67 GT500 engine id decal

[J_Speegle]

J_Speegle,

  I do not consider the DSO/SVO/add-delete sheets as a "paper exercise".  They are the equivalent of an Engineering Change Order (ECO) or Engineering Change Notice (ECN) and are a necessary and sufficient document to initiate a deviation from standard process on the assembly line.

Guess like many things different opinions are held by many.

Earlier I had asked about your thoughts on the engine ID tag I posted. Reply #38

On other subjects and pictures posted I had also seen #100 picture of the engine ID tag but since a regular production vehicle thought I might not be appropriate to use for the discussion.

The picture in Reply #48 that Bob posted I believe is one of mine I shared with him (file name matches) and its not from a Shelby but from another 67 Fe California built example. Not a Mustang or Cougar example as another shot of the engine shows a full frame rail and part of the firewall.

Looking through my collection of engine ID tags from 67 it appears that they used a different ID pattern than other engine plants at least in 67 and 68. Never enough examples but I'll try and get them up and posted for the discussion. Hopefully without muddying the waters Just be patient plenty of other things going on at the moment

[Bob Gaines]

J_Speegle,

  I do not consider the DSO/SVO/add-delete sheets as a "paper exercise".  They are the equivalent of an Engineering Change Order (ECO) or Engineering Change Notice (ECN) and are a necessary and sufficient document to initiate a deviation from standard process on the assembly line.

Guess like many things different opinions are held by many.

Earlier I had asked about your thoughts on the engine ID tag I posted. Reply #38

On other subjects and pictures posted I had also seen #100 picture of the engine ID tag but since a regular production vehicle thought I might not be appropriate to use for the discussion.

The picture in Reply #48 that Bob posted I believe is one of mine I shared with him (file name matches) and its not from a Shelby but from another 67 Fe California built example. Not a Mustang or Cougar example as another shot of the engine shows a full frame rail and part of the firewall.

Looking through my collection of engine ID tags from 67 it appears that they used a different ID pattern than other engine plants at least in 67 and 68. Never enough examples but I'll try and get them up and posted for the discussion. Hopefully without muddying the waters Just be patient plenty of other things going on at the moment

Jeff, the picture I posted of the engine block with the long sticker paper reminent was to show the possibility of sticker with a longer sequence of numbers and letters compared to the short series on the 3 digit repro sticker. It doesn't really matter if it is from a Shelby or not just that the longer sticker existed on a 67 FE block. The repro engine id sticker that 430dragpack posted shows how the longer engine Id sequence might look . That sticker matched the longer style of sticker paper left on the junk yard engine picture.  At least in theory it could exist.

[J_Speegle]

Jeff, the picture I posted of the engine block with the long sticker paper reminent was to show the possibility of sticker with a longer sequence of numbers and letters compared to the short series on the 3 digit repro sticker. It doesn't really matter if it is from a Shelby or not just that the longer sticker existed on a 67 FE block. The repro engine id sticker that 430dragpack posted shows how the longer engine Id sequence might look . That sticker matched the longer style of sticker paper left on the junk yard engine picture.......................

Just clarifying the source of the sticker

At least in theory it could exist.

keep that thought. have something more to share

[shelbydoug]

I hate to throw grenades but it looks like you guys simply don't know what was original to 67 GT500's? if so you should state that and stop speculating that it could be this or that or even something else unique that no one or few have ever seen before.

The ONLY way to document anything now is to post pictures of ORIGINAL '67 GT500 labels and tags not 390 S codes.

The label of the R Fairlane is interesting but the suggestion here is that there isn't as much standardization of these labels and engine tags as some previously thought?

Simply put, there are just too many people making reproductions which may or may not be accurate. If it doesn't get corrected now, the fantasy is going to get accepted as fact along with the flying monkeys.

Is there something in the water in this country that makes everyone delusional? Lets not bring that here to this forum also?

[shelbydoug]

By some chance do Terry Kristofac's engine pics show the paper label? What about the Hot Rod magazine article with the SHELBY valve covers?

[Bob Gaines]

By some chance do Terry Kristofac's engine pics show the paper label? What about the Hot Rod magazine article with the SHELBY valve covers?

Nope, nothing legible. That would be too easy.

[shelbydoug]

This is like looking for the Brasher Dabloon? There's only one of 'em and no one knows where it is?

I think that I have created an inclination of people to produce a rash of inaccurate "reproductions" to come? It's just going to confuse matters worse.

I'm sorry.

[67411F--0100-ENG.]

I have always assumed that the tag seen in the picture was 401 even though I believe this is a Erics automatic car. It may stand for be A01 instead.

Hello Bob and Everyone,

Yes, the tag on 0100 actually had "A 01" printed on it.  I have attached another photo of 0100's engine bay that was taken by Sports Car Graphic.  I have also attached a zoomed in portion of the engine bay photo taken by Car and Driver.  The "A 01" is clearly visible in the two photos.  If anyone ends up getting some of these tags made up, I would be interested in having one for 0100 which was:  Automatic trans with no EECS.

Thanks,
Eric

[Bob Gaines]

The problem is that they were only meant for internal Ford use and not meant to last any longer then it took to install them in the chassis.It didn't take long with the engine heat cycles and any moisture  humidity etc.it was exposed to for the paper to start degrading .  I have only seen a few half way legible examples from any year FE let alone 67 Shelby. The picture on Erics #0100 car is the clearest 67 Shelby specific one I can remember seeing and it is only a partial. Given the stickers location on the block it doesn't show up well from most angles in typical engine photo shots. 

[Bob Gaines]

I have always assumed that the tag seen in the picture was 401 even though I believe this is a Erics automatic car. It may stand for be A01 instead.

Hello Bob and Everyone,

Yes, the tag on 0100 actually had "A 01" printed on it.  I have attached another photo of 0100's engine bay that was taken by Sports Car Graphic.  The "A" is clearly visible.  If anyone ends up getting some of these tags made up, I would be interested in having one for 0100 which was:  Automatic trans with no EECS.

Thanks,
Eric

Eric,thanks for the smoking gun photo for the longer style engine sequence.

[67411F--0100-ENG.]

I have always assumed that the tag seen in the picture was 401 even though I believe this is a Erics automatic car. It may stand for be A01 instead.

Hello Bob and Everyone,

Yes, the tag on 0100 actually had "A 01" printed on it.  I have attached another photo of 0100's engine bay that was taken by Sports Car Graphic.  The "A" is clearly visible.  If anyone ends up getting some of these tags made up, I would be interested in having one for 0100 which was:  Automatic trans with no EECS.

Thanks,
Eric

Eric, thanks for the smoking gun photo for the longer style engine sequence.

Hello Bob,

No problem, glad to try and help out with this issue.  I went through all of my photos of 0100, and those two photos are the only ones that show a portion of the engine tag/sticker.

Thanks,
Eric

[shelbydoug]

Wasn't that one a 390? Should it have a 390 code or a 428 code?

Here's my first attempt but I think the info is wrong on it?

What's with this place flipping around the pictures? This one posted upside down.

[J_Speegle]

The ONLY way to document anything now is to post pictures of ORIGINAL '67 GT500 labels and tags not 390 S codes.

Disagree that engine plant practices have no value in this discussion. Since we have limited resources other labels made for the same time period as well as those nearby and made likely by the same company can provide clues and details that can be considered and discussed. Ignoring would be like trying to find a vaccine without considering what had worked and not worked with similar viruses as an example.

We just need to identify and list with the picture the source of the example for the obvious reasons

[shelbydoug]

The ONLY way to document anything now is to post pictures of ORIGINAL '67 GT500 labels and tags not 390 S codes.

Disagree that engine plant practices have no value in this discussion. Since we have limited resources other labels made for the same time period as well as those nearby and made likely by the same company can provide clues and details that can be considered and discussed. Ignoring would be like trying to find a vaccine without considering what had worked and not worked with similar viruses as an example.

We just need to identify and list with the picture the source of the example for the obvious reasons

Who said that they didn't matter? So far there is a partial of one of -00100? Got another? 

For that matter, do you have any 390's?

These things are as rare as chicken lips?

[JD]

Wasn't that one a 390? Should it have a 390 code or a 428 code?

Here's my first attempt but I think the info is wrong on it?

What's with this place flipping around the pictures? This one posted upside down.

Here is your image Rotated 180,

Also, maybe we can consider calling the paper adhesive  tape strips "Labels" and the stamped metal plates "Tags" to help with understand which is being referred too?