’67 Rear Valance Exhaust Flat-Style Trim – Who’s Got ‘Em?

[Richstang]

Still no sign of a Marti for a "K"" code without the GT package.

I found one for a Shelby TA car.  Vehicle Order Image shows A code, but the rest of the Marti is K code, non GT.  Special case.

7R01K21xx06

I came across that one too. Got very excited for a moment...then realized it was one of the T/A coupes.

[Richstang]

As noted in the first post of this thread

The first few cars with the flat trim are not made from the Cougar Trim parts!

After some conversations with Greg Kolasa, and following his caption in one of his books,
   We agreed the Cougat trim part was added after the '66 Mustang Hi-Po trim was used.
   It did not need to be cut to fit, saving time, and was a natural progression from the '66 Mustang part used.

It appears the Cougar trim was used at the tail end of trim parts needed...around the transition to the stamped valance opening.
We see the Cougar trim on some cars in the 700 VIN range.
Cars with the stamped valance were arriving at that same time

The transition date is critical to note on the Shelby American 'Production Order' completion date and upper right circled date.
It will help to determine the trim type (if needed) that should be used in any restoration.
There were more than a few cars that had the Cougar trim part.

[Royce Peterson]

All those Cougars were produced long after the January 1968 date on the drawing. I don't see any connection to 1967 Shelby production.

[Richstang]

All those Cougars were produced long after the January 1968 date on the drawing. I don't see any connection to 1967 Shelby production.

Yes, the AO Smith drawing doesn't add up, but it mght have been for the 1968 Cougar XR-7S. 

The SAI drawing is print dated 10/22/1966, but had handwritten 1/9/67 with the initials OBS
That was shortly before we start seeing the Cougar trim appearing on the 1967 Shelby's.

We've found many cars with the Cougar trim that were completed in February 1967 and later.
Ford received the stamped GT valance change notice with a stamped received date of 1/25/67.

I imagine Ford's involvement offered the '67 Cougar trim to shorten assembly time at SAI.
We know that was part of Fred Goodell's initiative upon arrival at SAI.
It also eliminated the time of cutting and modifying fitment to the '66 Mustang part.

[Royce Peterson]

All those Cougars were produced long after the January 1968 date on the drawing. I don't see any connection to 1967 Shelby production.

Yes, the AO Smith drawing doesn't add up, but it mght have been for the 1968 Cougar XR-7S. 

The SAI drawing is print dated 10/22/1966, but had handwritten 1/9/67 with the initials OBS
That was shortly before we start seeing the Cougar trim appearing on the 1967 Shelby's.

We've found many cars with the Cougar trim that were completed in February 1967 and later.
Ford received the stamped GT valance change notice with a stamped received date of 1/25/67.

I imagine Ford's involvement offered the '67 Cougar trim to shorten assembly time at SAI.
We know that was part of Fred Goodell's initiative upon arrival at SAI.
It also eliminated the time of cutting and modifying fitment to the '66 Mustang part.

The XR7-G's werre produced beginning in mid January 1968. There were two XR7-S Cougars built that made the January 1967 cover of Motor Trend Magazine. They would have to have been built by September 1966 to have made the magazine cover in those days. I am unaware of any drawings of the rear valance on the XR7-S.

[GT350DAVE]

As noted in the first post of this thread

The first few cars with the flat trim are not made from the Cougar Trim parts!

After some conversations with Greg Kolasa, and following his caption in one of his books,
   We agreed the Cougat trim part was added after the '66 Mustang Hi-Po trim was used.
   It did not need to be cut to fit, saving time, and was a natural progression from the '66 Mustang part used.

It appears the Cougar trim was used at the tail end of trim parts needed...around the transition to the stamped valance opening.
We see the Cougar trim on some cars in the 700 VIN range.
Cars with the stamped valance were arriving at that same time

The transition date is critical to note on the Shelby American 'Production Order' completion date and upper right circled date.
It will help to determine the trim type (if needed) that should be used in any restoration.
There were more than a few cars that had the Cougar trim part.

This is not correct. The Cougar trim was used  early on in production. My all original, original paint GT 350, Assembly date 10/13/66 and Shelby completed date 11/9/66 has the Cougar trim, as does every other GT 350 completed near those dates that I have seen.
Dave

[propayne]

I guess my question is why are these particular trim parts used on the '67 Shelbys referred to as "Cougar Trim"?

Is there any other company paperwork or technical drawings (besides the XR7-G plans that I posted with a date that is too late) that call them out as Cougar pieces?

- Phillip

[JD]

Maybe too late to try and "correct" the terminology of these but -

Note the 10-20-66 drawing from Shelby American titles the FIRST of this "flat" rear valance exhaust trim part as "1967 GT350 & GT500 Bezel - Assembly Exhaust - Interim" part not a "Cougar" part.  The AO Smith Cougar part looks to have been based on the earlier Shelby part and the drawing is dated later.

Everyone is "back-terming" the "flat" exhaust trim part as a Cougar part used on some early '67 Shelby's - a later part used on a different earlier car?  not according to the two drawing dates.

'67 Shelby "Flat" Exhaust Trim
'66 Mustang GT modified exhaust trim - used on some '67 Shelby's
'68 Cougar XR7-G Exhaust trim

[Royce Peterson]

As noted in the first post of this thread

The first few cars with the flat trim are not made from the Cougar Trim parts!

After some conversations with Greg Kolasa, and following his caption in one of his books,
   We agreed the Cougat trim part was added after the '66 Mustang Hi-Po trim was used.
   It did not need to be cut to fit, saving time, and was a natural progression from the '66 Mustang part used.

It appears the Cougar trim was used at the tail end of trim parts needed...around the transition to the stamped valance opening.
We see the Cougar trim on some cars in the 700 VIN range.
Cars with the stamped valance were arriving at that same time

The transition date is critical to note on the Shelby American 'Production Order' completion date and upper right circled date.
It will help to determine the trim type (if needed) that should be used in any restoration.
There were more than a few cars that had the Cougar trim part.

This is not correct. The Cougar trim was used  early on in production. My all original, original paint GT 350, Assembly date 10/13/66 and Shelby completed date 11/9/66 has the Cougar trim, as does every other GT 350 completed near those dates that I have seen.
Dave

There were no Cougars using such parts then. Why would anyone call it Cougar trim?

[Richstang]

Originally, I thought the flat "Cougar" (named decades ago) trim was used first in production
My new THEORY is different. It is always evolving as new information comes to light.
I should add, there is no right or wrong answer here. I am still gathering data and seeking photos for more evidence. 

Years ago, I saw Greg Kolasa's book with the photos and captions.
I asked him why he thought the flat "Cougar" trim parts were used later. He made three great points.
-1st the photo evidence; such as car #00723.
-2nd the timing; the '67 flat 'Cougar" trim came out after the '66 Mustang Hi-Po trim.
-3rd cost and time savings; why would SAI go backwards in time to get the older Ford parts.
The flat "Cougar" parts were newer, easier to get from Ford, and would save assembly time and money

All were very good points...However, I didn't just take Greg's word. I've been looking deeper for years.


Trim #1; Brochure V-738-2 and #00176. Very thin, flat, and highly polished (or chrome plated).
These parts also appear to be on very early production cars, not nearly as thick as the flat "Cougar" trim parts.
They appear hand fabricated and very, very thin
Day one #00003 – #00018
Day two #00002 – #00019
Day three #00024 – #000031 (maybe...we see a handmade appearing flat part on #00031)



Trim #2; 1966 Mustang Hi-Po trim, production part.
Trim is cut about 60-65% down from top with visible top screw needed.
Has a tighter cut-out around exhaust and an inner area at the top covering the valance cut-out
#00004; SAI 10/3166
#00017; SAI 10/31/66
#00050 vintage magazine photos, no completion date
#00100 vintage magazine photos, no completion date
#0187; SAI 12/22/66


Trim #3; 1967 flat "Cougar", production part
No inner section to cover the valance cut-out, thicker depth by approximately 4-5X
Requires a slight higher cut-out in the valance to fit the part
#00751; SAI completion date 2/13,
#00705; SAI completion date 2/17
#00702; SAI completion date 3/31
#0723; SAI completion date 4/3
#00881; SAI completion date 4/13
#000742; SAI completion date 5/11

[Richstang]

Trim #2

[Richstang]

Trim #3

[GT350DAVE]

Originally, I thought the flat "Cougar" (named decades ago) trim was used first in production
My new THEORY is different. It is always evolving as new information comes to light.
I should add, there is no right or wrong answer here. I am still gathering data and seeking photos for more evidence. 

Years ago, I saw Greg Kolasa's book with the photos and captions.
I asked him why he thought the flat "Cougar" trim parts were used later. He made three great points.
-1st the photo evidence; such as car #00723.
-2nd the timing; the '67 flat 'Cougar" trim came out after the '66 Mustang Hi-Po trim.
-3rd cost and time savings; why would SAI go backwards in time to get the older Ford parts.
The flat "Cougar" parts were newer, easier to get from Ford, and would save assembly time and money

All were very good points...However, I didn't just take Greg's word. I've been looking deeper for years.


Trim #1; Brochure V-738-2 and #00176. Very thin, flat, and highly polished (or chrome plated).
These parts also appear to be on very early production cars, not nearly as thick as the flat "Cougar" trim parts.
They appear hand fabricated and very, very thin
Day one #00003 – #00018
Day two #00002 – #00019
Day three #00024 – #000031 (maybe...we see a handmade appearing flat part on #00031)



Trim #2; 1966 Mustang Hi-Po trim, production part.
Trim is cut about 60-65% down from top with visible top screw needed.
Has a tighter cut-out around exhaust and an inner area at the top covering the valance cut-out
#00004; SAI 10/3166
#00017; SAI 10/31/66
#00050 vintage magazine photos, no completion date
#00100 vintage magazine photos, no completion date
#0187; SAI 12/22/66


Trim #3; 1967 flat "Cougar", production part
No inner section to cover the valance cut-out, thicker depth by approximately 4-5X
Requires a slight higher cut-out in the valance to fit the part
#00751; SAI completion date 2/13,
#00705; SAI completion date 2/17
#00702; SAI completion date 3/31
#0723; SAI completion date 4/3
#00881; SAI completion date 4/13
#000742; SAI completion date 5/11

Rich,
1)l may be wrong but I don't believe Greg believes that about the early cars any more. Some of the theories about the later cars may be correct.
2)The last time Greg and I discussed this topic was earlier this month, April 6th when I provided details and photos. I would be glad to share them with you.
3)I am not new to this, if you asked me, which you didn't, I would have given you my opinion from collecting data, owning and restoring these cars for over 30 years.
Dave

[JD]

I spoke with Greg earlier this month on this topic as well,  there is intent and then reality, and the dates on the blueprints - then there is the "Shelby American production methodology circa 1966/67" and deadlines to produce cars for introduction date mid-November 1966 - the "Showing Cars".

Bouncing back and forth for handy solutions (having parts made verses using existing Ford parts and modifying them) could be a real thing.

(Car #26 had the modified '66 GT trim pieces - one of the Showing Cars, I believe it was the original)

My opinion is some early got the Shelby flat version others got the '66 Mustang GT modified and it bounce back and forth until the decision was to scrap all of it and just use the '67 Mustang GT rear Valance - less parts, less work - Ford paint it and Done!  Bob is correct I left out the Ford part of doing the painting and the valance is done Shelby workers don't have to touch it any more!

Acknowledging the variations and the general time periods they were used maybe as good as it gets?

[Bob Gaines]

I spoke with Greg earlier this month on this topic as well,  there is intent and then reality, and the dates on the blueprints - then there is the "Shelby American production methodology circa 1966/67" and deadlines to produce cars for introduction date mid-November 1966 - the "Showing Cars".

Bouncing back and forth for handy solutions (having parts made verses using existing Ford parts and modifying them) could be a real thing.

(Car #26 had the modified '66 GT trim pieces - one of the Showing Cars, I believe it was the original)

My opinion is some early got the Shelby flat version others got the '66 Mustang GT modified and it bounce back and forth until the decision was to scrap all of it and just use the '67 Mustang GT rear Valance - less parts, less work - paint it and Done!

Acknowledging the variations and the general time periods they were used maybe as good as it gets?

I agree with this but I think a typo "less parts, less work - paint it and Done!"  . The Mustang rear valance was painted at Ford.  It also seems reasonable to assume that SA had a heads up from Ford that the evolved GT valance was shortly going to be put into production.