1969 BOSS 302 GT 350 Prototype

[shelbymann1970]

  Car was built the SAME day as my vert. 5-6-69. Again I read the dash vin and it was G48 and that got me on the investigation trail so to speak. 1984. Now in Mi it wouldn't be hard to get a title changed. My boss 429 title around that same time frame the dash vin was 9F02Q198868. Cops had to verify since the owner had his title for a few cars stolen and with a dirty windshield(car sat outside at Jeff Bietzel's shop) they put an "0" where the Q was. I walked into the SOS and provided my eminger report along with other info showing the 5th digit was the engine code and without the car present got the vin on the title changed to a Z while the dash said Q. I still have that paperwork in my possession  40 years later. a subsequent owner made up a new dash tag with a Z on it. It happens. #2039 black car. had the original KK sticker on the door when I bought the car. No doubt it was a B9 before I even got my paperwork from Lois.

[Coralsnake]

Ford obviously intended your car to be a 428 car. According to the twisted logic of this thread there is no way it could have been a Boss 429 

[67st102]

Here is a thread and discussion on this vehicle from earlier this year.

Thanks


https://www.saacforum.com/index.php?topic=22221.msg169698#msg169698

[shelbymann1970]

Here is a thread and discussion on this vehicle from earlier this year.

Thanks


https://www.saacforum.com/index.php?topic=22221.msg169698#msg169698

Many of car features I  have read over the years are riddled with errors or just made up facts for the stories(of course usually by the owners). The authors are making a living writing as much as they can get published and don't have the time to really fact check or don't want to spend the time. That is for good authors writing books on a subject. Just my take shaking my head too many times on errors in a story.

[crossboss]

Is it? I can show you several GT500 KRs that have "01" body serial codes on their windshield tags.

Are they coupes?  They are not.

The history and what actually happened is what is important. Is it unique? Yes it is unique.

Was it built as a Shelby? No it was not.

The paperwork proves that and there is a reason its not being shown.

Heres another example:Shelby had several 351 Cleveland cars. They do not have special engine codes. Does that mean they did not exist?

Or what if a car shows up with one of the unused 1969 Shelby Vins? Its not a Shelby, even though "the numbers" say it is. Its about the history, not the numbers

Really? Numbers don't mean anything? And the 'intent' was very clear.

[Coralsnake]

The pictures above show the car as a Boss in 1985.  (Reply 28)

[shelbymann1970]

The registry shows Bob Gaines owned this car in 91/92/93 est. - so the question would be was it in BOSS 302 metal form when he owned it or was it in GT 350 fiberglass form?

Stephen I have posted 2  real pics I know EXIST of this car. 1 in 1985 When Jeff Plowman owned it and the other when George owned it. It was taken after I believe he painted it at the super Ford Nationals. It is actually sitting next to one of his Classic Design Concepts trucks.  Here you go second pic is when George owned it taken at Milan Dragway-full tail light panel and RARE 69 B2 rear spoiler on car. NO FIBERGLASS. I'll answer for Bob-No fiberglass when he owned it nor was there evidence it had been mounted at one time after chem stripping. .

[Coralsnake]

No evidence of Shelby side scoop and ducting. It has Boss quarter panels, not Mach 1 style as it should. 

No evidence of tail light conversion.

No front fiberglass, no Shelby parts, not even the fog lamps.

If you still believe this story, you're not capable of paying attention.

Again, why is made to look like a 1970? Where's the build sheet? That will "prove if it had the Shelby conversion (all 1969 Shelbys have conversion package notations)

Prove me wrong and I will apologize. I just want the facts, not what you think it should be or what was "intended"

[shelbymann1970]

No evidence of Shelby side scoop and ducting. It has Boss quarter panels, not Mach 1 style as it should. 

No evidence of tail light conversion.

No front fiberglass, no Shelby parts, not even the fog lamps.

If you still believe this story, you're not capable of paying attention.

Again, why is made to look like a 1970? Where's the build sheet? That will "prove if it had the Shelby conversion (all 1969 Shelbys have conversion package notations)

My build sheet. Conv pkg noted as ref for those who do not have their own build sheets.

[shelbymann1970]

I just actually read the write up on the ebay ad. WTH? OK, I'm 64 and knew of the car at age 24. almost 40 years have passed but this is what I remember and I usually remember unique cars and experiences well. Jeff Plowman bought the car-well traded for it- off of the original owner and not his son as stated in the ad(could be wrong). I remember giving the original owner-person who bought the car "new"- to George circa 1990(?). George found out the OO was deceased and was looking for the son to try and find the original engine. I had the original owner's name only because Jeff had given it to me and I wrote it down. I bet somewhere in one of my folders or address books I still have that name. When Jeff bought it it had the Shelby vin and he wasn't a Mustang expert as the OO must have told him. No 5 in the Vin and Jeff had just purchased the car. So highly doubt he changed a vin. Jeff worked at a gas station working the night shift. I drove by that gas station every night going to work on midnights at where I worked at the time. Going by one night I see the Boss and do a u turn and stop to see it only for the Shelby wheels on it. Jeff comes out and shows me the car. I had to get to work but told him I'd like to inspect it more since i'm a Shelby guy. I did when I had more time which I did. I'd say I'm more in the know than many on this car just by dumb luck and geography. If he didn't work at that gas station I would have probably never saw the car until George brought it to SFNs after painting it.

[68stangcjfb]

In reference to incorectly stamped vins, I've seen several cars with incorrectly stamped windshield tags and body stamped vins ( I own a car myself with an incorrectly stamped engine code on the windshield tag only) but I must ask has anyone ever seen an incorrect vin stamp on every tag and stamping on the car? I have no interest in buying this car or even have a horse in this race. I'm just asking that question because I find it very hard to believe Ford could screw all of them up on the same car. That being said, Kevin Marti could probably shed light on this car if properly motivated or like Coralsnake says,  just show the build sheet and get it over with assuming it still exists.

[Coralsnake]

...somewhere I saw a reference to cars being built at Kar Kraft. I have not seen evidence they built any Shelbys. I am pretty sure I have some documents that specify exactly what they did to convert the 1969s.

If anyone has evidence they did anything other than the 1969 to 1970 conversions on finished cars, please let me know.

[68stangcjfb]

I was just looking at the dates on the Marti report. I'm thinking some time between April 7th when the order was received and May 6th when the car was built, someone at Ford who thought it would be a good idea to build a Boss 302 Shelby got word from their boss that they were killing the Shelby program and remaining cars would be restamped as 1970 models. There clearly was no need to explore the possibility of a Boss 302 Shelby anymore but the paperwork for the car was already in the pipeline so it just got built as a Boss 302. Maybe they tried to change the paperwork hence the 15-day late build time? Is it known at what date Ford decided to end Shelby production?

[shelbymann1970]

see the pic from 1979. Pic was taken near Plymouth Mi in the caption  which is next to Canton Mi where the owner lived. Pic is now deleted from the car's website along with all the documents. That is probably when the car received the 351C.So Robert Brey was the first owner so that eliminates me looking for the name.

[shelbymann1970]

I was just looking at the dates on the Marti report. I'm thinking some time between April 7th when the order was received and May 6th when the car was built, someone at Ford who thought it would be a good idea to build a Boss 302 Shelby got word from their boss that they were killing the Shelby program and remaining cars would be restamped as 1970 models. There clearly was no need to explore the possibility of a Boss 302 Shelby anymore but the paperwork for the car was already in the pipeline so it just got built as a Boss 302. Maybe they tried to change the paperwork hence the 15-day late build time? Is it known at what date Ford decided to end Shelby production?

This is what I thought but also think they kept building Shelbys for the 70 year as why then were Shelbys built to the end of 69 production and some of those cars ended up as 70s?