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

[J_Speegle]

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.

For the conversation, don't think you can include the total numbers of a model produced  when your focusing on just early production.

Also I think the focus is on "possibility" verses "certainties" for lack of better words at the moment.

For the month of December 66 I counted 208 GT500's  so 20% of your 1200 number

[shelbydoug]

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.

For the conversation, don't think you can include the total numbers of a model produced  when your focusing on just early production.

Also I think the focus is on "possibility" verses "certainties" for lack of better words at the moment.

For the month of December 66 I counted 208 GT500's  so 20% of your 1200 number

The OP is asking for the view points of those who post here.

To answer that honestly I have to put myself in the position of a potential buyer in this case and answer as to what I EXPECT to find on the car. It is my opinion, yes.

On a car like his NO ONE CAN PROVE that his car was built as it stands. All the Registrar can say is that IT COULD HAVE BEEN built that way.


There is no other documentation available from Ford showing the use of very early long blocks being assembled far later then normally done. In addition if the three that Dave is referring to are randomly dated with no apparent pattern, that weakens the argument considerably.



I, ME,  NEED FAR MORE then three cars that are SIMILAR and it isn't even me that is going to come eventually to the consensus that there are very early long blocks used in a build MONTHS later. It is the "Jury" that you need to PROVE IT to.

The reality is that you can't prove that it is original to the car and that it is not, just that MAYBE it could be. So as a buyer, I'd just stay away from it and look for a car that conforms to the norms.



THAT'S the honesty that the OP is prying at since apparently the OP is considering changing the long block for those reasons.

Personally if it were my car I wouldn't bother but I'd have to accept the fact that in the current environment of looking for "correctness" that at some point in the near future if I want to sell it as 100% correct, that statement will likely be challenged by buyers.


It's nothing personal to anyone J. That's just my logic on this situation and only one person in the peanut gallery here. Others are just as influential or uninfluential. 

[J_Speegle]

To answer that honestly I have to put myself in the position of a potential buyer in this case and answer as to what I EXPECT to find on the car. It is my opinion, yes.

On a car like his NO ONE CAN PROVE that his car was built as it stands. All the Registrar can say is that IT COULD HAVE BEEN built that way.

I, ME,  NEED FAR MORE then three cars that are SIMILAR and it isn't even me that is going to come eventually to the consensus that there are very early long blocks used in a build MONTHS later. It is the "Jury" that you need to PROVE IT to.

The reality is that you can't prove that it is original to the car and that it is not, just that MAYBE it could be. So as a buyer, I'd just stay away from it and look for a car that conforms to the norms.

Can't argue with your stated points, especially since your referring to opinions,  just trying to put the three examples where the span between the casting date and car build date was wider than usual that Dave made mention into context.

I do have six examples from December 66 built cars with the 428 engine maybe I'll post or make reference those in a follow up post

[shelbydoug]

Well, this is not an argument. It's a discussion attempting to analyze accurately what happen in three notes when we need more to recognize the tune.

What we would need would be someone that worked in production at Ford to explain why the internal sourcing of the 428 engines fell out of the normal procedures.

Were there 67 428 Mustangs besides GT500's?



I'm not happy being the antagonist here.

[J_Speegle]

Were there 67 428 Mustangs besides GT500's?

Don't believe you will find any records of such a car being built at one of the three car assembly plants