Its back!

[Harris Speedster]

Side oiler, you are being kind .
above  >>
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?

So >. Nothing equals nothing, our Golden rule at SAAC for all our own benefits >> is both numbers and history on 65-67 is required to authenticate a real Shelby
Wasn't there real serious problems quite a few years back on Eleanor's, can't remember why?
Respectfully,
John

[J_Speegle]

Side oiler, you are being kind .
above  >>
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?

So >. Nothing equals nothing, our Golden rule at SAAC for all our own benefits >> is both numbers and history on 65-67 is required to authenticate a real Shelby
Wasn't there real serious problems quite a few years back on Eleanor's, can't remember why?
Respectfully,
John

Respectfully I think it takes more than just numbers (if your referring to just VINs) and history.  The letter that SAAC sends out to confirm a VIN match is an example of this since it basically states that the match alone does not confirm or validate a car.  Plenty of examples of history and VIN's not equaling a real car IMHO

Others may and likely do have differing opinions If we didn't it would not be much of a discussion

[Bill]

Side oiler, you are being kind .
above  >>
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?

So >. Nothing equals nothing, our Golden rule at SAAC for all our own benefits >> is both numbers and history on 65-67 is required to authenticate a real Shelby
Wasn't there real serious problems quite a few years back on Eleanor's, can't remember why?
Respectfully,
John

John,

    You know, I have the door and associated data tag for a 68 GT500 KR convertible that met it's demise back in the late 70's in upstate NY....It's already been reported to SAAC, and is noted in the registry....Theoretically, 100 years from now, someone might rebuild the car just off these parts and call it "real" , then tell the future SAAC registrar that the reports of it's demise were wrong all that time.

Bill

[Harris Speedster]

Bill,
You are spot on and so is J speegel.
In my opinion, both your thoughts are correct, and provable as doable by unscrupulous types over the decades.

Yep, a person can make an air car from fender well numbers and shelby plate, better with title to the car that was lost.
I have lived through such times with the harris car, a National magazine published a full 1/2 page article about a guy claiming his car may be the Harris car.
After an angry letter, they retracted.
A 1958 Ferrari full race TR that came from the same place the Harris came from, 3 cars ended up claiming ownership of a car worth millions.
How many Cobra's have twins ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Wall art for a man cave, thats how I have advertised a 63 1/2 lightweight car, title, all plates and all stamped body/frame numbers.
Not mine, but I do try and sell it and PICK my words carefully.
Your KR is about in the same boat Bill, would you agree ?
DAVE, how is the mustang/car in question listed in the 67 registry, and under which number ?
Respectfully,
John

[Harris Speedster]

All so true.
The chassis and stamped serial number reigns supreme ,
Side oiler, those are real to the point statement/question.
Does the car we are discussing in question have the numbers ?

The Ferrai TR I mentioned, went to court three times, original chassis won by metallurgy tests >> to think I scarped mud off my feet on that chassis.
Respectfully,
John

[Grumpy]

This is as clear as mud. Hey I have the "real" rear bumper from a 66 Convertible along with an old registration an # plate. That's enuff right  . Crazy !

[Harris Speedster]

Grumpy,
Agreed 100% , it is crazy.
the plate is of concern.

Not on point, but years ago when I purchased a red 66 Shelby up your way.
I had a guy telling me he could get me the numbers etc off of a real 66 conv?
Which it was a Shelby converts number, best of my recollection.
I never tried verifying it at SAAC. I think I did mention it to Mr Vinny though.

I would doubt it is the same car, and you used the statement to prove a point on the 67 mustang in question ?
respectfully,
John

[98SVT - was 06GT]

Wall art for a man cave, thats how I have advertised a 63 1/2 lightweight car, title, all plates and all stamped body/frame numbers.

DAVE, how is the mustang/car in question listed in the 67 registry, and under which number ?

I personally know the guy who hauled one of Shelby's Cooper Monaco King Cobras to the land fill in San Fernando - yet both seem to still exist today......

I should buy you R code stuff - It's the closest I'll come to owning a real one.

What could the registry say - Transmission with # possibly from XXX Shelby located in 19?? - Mustang sheetmetal from firewall back claiming to be Shelby XXX was offered for sale in Texas? PS: date codes in sheetmetal are too late to be # claimed?

[Coralsnake]

Can someone explain to me how the 1967 brake vent hose interfaces with the two slots in the quarter panel ? Is it small enough to fit in the "slot" ?

[J_Speegle]

Can someone explain to me how the 1967 brake vent hose interfaces with the two slots in the quarter panel ? Is it small enough to fit in the "slot" ?

Maybe a picture of the interior of a scoop and where the duct is located will help explain. The end for the duct and the hose pass under the center horizontal brace shown in the picture you posted

[Coralsnake]

Got it thanks!

[Bob Gaines]

The hose didn't have to be large given it did nothing to cool brakes .It was strictly for looks and to technically comply as functional initially in production.

[Bill]

Bill,
You are spot on and so is J speegel.

John,

   With all that is going on with you, glad I could make you laugh today. I know how much you want that KR convertible door, but I can't let it go right now. I will think hard on your Intermeccanica Italia, if you could hold off till my lo-cal swap (6-8 months), perhaps I can swing it then if SWMBO will get onboard. 

Bill

[Harris Speedster]

I did forget to ask if I get the Carroll Shelby signed glove box door in the deal,>>> ha
You did cheer me up Bill, always a pleasure my friend !
john

I must say that the patina on that qrt shot above, is far different even now, than when it was all flat black in the early pictures Coralsnake posted.
I am not sure what they expect to gain from this mustang ?

[Bill]

I am not sure what they expect to gain from this mustang ?

Notoriety, greed (greed makes good people do questionable things), because they feel they can, free advertising, maybe even self promotion for their names and their business brand(s), maybe just for the footnote that will live on forever after they sadly pass away one day, we may never know. What we do know right now, like the "Shelby in a block" (adult size paperweight), or the door/dataplate/etc I have for what is left for a certain 68 KR convertible, is that you cannot make a car like this into an original vintage Shelby, no matter who gets involved, or how much money they throw at it.

Just my personal opinion and two cents worth on this subject.

Bill

PS: I'm serious about the Italia