- Joined
- Feb 28, 2007
- Messages
- 19,525
Damn that is sooo sick!! Can you please tell me where you got your steering wheel refinished and how much it was?? Thanks bud :beer:
My Arancio Ishtar Cobra Build....lots of pics
- Thread starter MeNmySN95
- Start date
what are you gonna do with the d1 now?
Definitely a much better choice going with turbos instead of the D1! What size twins are you going to run? Any updates on the Murci?
I see you are in Cali... You need to bring this and the Murci to the Concorso Italiano and Pebble Beach in August. Best weekend ever. So many car things to do. Check it out and register.
www.concosro.com
Awesome... I'm in Sacramento. Well have to meet up. Caravan every year with buddies. C6Z, C6gs, Saleen, Viper, 2 Vipers, 360, and a Gallardo...
On the brake pedal you want to re-drill the hole where the rod attaches about an 1" higher to give your foot more leverage. Typically you want a 6:1 ratio.
This link will help explain it.
http://www.mpbrakes.com/uploads/documents/pedalratiopdf.pdf
Nice garage. I've always had a soft spot for lambo's since I was a kid. Espcially the countach. The Diablo is my dream car.
-Mark
This link will help explain it.
http://www.mpbrakes.com/uploads/documents/pedalratiopdf.pdf
Nice garage. I've always had a soft spot for lambo's since I was a kid. Espcially the countach. The Diablo is my dream car.
-Mark
First I will say great collection!
Next is some things just don't add up to me in this thread. Some things you cheap out on and say it's not worth the money, then spend buttloads of cash on some insignificant things. Kinda ass backwards if you ask me.
Also you said you were anti turbo but was building twins on a Murci? Now twins on the cobra?
Next is some things just don't add up to me in this thread. Some things you cheap out on and say it's not worth the money, then spend buttloads of cash on some insignificant things. Kinda ass backwards if you ask me.
Also you said you were anti turbo but was building twins on a Murci? Now twins on the cobra?
Not to be judgemental in my first post, but the driver's side fender on the Shelby is incorrect for a '65. It is from a '66 MY. Just a heads up. If you ever get it judged they will deduct points.
Very nice cars btw! As an early Shelby freak, I'm loving the '350!
Very nice cars btw! As an early Shelby freak, I'm loving the '350!
Didn't realize there were differences in the fenders. Care to elaborate?
The '65 cars have a flat flange on the top of the fenders where they (white) bolt to the inner fender (black). The '66 cars have 2 small triangle bumps on either side of the shock tower on the fender (white) between the firewall and the cutout for Shelby tag (date codes are stamped on regular Mustangs in that location). This was designed to be a small "crumple zone" so the fender would bend in those places and not be bushed straight back. I hope that makes sense.:thumbsup:
My dad and I do concours restorations on early ('65-'66,'67) Shelbys. After you spend enough time on the detail work on multiple cars, there's a point when those things stick out instantly.
My dad and I do concours restorations on early ('65-'66,'67) Shelbys. After you spend enough time on the detail work on multiple cars, there's a point when those things stick out instantly.
you're tripping. Car was done by a Shelby Specialist here in CA. Show me in another picture, how the car is wrong, because what you said makes no sense. Better yet, circle them in the photo of my car, and compare them to a "correct" car.
I am a Chief class judge at the LA Concours, Irvine Concours, Palos Verdes concours, Muckenthaler, and I am a judge at literally 90% of all the SCCA events in California. So, I know how judging goes, and I've NEVER been docked any points, and people from SAC have crawled up and down that car. They did catch that the door post catch had a date of 6-66 and the other had 5-65. I have replaced both of them with 6-65s so they match. People also said that the day/night mirror was off a 1966, but they are a very, very, very rare option on the 1965s.
I am a Chief class judge at the LA Concours, Irvine Concours, Palos Verdes concours, Muckenthaler, and I am a judge at literally 90% of all the SCCA events in California. So, I know how judging goes, and I've NEVER been docked any points, and people from SAC have crawled up and down that car. They did catch that the door post catch had a date of 6-66 and the other had 5-65. I have replaced both of them with 6-65s so they match. People also said that the day/night mirror was off a 1966, but they are a very, very, very rare option on the 1965s.
Last edited:
Not replying to knock anything of yours, as there's no debate that you have an amazing collection of cars, and your SN-95 project is awesome....one of the coolest I've ever seen.
But the comments on your '65 interest me. I don't recognize anything odd about the fenders, but just for the sake of discussion since the whole concours aspect of the vintage car hobby interests me (and I especially like early Shelbys), I question the following items on your car...
-early-style port-hole hood instead of one with fully exposed scoop
-Shelby American sill plate emblems instead of black Ford logo
-tan seatbelt leathers instead of black dyed
-screws attaching grill tabs to headlight buckets instead of rivets
-unpainted wheel caps
-stainless trim on pedals
-never heard of any '65 GT350 being built with a day/night mirror
-your car likely had a three-hole/spoke steering wheel instead of slotted
-I think 6-65 coded striker plates would be too late for that car...keep in mind Ford pulled from bins, and your Shelby is fairly early production. And I wouldn't be too obsessed for getting a matching pair, as many cars I've seen/read about had mismatched date codes regarding month manufactured, anyway
I also think it's odd that the only two Shelbys you mentioned are both cars to have rumored duplicates lingering around, but not that I want to get into that. It's just interesting to learn the differences among how cars were originally optioned, and I wonder if your car came with the mentioned pieces, or why you have those pieces on the car when it sounds like you put a lot of thought into every component.
But the comments on your '65 interest me. I don't recognize anything odd about the fenders, but just for the sake of discussion since the whole concours aspect of the vintage car hobby interests me (and I especially like early Shelbys), I question the following items on your car...
-early-style port-hole hood instead of one with fully exposed scoop
-Shelby American sill plate emblems instead of black Ford logo
-tan seatbelt leathers instead of black dyed
-screws attaching grill tabs to headlight buckets instead of rivets
-unpainted wheel caps
-stainless trim on pedals
-never heard of any '65 GT350 being built with a day/night mirror
-your car likely had a three-hole/spoke steering wheel instead of slotted
-I think 6-65 coded striker plates would be too late for that car...keep in mind Ford pulled from bins, and your Shelby is fairly early production. And I wouldn't be too obsessed for getting a matching pair, as many cars I've seen/read about had mismatched date codes regarding month manufactured, anyway
I also think it's odd that the only two Shelbys you mentioned are both cars to have rumored duplicates lingering around, but not that I want to get into that. It's just interesting to learn the differences among how cars were originally optioned, and I wonder if your car came with the mentioned pieces, or why you have those pieces on the car when it sounds like you put a lot of thought into every component.
Last edited:
I will start by saying that I have the original documents from Shelby on this car, and the 5R09K vin is the matching one to 5S214, as well as the engine stamp. The 2 things that were missing off the car was the intake manifold and the carburetor, which were replaced with NOS parts. The car even has the original glass in it (trust me it shows).
I understand about what you said about the strikers, but I wanted them to match, obviously they didnt have 66 stamped strikers in 65.
- Car has original steering wheel, 15" w/ slots. Cars #001-#094 had SOLID 16", cars between #110-#256 had 15" SLOTTED.
- The Seatbelts leathers are black. All of them are tan on the underside, i guess they didnt want the black dye to rub off on your clothes? *shrugg*
- Theyre bolts, not screws.
- Shelby American Plates are original
- Center Caps are chrome. See photo. Some people say that the CS is supposed to be black, some say the whole cap is black. I go by what I read.
- Hood is original 1 piece fiberglass hood
- Pedals are up in the air IMO. I'd do some research on that.
Car did not originally have the LeMans stripes though. And the seats are leather instead of viynal.
Get some original keys...
Next im guessing that someones going to say "the battery in the back is incorrect", about 1/2 way thru the production they put them back in the front because of "fumes"
Im not trying to be a dick, but am I supposed to assume your Clone w/ a 363 is supposedly more correct?
Also the "only two Shelbys i mentioned have clones". Well, I brought up the R model, because its driving proof that SAC has its head far up its ass. People make clones from cars, called "Air-Cars". Its a different Story when you have all documentation that its the real car. Like the R model. SAC had to ISSUE AND APOLOGY LETTER FOR SAYING OUR CAR WAS FAKE! Why? BECAUSE IT WAS THE REAL ONE, and we won in court because we had outstanding evidence. Same on the 214 car. Again, its not worth the $XXXXX amount to sue SAC again. Theyre still pissed about the R model incident, so ANY Shelby that can be associated with me or my uncle will be deemed a fake. ****ing stupid IMO.
Ive seen XXXXX (took name out because Im not going to be accused of libel, but ill just say he has a "big name" in the shelby world) 65' GT350 in person, and its a piece of shit resto-mod, with all sorts of polished stuff, and the engine bay is gloss black. Hes really the only person who pissed on the 214 car, and he has no room to talk. Also, the supposed "real" 214 is in Peru, and he is a known close friend of the fore-mentioned man. He has also been called out on several occasions, and he runs his mouth about MY car, yet he wont stack up and put both cars side by side. He also "lost" all of his documentation for the car, and its been proven that his isnt a K code car. LOL!!! But because he's a member of SAAC, everyone believes him!!! Guess its SUPER RARE RIGHT?!?! :jerkoff:
This is exactly why I dont get involved with Shelby clubs, I dont want to end up killing everyone. lol.
[/rant]
I understand about what you said about the strikers, but I wanted them to match, obviously they didnt have 66 stamped strikers in 65.
- Car has original steering wheel, 15" w/ slots. Cars #001-#094 had SOLID 16", cars between #110-#256 had 15" SLOTTED.
- The Seatbelts leathers are black. All of them are tan on the underside, i guess they didnt want the black dye to rub off on your clothes? *shrugg*
- Theyre bolts, not screws.
- Shelby American Plates are original
- Center Caps are chrome. See photo. Some people say that the CS is supposed to be black, some say the whole cap is black. I go by what I read.
- Hood is original 1 piece fiberglass hood
- Pedals are up in the air IMO. I'd do some research on that.
Car did not originally have the LeMans stripes though. And the seats are leather instead of viynal.
Get some original keys...
Next im guessing that someones going to say "the battery in the back is incorrect", about 1/2 way thru the production they put them back in the front because of "fumes"
Im not trying to be a dick, but am I supposed to assume your Clone w/ a 363 is supposedly more correct?
Also the "only two Shelbys i mentioned have clones". Well, I brought up the R model, because its driving proof that SAC has its head far up its ass. People make clones from cars, called "Air-Cars". Its a different Story when you have all documentation that its the real car. Like the R model. SAC had to ISSUE AND APOLOGY LETTER FOR SAYING OUR CAR WAS FAKE! Why? BECAUSE IT WAS THE REAL ONE, and we won in court because we had outstanding evidence. Same on the 214 car. Again, its not worth the $XXXXX amount to sue SAC again. Theyre still pissed about the R model incident, so ANY Shelby that can be associated with me or my uncle will be deemed a fake. ****ing stupid IMO.
Ive seen XXXXX (took name out because Im not going to be accused of libel, but ill just say he has a "big name" in the shelby world) 65' GT350 in person, and its a piece of shit resto-mod, with all sorts of polished stuff, and the engine bay is gloss black. Hes really the only person who pissed on the 214 car, and he has no room to talk. Also, the supposed "real" 214 is in Peru, and he is a known close friend of the fore-mentioned man. He has also been called out on several occasions, and he runs his mouth about MY car, yet he wont stack up and put both cars side by side. He also "lost" all of his documentation for the car, and its been proven that his isnt a K code car. LOL!!! But because he's a member of SAAC, everyone believes him!!! Guess its SUPER RARE RIGHT?!?! :jerkoff:
This is exactly why I dont get involved with Shelby clubs, I dont want to end up killing everyone. lol.
[/rant]
Last edited:
Users who are viewing this thread
