Its back!

[Coralsnake]

Just like predicted

https://www.saacforum.com/index.php?topic=19118.0

[1969shelbygt350]

??

[Coralsnake]

The current owner is collecting parts for the restoration, now that they feel the car has been "authenticated"

I invite anyone who thinks they have authenticated this car, to share their work on the forum.

[Royce Peterson]

Caveat Emptor

[FL SAAC]

kool

[Bob Gaines]

The current owner is collecting parts for the restoration, now that they feel the car has been "authenticated"

I invite anyone who thinks they have authenticated this car, to share their work on the forum.

He may be second guessing the decision to be involved with the car at this point.

[JD]

He may be second guessing the decision to be involved with the car at this point.

The Holy Fail ?? 

[Coralsnake]

Just re-watched the update and how the car was identified.

[Bob Gaines]

Just re-watched the update and how the car was identified.

Can you post a link?

[Coralsnake]

Process starts at 15:30

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TTeXtm9Ouos&pp=ygUVRGVubmlzIGNvbGxpbnMgU2hlbGJ5

It doesn't change the car was identified by the transmission and its still missing the vast majority of everything, but thats not stopping the restoration

Watch at 15:30 mark again

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SnnWvN0oK6w

[Bill]

So, they have a VIN off the transmission, they say "it's 1444" based on this, so now, how does that VIN change it's association to another car, a rarer car, a supercharged car no less? Again, if it turns out to be so, fantastic, yet for now, I have not seen hard proof that it is what they are now saying it is.

As for the rest, speaking with various SA employees over the years, the stories of CS personally taking orders for customers was nothing further from the truth. From their recollection, CS did not pick up the phone for a retail order, not even for a 427 or 289 FIA, heck, did not even want to speak with dealers placing orders, let alone a retail customer. Again, just my recollection of those conversations over the 40 or so years I had the pleasure of interacting with them.

Bill

[Coralsnake]

This is my understanding

The VIN on the transmission was never 1444. Thats in the first video. It was simply a guess.

A youtuber viewer gave them a name, they connected the transmission number to the car by using that name which was in the Registry.

1477 is that car.

So now we are back to;  is a roof and two quarter panels a car? (Or some variation of that)

How much has to survive for the car to exist?

[Harris Speedster]

I sold two "original" Paxton set ups to guys herein SAAC for real 65 and  67 paxton cars.
No date codes on any parts dennis bought, $3500. value?
carb is the only original piece, if it is?
BTW, what was said about the carb being correct, may not be why.
I personally have never assumed or argued serial numbers, nor will I ever do it.

Coralsnake & Bill,
YEP in my opinion also, nothing that has been presented documents it as a Shelby,
Roof and Qrts and other tid bits equal nothing , trans #'s the same case?
Just my own opinion from viewing the facts as an old dog.
DAVE M, I and others are curious as to what is now entered into the registry about this car , and under WHAT serial number (s) ?
Respectfully,
John

[427hunter]

I sold two "original" Paxton set ups to guys herein SAAC for real 65 and  67 paxton cars.
No date codes on any parts dennis bought, $3500. value?
carb is the only original piece, if it is?
BTW, what was said about the carb being correct, may not be why.
I personally have never assumed or argued serial numbers, nor will I ever do it.

Coralsnake & Bill,
YEP in my opinion also, nothing that has been presented documents it as a Shelby,
Roof and Qrts and other tid bits equal nothing , trans #'s the same case?
Just my own opinion from viewing the facts as an old dog.
DAVE M, I and others are curious as to what is now entered into the registry about this car , and under WHAT serial number (s) ?
Respectfully,
John

+1

Dave?

[Side-Oilers]

Pete wrote: "So now we are back to;  is a roof and two quarter panels a car? (Or some variation of that)"

I agree, this is a troubling equation.

What if we adopt the same rules for "original" as the US Treasury does for damaged currency bills?

If you have more than 50% of the original bill, they will exchange it for a new one.  49%. =  no go.

On a car, figuring out the 50.1% that justifies an "original" declaration will be more difficult to determine:
% by weight?
% by number of parts?
% of parts with VIN?

Thoughts?