that might be a misprint. And that was a reasonable supposition with what we had at the time. However, these additional documents settle that issue.

And you are due additional SPECIAL THANKS FROM ME for posting the documents with details about the carryovers. Yes, they were pertinent to this discussion, but they mean so much more to a carryover nut like myself.

As Jeff has mentioned, reasonable people may disagree. But at least now we're both looking at the same evidence.

THANKS AGAIN!
Steve

Update added on 4/26/20 – The above contains my first reaction after viewing the documents that Bob posted. After further research I have slightly modified a few of the conclusions stated above. If you wish to see my latest thoughts on this please read reply #93.

[SFM6S087]

Following up on your earlier request. First would mention that the form references 71-2502 as the earlier build group but the identification for  this group was 71-2504. Sorry. Lots of numbers and as you have found not all easy to make out

Thank you so much for the excerpt from DSO 71-2502. That's exactly what I've been looking for. Some evidence related to this topic that I was previously unaware of - something new to learn. Yee Ha! The copy you posted is not very clear, and I have to admit I'm not experienced at reading DSO sheets. Would you please devote one of your replies exclusively to explaining what's written there and what it means. Also, I'd like to know the date of that DSO and which 1965 cars it's for. You don't have to reveal the actual SFM numbers if you don't wish. But if you know roughly where those cars fit into the 1965 run that would be helpful. Were they early, middle, or late in the production run of 1965's? Again, thank you for posting that!

As I read the first page  I can make out about 98% of the typed and handwritten details as follows


Top of the form shows SPECIAL ORDER. Some refer to these as Add/Delete, SVO (Special Vehicle Orders) and other terms. We copies of them throughout Shelby production, 69's are the latest I've seen copies of.

ALL SPECIFICATIIONS TO BE IDENTICAL TO DSO 71-2502 EXCEPT AS FOLLOWS:
Two columns to the right show 5393020

- First line text is struck-through with the note STD PER SUPP #1

- Holley carb (xx259?)

- Special intake manifold

- Special fuel line – XXX 9A2774-F (Franklin Products)

- Cast rocker covers LH - C3RA-6582-C  RH – C4RA-6582-A

- Rocker cover washers –(354610- ?40 (?crrett)

- Rocker cover bolts (20364-? (?ird??ll and Ford)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

To the right we see someone grouped these items together and signed off on them 3-2-65 with the initials RA. In addition to these we see the group identified by the number 5393061

The date dial in the top right shows the form was received on Jan 11th 1965 and initialed by "B"

Other dates from the top of the form

Date typed – 12/30/1964

Date order received at Ford – 12/29/64

Wire Inquiry No. Previous DSO No. – 71-2502

DSO No. (PSO No.) 71-2504 My addition – for this order.

Other hand written initials for sign off "JP" (might be something else) and "WB" then 1-27 and 1-22

At the bottom we have Req Release Date From Fleet: 3/15/65

Order Accepted by followed by a signature and the date 1/16/65

Jeff,

Thank you for your detailed reply. That helps a lot.

Based on that, would it be reasonable to conclude that the cars in DSO 71-2502 did not get their Cobra manifolds at Ford, but the cars on this DSO 71-2504 did get theirs at Ford?

What about the other DSO's for 1965 production, do you have copies of any others? If so, what do they indicate about where their Cobra intakes were installed?

THANKS!
Steve

[SFM6S087]

I don't generally get to the conventions so if you have something you wish to share that should not be posted in public we'll need to work out some other arrangement. You could email me a copy. Or you could just describe what you have in an email. If you just tell me the type of document, date, and pertinent info I'll take you word for it. You don't have to send an actual copy if you don't want to.[/color]

The picture is of the shipping dock at Cleveland Engine plant.

The picture shows just under 100 engines (likely 289's) on shipping cradles and and in racks. A rail car, with its doors open is sitting at the loading dock loaded with empty engine shipping cradles being returned to the plant - waiting to be unloaded. Engines are all small block engines for manual and automatic installation.

In the middle of the picture (likely staged) there is a worker with a clipboard appearing to be checking some detail on an engine.

Since I was describing how two engines identified by the same engine ID sticker/label could be identified as a different or special engine of the same type, there is a small group of engines in the last couples of rows so they are not as clear as other, closer engine combinations. But looking closer you can see all of this group are manual transmission destined engines. Two of these engines have a large label applied to the driver's side valve cover with a large DSO lettering identifying that they are different in some way from all the others in view.  These two also have chrome valve covers. In the row right in front of these two is another 289 with what appears to possibly be aluminum valve covers and the clear plastic bag used to cover the carb may have a longer and different shape than others around it.

In the back of the room there are stacks of exhaust manifolds and other engine parts likely received but not yet entered into stock and eventually to the assembly area

That's my best effort to describe this picture. Was very excited when this one was located

There are no notations on the back side of the 8x10 BW picture other than the picture was provided by Ford's North Central public Relations Office located in Cleveland. Picture is dated (possibly when published) by Cleveland Press Reference Dept. paper April 22 1966. Easy to see the picture was taken allot earlier that that.

Jeff,

Fantastic! That is a great insight into the process.

I know you have many other demands on your time and I sincerely thank you for the time you spent typing that description in order to help educate me.

THANK YOU!
Steve

[TOBKOB]

And this my friends is how a spirited conversation should end...No one mad, no name calling, and a lot of documented info exchanged. Thanks to all involved.

TOB

[Coralsnake]

Notice the people involved. That may be a clue?

[SFM6S087]

Bob,

In your attachment #3 several words got cut off when the picture of that document was taken. I can make a reasonable guess for all but one. Would you please look at the third line of the last paragraph and tell me what you think the missing word is? The whole sentence is fairly long and is a description of how the "near specification" 1966 GT350's will be built at San Jose. Here's an excerpt that contains the missing word, which starts with the letter g.

"... plus a 5 dial instrument cluster with camera case black appliqué and possibly minus the 1965 g_____ assembly."

I'm thinking the word "gauge" is possible, but it wouldn't seem to make sense to add the 5 dial instrument cluster without the gauges. Without access to the full document we may never know for sure, but your best guess would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Steve

[Bob Gaines]

Bob,

In your attachment #3 several words got cut off when the picture of that document was taken. I can make a reasonable guess for all but one. Would you please look at the third line of the last paragraph and tell me what you think the missing word is? The whole sentence is fairly long and is a description of how the "near specification" 1966 GT350's will be built at San Jose. Here's an excerpt that contains the missing word, which starts with the letter g.

"... plus a 5 dial instrument cluster with camera case black appliqué and possibly minus the 1965 g_____ assembly."

I'm thinking the word "gauge" is possible, but it wouldn't seem to make sense to add the 5 dial instrument cluster without the gauges. Without access to the full document we may never know for sure, but your best guess would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Steve

Sorry, I will have to guess along with you as I don't have access to the document anymore other then the picture I posted which I took some time ago. My first guess would be "Gauge" . After reflection if something else comes to mind I will post it.

[J_Speegle]

Jeff,

Thank you for your detailed reply. That helps a lot.

Based on that, would it be reasonable to conclude that the cars in DSO 71-2502 did not get their Cobra manifolds at Ford, but the cars on this DSO 71-2504 did get theirs at Ford?

That is how I read the document and the purpose for spelling out the requirement at the beginning of all the details

What about the other DSO's for 1965 production, do you have copies of any others? If so, what do they indicate about where their Cobra intakes were installed?

Not many but will look. Doesn't seem that allot of cars retained these list unlike 67 San Jose built Shelbys

[SFM6S087]

Reply in green below:

Jeff,

Thank you for your detailed reply. That helps a lot.

Based on that, would it be reasonable to conclude that the cars in DSO 71-2502 did not get their Cobra manifolds at Ford, but the cars on this DSO 71-2504 did get theirs at Ford?

That is how I read the document and the purpose for spelling out the requirement at the beginning of all the details

Assuming that the cars for 71-2504 were built at Ford the way they were described on the DSO. I only mention that because of my experience in learning that the engine substitution request on 71-2510 was not fulfilled by Ford. Which makes the DSO info a little less reliable than I once thought. Which just emphasizes the need to dig for every scrap of evidence possible in order to make our best guess as to what actually happened. All great fun!

What about the other DSO's for 1965 production, do you have copies of any others? If so, what do they indicate about where their Cobra intakes were installed?

Not many but will look. Doesn't seem that allot of cars retained these list unlike 67 San Jose built Shelbys

Steve

[J_Speegle]

Assuming that the cars for 71-2504 were built at Ford the way they were described on the DSO. I only mention that because of my experience in learning that the engine substitution request on 71-2510 was not fulfilled by Ford. Which makes the DSO info a little less reliable than I once thought. Which just emphasizes the need to dig for every scrap of evidence possible in order to make our best guess as to what actually happened. All great fun!

All up to interpretation it would seem. Why would Ford not want to do something that they had apparently agreed to do and did do on other occasions? Or if they had not been doing so, recent to the time period mentioned above, why would Ford and Shelby include the text into the approved order forms.

Would want to read or at least know more about the why Ford didn't want to fulfill before I would minimize the importance (though nothing is foolproof) of finalized order form. The registry has placed allot of faith in them over the years.

Big puzzle with allot of pieces or insight not available. This and allot of other searches/research continues


Maybe we can get back to the film - post some stills and discuss the other details in it.

[SFM6S087]

Replies in green

Assuming that the cars for 71-2504 were built at Ford the way they were described on the DSO. I only mention that because of my experience in learning that the engine substitution request on 71-2510 was not fulfilled by Ford. Which makes the DSO info a little less reliable than I once thought. Which just emphasizes the need to dig for every scrap of evidence possible in order to make our best guess as to what actually happened. All great fun!

All up to interpretation it would seem. Why would Ford not want to do something that they had apparently agreed to do and did do on other occasions? Or if they had not been doing so, recent to the time period mentioned above, why would Ford and Shelby include the text into the approved order forms.

Great questions. And yet odd things did happen with both the paperwork and the cars. Things we may never find the explanation for. Making period photos and videos (like the one that launched this thread) even more valuable.

Would want to read or at least know more about the why Ford didn't want to fulfill before I would minimize the importance (though nothing is foolproof) of finalized order form. The registry has placed allot of faith in them over the years.

Not minimizing the importance of any document - just learning not to take everything at face value. And the Registry has been wrong about a few things over the years too. As the old saying goes, "The only two people I trust are you and me... and I wonder about you." Ha, ha! To their credit, SAAC, like us, is in constant pursuit of the truth - even if it contradicts something previously believed or printed. A good reason to keep the latest edition of the Registry on the shelf. The more they learn the more accurate it gets.

Big puzzle with allot of pieces or insight not available. This and allot of other searches/research continues

Agreed. All great fun.

Maybe we can get back to the film - post some stills and discuss the other details in it.

This little discussion is a great example of why hard evidence - as shown in the video that started this thread - is so valuable, and drew my attention to this topic to start with. Seeing what actually happened is much more convincing than making assumptions (even reasonable and logical assumptions) about stuff written on paper.

So getting back to the film sounds good to me.

Steve

[6s2020]

So, getting back to the film,

First off , staged or not staged ?

Of course it is "Staged" , "Scripted" and "Directed" ... it's a short film, does not mean it was not real, true and factual.

I mean, the camera crew did not just lob on to the line and start filming.

If we are to believe that the engine parts were already fitted at ford at the time i think it is a stretch to believe they switched out the Cobra oil pan for a stock one (messy job) and not show fitting the cobra one in the film.

Plus the presence of chrome rocker covers, let alone the fact it would have made just as good copy to show exchanging those for the Cobra ones(much easier)

Also those two line workers look like they have placed an inlet manifold down in an engine bay a thousand times before 

Just my thoughts and observations of the film.

[Bob Gaines]

So, getting back to the film,

First off , staged or not staged ?

Of course it is "Staged" , "Scripted" and "Directed" ... it's a short film, does not mean it was not real, true and factual.

I mean, the camera crew did not just lob on to the line and start filming.

If we are to believe that the engine parts were already fitted at ford at the time i think it is a stretch to believe they switched out the Cobra oil pan for a stock one (messy job) and not show fitting the cobra one in the film.

Plus the presence of chrome rocker covers, let alone the fact it would have made just as good copy to show exchanging those for the Cobra ones(much easier)

Also those two line workers look like they have placed an inlet manifold down in an engine bay a thousand times before 

Just my thoughts and observations of the film.

In this context the word staged means doing something that is not typical is done on camera for effect. Now as far as this film is concerned if the events are not dramatically staged and the films reflects real in place procedures done during that window in time then at the very least it was during one of the interruption periods of Ford Shelbized engines like has been established were done before and after the time period depicted.