(SJ build 12/28/66) 67 GT500. Engine date code Correct for the car?

[shelbydoug]

Looks like February 28 1966.

Ok thanks.
It is not correct date code for the car?
Kyle

Wow! You can't ignore what Dave Mathews just said of the car. I know him and he wouldn't make a blanket statement like that without data to back it up, so he's got to have a whole lot more then just a few early cars to compare engine build dates to.

Even so, I have issue with there being such a spread in dates between the long block and the bolt on components. That SUGGESTS to me that the long block has been replaced.

If all of them were close to the block casting date I'd more readily accept that explanation.

When the engine was assembled. it was put together so it was ready to be installed in a chassis. That would include the exhaust manifolds and distributor. The transmission is way out of line so I'd suspect that is not the original?

I would need someone else, like J.Speegle, to explain these discrepancies to me as to how the distributor is November and the short block August and be an original build?


I wouldn't go and panic over this yet. I'm thinking that it is entirely possible that the long blocks on the early cars are basically left over '66s and needed final assembly?

428 Mustangs in 67 can't be big sellers and I would think most of them were T-birds and LTD's, etc?


Here's what I think the issue is going to be. The Registrar may indeed have been gathering data on the engine blocks and maybe heads but did he do the distributors and exhaust manifolds too?

Those items are suggesting to me an engine build in late November or early December which is what I would expect to see as original.

[GT350DAVE]

If you think the GT 500 motors are out of wack, you should look at the components for the early 67 GT 350's.
I only collected block and head date codes for the GT 500's. Keep in mind, that my statements are only for the very early cars and as production progressed, the dates became much closer to the San Jose assembly dates.
Never say never with a 67.
Dave

[6T6/7]

I would think anything dated August '66 or later as too late to be '66 production, leftover or otherwise.  More likely intended for early '67 production?

[Royce Peterson]

I don't know much about the '67 Shelby GT500 but the case being made that early does seem odd. It likely got exchanged at an AAMCO or other transmission rebuild shop sometime in the car's past.

I have read (but don't know) that 1966 C6 transmission cases are different in some way from later ones. Perhaps someone here would know?

Looks like February 28 1966.

Ok thanks.
It is not correct date code for the car?
Kyle

[Kyle]

Thanks a lot for this information.

Shelbydoug I was referring not correct about the transmission date code not the engine date code.

Dave there are early shelby 67 GT500's that have an engine dated 5 months earlier?

I'm not shure about my distributor date code, one of my carb date code if they are a correct date code for my car?

[Kyle]

I don't know much about the '67 Shelby GT500 but the case being made that early does seem odd. It likely got exchanged at an AAMCO or other transmission rebuild shop sometime in the car's past.

I have read (but don't know) that 1966 C6 transmission cases are different in some way from later ones. Perhaps someone here would know?

Looks like February 28 1966.

Ok thanks.
It is not correct date code for the car?
Kyle

Ok thanks Royce,

Even me I don't know if it is a correct date code. Most likely February is early for my car.
Someone know what should date code need's to be for my car please?

[GT350DAVE]

There are EARLY GT 500's with dates on their blocks 5 months before their assembly date at San Jose. I haven't collected automatic transmission dates but have seen components on the early GT 350 motors that date even earlier than the 5 months. Cylinder heads in particular.
Dave

[Kyle]

Ok thanks Dave,
So my engine block and chylinder heads dates codes looks to be correct for my car ?
My transmission date code date code is more than 5 months before the car.

[Kyle]

Dave,
What early 67 Shelby's vin numbers did you saw with an engine 5 months earlier for the car please?
So I will have more idea please.

Thanks Kyle.

[GT350DAVE]

I have 3 so far. All early. I do not give out Vins. especially on a public forum. Vins are confidential unless permission is granted by an owner.
Dave

[Kyle]

Ok Dave,
But my car makes sense that it has an engine cast date 6H19 and assembly date 6J28 9 please?

[GT350DAVE]

It looks good to me.
Dave

[Kyle]

Ok thanks for everything Dave.

[Kyle]

I noticed that crankshaft damper date code is 6K/66 October and the dualpoint is 6K31.

What is the best engine date code for my car is please?
Casting date 6K with an asembly date late 6L or Casting date 6L with an asembly date early 6M ?

The BK carb date code is 6B1 so it's December.
The BJ was replaced.

Thanks Kyle.

[shelbydoug]

I noticed that crankshaft damper date code is 6K/66 October and the dualpoint is 6K31.

What is the best engine date code for my car is please?
Casting date 6K with an asembly date late 6L or Casting date 6L with an asembly date early 6M ?

The BK carb date code is 6B1 so it's December.
The BJ was replaced.

Thanks Kyle.

I would say that you are correct. 6K or 6L.

Although there may be some supporting evidence that your block may have special circumstances and accepted as correct, it is not what anyone would expect to find.

With all due respect to everyone involved, three cars out of 1,200 does not make enough of a pattern to prove anything.

If it were say, 12 or more with all very similar casting and assembly dates, then that's a better situation.

The decision is entirely up to you to decide if anything even needs to consider changing to an EXPECTED date.



What Dave says about '67s is knowledge learned from experience in the field. It is a change over model year in so many ways and some screwy stuff went on which tends to add to the absolute uniqueness of the '67 Shelbys.

Never say never is a very fair criticism of the '67s.