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

[honker]

This is not my area of expertise, but this is a photo I found on the net, supposed to be a restored '67 GT350 ? I saved it as reference for a model build.

Maybe it would be a good image for those more knowledgeable to point out what is right or wrong, always ready to learn something     before I put the model on the table at a show, and someone points out the inaccuracies ! model guys can be really anal !

Mike

[Bob Gaines]

This is not my area of expertise, but this is a photo I found on the net, supposed to be a restored '67 GT350 ? I saved it as reference for a model build.

Maybe it would be a good image for those more knowledgeable to point out what is right or wrong, always ready to learn something     before I put the model on the table at a show, and someone points out the inaccuracies ! model guys can be really anal !

Mike

For a model it would be fine given all finishes are painted faux finishes but on a real car many things can look better a natural finish appose to a faux painted finish. there are other detalls like wrong parts which on a model you have little control over. I will give a few examples but this car is so far off of the mark from a higher scoring SAAC DIV II entry that is hard to know where to start. Bellhousing looks fake painted,so does trans and trans pan,Starter has wrong finish and missing details, powersteering ram wrong faux finish,missing hardware on chassis side PS ram,  wrong PS hose's,wrong inner and outer tie rods,wrong tie rod adjusters, wrong paint markings on drag link,wrong idler arm, wrong finishes on repro lower control arms ,wrong hardware on concentrics, wrong upper control arms, wrong paint marking on strut rods. Maybe wrong sway bar but can't be sure from this angle. Too much typing. I will let others finish.

[J_Speegle]

This is not my area of expertise, but this is a photo I found on the net, supposed to be a restored '67 GT350 ? I saved it as reference for a model build.

Maybe it would be a good image for those more knowledgeable to point out what is right or wrong, always ready to learn something     before I put the model on the table at a show, and someone points out the inaccuracies ! model guys can be really anal !

Think we're getting WAY off thread as we move into details for other things other than paint. Picture (as Bob wrote) has a a ton of incorrect details as far as parts used, finishes, paint marks .... so best to say its not a good choice IMHO for someone to copy if their looking to reproduce the original look of an original 67 Shelby.  This does work as a good example of why its not the best idea to copy what you find on the web in general.

As for paint details it appears that the restorer used a flat red oxide primer rather than a primer sealer which produced a much flatter in finish than typically found on original cars from the firewall forward it appears. They also forgot the dolly marks/bare spots  and possibly a couple of other details

[Kent]

ok now we need a pic of a GT350 and GT500 that is correct

[J_Speegle]

ok now we need a pic of a GT350 and GT500 that is correct

For the paint details? Remembering your subject title.  IF so then the engine size would not matter.

The challenge is that if we posted one for the paint details allot of owners would copy it exactly where in reality there was a typical range and that is where the challenge is - showing that range.

[2112]

Jeff,  Do you still plan your "White Papers" for the '67 model year?

If so, I would like to purchase a copy.

[J_Speegle]

Jeff,  Do you still plan your "White Papers" for the '67 model year?

If so, I would like to purchase a copy.

Yes its on it's third editorial review - not the best writer but want to be as clear and exact in my descriptions and have to fight the urge of covering too much slightly on the edge of the subject being focused on. Maybe, got allot of things going on currently, right after the Holidays then I can move the focus on to the only Shelby year and plant I've not covered yet. - 1968's

They are always offered for free either through membership at CMF or for articles like the undercarriage ones offered freely through one or more other good forums that the subject matter relates to. 

Changing might temp a few who could use the information out or tempt them to use the information from another year and or plant, plus I would not know how to set a price on the effort and years spent accumulating the information.

[corbins]

I was referring to a 69 hood blackout treatment. Would this SEM product be appropriate to the blackout ?

IMHO having shot both. No

Pete , that finish came out as close to the factory finished as far as gloss and texture is concerned as any car could be. Considering a real person with a spray gun in his hand applied it vs a factory spray machine, it was true blue for sure !

These cars were sprayed by hand also pretty much like they would have been at any body shop, with a high end booth of the time. Difference was that the paint was supplied through a series of hoses and large container of paint rather than in the gun (gravity feed). 

Now comparing todays spray guns and methods are often very different from the 60's and often this can create a challenge. Great to hear you achieved an original like finish

Ok , thanks... so as you have sprayed both.. what exactly do you use for the 69 hood blackout

[2112]

Yes its on it's third editorial review - not the best writer but want to be as clear and exact in my descriptions and have to fight the urge of covering too much slightly on the edge of the subject being focused on. Maybe, got allot of things going on currently, right after the Holidays then I can move the focus on to the only Shelby year and plant I've not covered yet. - 1968's

They are always offered for free either through membership at CMF or for articles like the undercarriage ones offered freely through one or more other good forums that the subject matter relates to. 

Changing might temp a few who could use the information out or tempt them to use the information from another year and or plant, plus I would not know how to set a price on the effort and years spent accumulating the information.

Well, that is a heck of a contribution to the hobby considering just how much work it had to have taken.

Thank you.

You deserve more than just a thank you tho.

[J_Speegle]

You deserve more than just a thank you tho.

Donations to the site never hurt and keep the wolves away from the front door  LOL  But this is not required