Rear panel G.T. 350 emblem variations

[6s1640]

Hi all,

I am trying to understand a variation on the G.T. 350 emblem.  The attached photographs shows two versions.  I believe the upper is the later production version that was altered for better casting features.  The lower version is a used emblem off a car in the mid 400s. It does appear to have casting flaws on the backside and smaller casting flaws on the front.  You can see the divots on both sides.  The later version is a much cleaner casting.  Do I have it right from early versus late?  Do we know when the transition occurred?  I am betting all 65's got the early version and into the 66 production.  Somewhere in the 66 production, the later emblem was introduced.  I expect there was overlap or mixing of both versions during the transition.  So there is probably not a clean break.

Thanks

Cory

[GT350Lad]

Interesting Cory, will be keen to hear thoughts. I know that #373 looks like the later version from memory.

Cheers

[DennyD]

Hi Cory,

Here's a photo of the emblem off 6S1568. I can't say for sure if it's the original assembly line one. It appears to be similar to the one you posted in the top photo. Denny

[deathsled]

I thought originals did not have those two small dimples on either side of the posts.

[Bob Gaines]

I thought originals did not have those two small dimples on either side of the posts.

Later versions had the mold injection marks . The earlier versions without rehashing the other tells are machined across the back side like your picture.

[deathsled]

I thought originals did not have those two small dimples on either side of the posts.

Later versions had the mold injection marks . The earlier versions without rehashing the other tells are machined across the back side like your picture.

Good to know.  Thank you for your elucidation on the question.

[Dan Case]

SFM5S142 came with one that was painted with something like magnesium color engine paint before black was applied in the lettering. On a trip to California in 1978 I found a new old stock one just like it in a blue and gray FoMoCo® box. Memory says I sold it to Mark Hovander for one of the restorations he did.

[SFM66H]

Hi Cory,

I had made this captioned comparison photo of my emblems and posted it on Forum v1, but it was lost into cyberspace along with everything else after the big meltdown.

As stated by others here, the original emblem that I removed from my car in 1977 is the machined version shown at the bottom, and the one on top with the ejection pin marks is a late production / early service part.

Kieth

[Bob Gaines]

Hi Cory,

I had made this captioned comparison photo of my emblems and posted it on Forum v1, but it was lost into cyberspace along with everything else after the big meltdown.

As stated by others here, the original emblem that I removed from my car in 1977 is the machined version shown at the bottom, and the one on top with the ejection pin marks is a late production / early service part.

Kieth

Kieth ,I would like to point out that there are early service parts and later service parts. Both emblems were in the Ford service system .Through attrition one replaced the other. I have had NOS (early service)versions of the earlier style with the machined backside and NOS versions of the (later service) of the later style with the mold marks. So that there is no misunderstanding NOS in this context is understood as New Old Stock which is a service part and not a part taken off a car in excellent shape unlike what some people like to assign incorrectly.

[98SVT - was 06GT]

The "casting flaws" in the OP appear to be corrosion not original flaws.

[SFM66H]

Hi Cory,

I had made this captioned comparison photo of my emblems and posted it on Forum v1, but it was lost into cyberspace along with everything else after the big meltdown.

As stated by others here, the original emblem that I removed from my car in 1977 is the machined version shown at the bottom, and the one on top with the ejection pin marks is a late production / early service part.

Kieth

Kieth ,I would like to point out that there are early service parts and later service parts. Both emblems were in the Ford service system .Through attrition one replaced the other. I have had NOS (early service)versions of the earlier style with the machined backside and NOS versions of the (later service) of the later style with the mold marks. So that there is no misunderstanding NOS in this context is understood as New Old Stock which is a service part and not a part taken off a car in excellent shape unlike what some people like to assign incorrectly.

Okay - Thanks Bob.
So, you've had both emblem versions shown in my photo, and both of them are considered to be NOS/service parts.

What I'm wondering about then, is which version would be considered to be an "assembly line" emblem? Is it correct to say that the machined version is an "assembly line" emblem?

[SFM66H]

[Bob Gaines]

Hi Cory,

I had made this captioned comparison photo of my emblems and posted it on Forum v1, but it was lost into cyberspace along with everything else after the big meltdown.

As stated by others here, the original emblem that I removed from my car in 1977 is the machined version shown at the bottom, and the one on top with the ejection pin marks is a late production / early service part.

Kieth

Kieth ,I would like to point out that there are early service parts and later service parts. Both emblems were in the Ford service system .Through attrition one replaced the other. I have had NOS (early service)versions of the earlier style with the machined backside and NOS versions of the (later service) of the later style with the mold marks. So that there is no misunderstanding NOS in this context is understood as New Old Stock which is a service part and not a part taken off a car in excellent shape unlike what some people like to assign incorrectly.

Okay - Thanks Bob.
So, you've had both emblem versions shown in my photo, and both of them are considered to be NOS/service parts.

What I'm wondering about then, is which version would be considered to be an "assembly line" emblem? Is it correct to say that the machined version is an "assembly line" emblem?

I have had both styles used original taken from GT350's and also NOS versions of both. If you read the previous posts then you will see that the discussion started out as of when not if the mold mark version came into use on the assemblyline. I believe that the one with the machining on the back was used in 1965 production and some of 66. The style with the mold mark came into use sometime after 66 production started .The obvious next question is when? I don't have near enough info to make that call.   

[Bob Gaines]

It should be pointed out that there are numerous examples of service parts changing or evolving. In this case one assemblyline style part was used up in service inventory and replaced with another style used in production.

[J_Speegle]

So, you've had both emblem versions shown in my photo, and both of them are considered to be NOS/service parts.

What I'm wondering about then, is which version would be considered to be an "assembly line" emblem? Is it correct to say that the machined version is an "assembly line" emblem?

Consider that when they were building any of these cars, some parts from the original supplier and made exactly like what was being used on either line (Ford or SA) made their way into the supply chain to be sold and used to repair the cars from almost day one. Because of this we find some NOS that are exactly the same as what was installed, because they were, and later NOS where the same company made them in another run, possibly changing due to manufacturing changes or cost or now very close, if made by a different supplier or changed for the reasons mentioned.

Agree with Bob that too many of these may have been replaced with nicer, newer ones during earlier restorations or repairs - possibly even added to cars that didn't originally receive them. Also the details we're discussing are not visible once installed so not enough examples are available to draw a conclusion at this time or likely any time in the future