1967/68 Mustang engine bay, undercarriage etc. Paint that was used in factorys?

[Kent]

Ok I was now searching for 3 days for the correct paint for the Mustang 67/68 Engine Bay and Undercarriage here are my questions

1. Does somebody has some pictures where you can see the underccarriage+engine bay painted concours for san jose and nj plant
2. what kind of black did they used in the factorys? was it a normal paint or did they used hardener etc. I read so many stuff about it what people use which is close to original but nobody talk about it really what the factory was using and what is the closest you can buy. Also for the red primer what was that and what will be the closest to buy now?
3. Why do I dont found a book, website etc. where somebody show its concours restoration on a Shelby 1967 or 67 Mustang there are so many secrets and a lot of people ask the same questions over and over again. I think a book or website with detailed pictures and content would be so lovely for all of us Shelby and Mustang Guys.

I have a 68 1/2 CJ, a 67 Fastback Shelby Clone and a 67 Fastback I want to build in the winter and I want to make them close to factory/ concours with some smaller mods, but all I can do in concours style will be concours so that why I´m asking here. I know a lot of things but not that much like a lot of you guys so your help is appreciated, maybe we can start a guide to concours or a good factory looking restoration that can be used by everyone in the future.

Thanks Kent

[Coralsnake]

Maybe you are not looking in the right places? 

In most cases, the factory used enamel paint. Many places either do not carry enamel or you cant legally spray it. Enamel has become "old technology" . Thats why you are seeing threads about modern paints that look like the original paints.  Primer and painting techniques varied extensively from plant to plant and year to year. Thats why your not finding "one source". I think people that have studied this area ( some for decades) realize it would be an effort that is monumental. Most are "old school" and dont subscribe in the theory that just because someone wants something, you should it hand it to them.

Here is a guide for 1968 New Jersey cars: (a 1967 might be different)

http://www.thecoralsnake.com/PAINT.HTML

I have seen similar threads on other forums, for other years and plants.

[Coralsnake]

Lets clarify one other item, "concours" is historically correct as built. There is no such thing as a concours clone or concours with modifications. Its a very specific definition. Its not just about quality of workmanship. In my opinion, one does not have a "concours" car until it has been recognized by concours judges in a national venue. For Shelbys that would be MidAmerica, SAAC, MCA and maybe a couple others.

Im not cracking on you, but I am a reforming concours judge and dont want others to be confused.

[TOBKOB]

You will find a lot of information (correct info) here. To clarify a lot of sources are not correct ( I'm not referring to Pete  ) and do not take into account the different build dates, assembly plants and running changes.

http://www.concoursmustang.com/

TOB

[roddster]

I imagine you are familiar with: www.Concoursmustang.com   The SAACforum   www.vintage-mustang.com
  and you have the Osbourne assembly manuals.  Add in theMustang Club of America judging sheets...per each car.  One of the best restoration illustrations, information and photos is in the GT/CS registry but that book is limited in volume and costs $100 plus.  It does not illustrate the San Jose built cars but it sure is close.
  Also, there is no substitute for looking at correctly restored and even original cars.  And, I'll say it, most Concours cars seem to be over restored these days.

[2112]

  Also, there is no substitute for looking at correctly restored and even original cars.  And, I'll say it, most Concours cars seem to be over restored these days.

Well, I can understand the desire not to leave so much sheetmetal completely bare like was done in the factory. Like up under the dash or rear quarters.

[Kent]

I dont want to built the mustangs to concours only thing I want to do is a correct build, restoring the original parts like it should be, painting the engine bay etc correct, because when I do it I want it right for me. I want to build the cars how I will like them pretty much orignal with some senseful mods and drive them,thats the same like Shelby did with the mustangs. I want to build classic mustangs with no summit, cjpony crap on them but yes I will upgrade the control arms, steering etc. but at the end they should have the correct finish also when they have ball bearings etc. I want to optimize the stock parts and give them a finish like they would be from factory. Maybe call it sleeper or stock looking modified mustang I dont know ;-) I only know I love the Mustangs and Shelby´s and a normal concours restoration makes no sense for me because I drive them a lot. So I want to make all the bodyworks, paint etc. really nice and yes in concours quality, also finish of the parts should be concours quality etc. but it will be modified at the end of the day but very nice and charming. I think you guys will love the results. The cars I´m doing the next 6 months are pretty much original except for the shelby clone and so I want to keep their soul. I hope you understand now what I mean.

[J_Speegle]

Some great responses so far and there could be a ton more discussion on the subject as has been in the past

It seems fairly common to find people coming into this part of the "hobby" see the sharing of information and the discussions as the keeping or sharing of secrets since there is not a ton of easily accessible free information at their fingertips. This may be because the person asking the questions often sees or expects the answers to be "they were all " this way or that way, when (especially for 67) in real life the answer to just one question can be one of two to three different answers based on date the car was at the plant, how the car was equipped and the assembly plant. Change the assembly date a week or a month earlier or later and the answer may change. There have been a fair number of personal efforts over decades like Coralsnake's great site which focuses on mostly one plant during a specific time period and a handful of models but these take decades to assemble and grow there are not thousands of people who have access, the time or the knowledge to assemble them like there are in other fields.  As one told me at one point " there are no government grants for this research".

This fact makes assembling any web site, book or other product is IMHO and my experience very difficult to produce with any accuracy. And at the moment it is shared or made public likely wrong or incorrect in some detail undiscovered when the publication/site was assembled.

3. Why do I dont found a book, website etc. where somebody show its concours restoration on a Shelby 1967 or 67 Mustang there are so many secrets and a lot of people ask the same questions over and over again. I think a book or website with detailed pictures and content would be so lovely for all of us Shelby and Mustang Guys.

Like you (not a criticism just an observation) many think the best route is to look at restored examples but those that have been involved in showing understand that that route is full of issues. Each restoration is only as good as the restorer, his research and the available parts when the car was built, as well as the rules (if built to a judging standard) when the car was built.  As knowledge increases, old understandings of what was correct get challenged and adjusted those restorations become dated.

And if pictures of individual restoration efforts are shared other owners or builders tend to copy exactly details shown without regards to the differences between the car being seen and their own car.  On top of this it tends to produce exact carbon copies where originally they were not. Sites have assembled pictures of "restored" cars and shared hundreds of examples but just about every picture shown includes incorrect details so it can be a minefield for an owner since they likely don't know which detail is correct for their car and which isn't

As we say often. There is no easy button in restoration though a big check book (to pay someone else to research, build and detail) may be the next best choice for some

Sorry for the winded response but we hope that by posting these responses it will help you and others who view it

We will continue to work to provide answers and assistance as best possible.

[J_Speegle]

I dont want to built the mustangs to concours only thing I want to do is a correct build, restoring the original parts like it should be, painting the engine bay etc correct, because when I do it I want it right for me. I want to build the cars how I will like them pretty much orignal with some senseful mods and drive them,thats the same like Shelby did with the mustangs. .............

Sounds like you looking to follow the original meaning of "resto-Mod" 

Have a couple of similar cars and what allot of people choose to do with the cars though how far the modifications go can really affect IMHO and at a point not go well with the partial restored look but you car your choices. Just don't expect everyone to like or respect your choices

[Kent]

I think some people also would say a shelby is a modded mustang and they would prefer a "normal" Fastback or coupe whatever, a resto-mod is a empty body with new parts from summit etc. What I want to do is to make a correct restoration or build with some upgrades on the original parts. I have a big stock of so many fomoco original parts from 67/68 and I love them all I think I know what the difference between scott drake and fomoco is and I love to take old original parts and to rebuild them also if the same part in new would cost me only 5$

Again I only want to build it right like factory did it and if it was enamel I will get here in germany. I found some sellers of enamel paint the only question is it a 1 component or 2 component paint so do I need hardener or was it really out of a big canister and sprayed on the cars.

[Chris Thauberger]

Alkyd enamel paint is one component with reducer and takes forever to setup(air dry) or become what is referred to a 'tack free'.  That is why assembly line used "bake ovens".
I started painting just as acrylic enamel paint was appearing so I only sprayed with enamel for a few years.

No plural component paint from the factory in the sixties.

Chris

[Kent]

Thank you all for the nice answers, that help me a lot. And you cant buy that paint anymore in the usa? Here I can buy enamel polyurethan paint with hardener and reducer and mix it so that would be good? Or was it not a pu enamel paint what Ford used was it acrylic enamel?

[Chris Thauberger]

Thank you all for the nice answers, that help me a lot. And you cant buy that paint anymore in the usa? Here I can buy enamel polyurethan paint with hardener and reducer and mix it so that would be good? Or was it not a pu enamel paint what Ford used was it acrylic enamel?

Polyurethane enamel was mainly used for fleet, trucks and buses. Ford used acrylic enamel on Mustangs.

Chris

[J_Speegle]

Again I only want to build it right like factory did it and if it was enamel I will get here in germany. I found some sellers of enamel paint the only question is it a 1 component or 2 component paint so do I need hardener or was it really out of a big canister and sprayed on the cars.

Single stage from a large holder run to a different spray guns positioned at different location in the first section of the assembly process. Originally baked but don't think you want to build a booth for that. You might want to consider a hardener made for the paint I would

[Kent]

Oh for the drying process I have a booth here and everything I need I only want to be sure to have the right paint, I think I need to mix a little bit and paint some metal and then hold it on a original engine bay from a 67/68 mustang here. What paint are you guys using for your restorations to get it concours?

Was it now acrylic or alkyd enamel? Because I read both in this thread and its a difference between both.