66 Shock Tower Survey Help Needed

[Snakepit]

Originally Posted by JamesFee

1801 came with Koni's ........

2021 came with Koni's .

j

James, respectfully, how do you know the Koni installation was done at San Jose? If either/both were dealer installed that would have little to do with the shock supports unless they replaced them with standard Mustang ones.

I also have stories from original owners where they replaced the stock shocks with Koni's with in days or weeks and now do not have the washer welded shock supports. They can not explain why nor can they be sure if their car came that way.

Originally Posted by s2ms

......We now have four cars between 1693 and 1801 that very likely did not originally come with the shock tower washers. The fact that your car did originally come with Koni's supports the supply issue theory. ..................

Would suggest that you don't have "the fact" since this is a report or an observation IMHO.


Interesting the claims that 66 cars after the left overs came with Koni's. How are owners (other than recall) supporting it?

Since the 65 cars with Koni's came with them and later with the FOMOCO and AUTOLITE I can't see where the shock has a thing to do with the subject.


And agree the steering washers are way too thick for this application.

[s2ms]

Originally Posted by Snakepit

Would suggest that you don't have "the fact" since this is a report or an observation IMHO.

Interesting the claims that 66 cars after the left overs came with Koni's. How are owners (other than recall) supporting it?

Since the 65 cars with Koni's came with them and later with the FOMOCO and AUTOLITE I can't see where the shock has a thing to do with the subject.

Jeff, I agree the shock type probably has nothing to do with the subject. I included it as a possibility in my original inquiry because it was suggested to me in the past by some very knowledgeable people as a possible reason for the missing washers. I didn't believe in that scenario and figured if we find owners who had missing washers and can show their cars had original Koni's then it very strongly points to a supply issue and we can rule out the shocks.

[Snakepit]

Originally Posted by s2ms

Jeff, I agree the shock type probably has nothing to do with the subject. I included it as a possibility in my original inquiry because it was suggested to me in the past by some very knowledgeable people as a possible reason for the missing washers. I didn't believe in that scenario and figured if we find owners who had missing washers and can show their cars had original Koni's then it very strongly points to a supply issue and we can rule out the shocks.

Just to continue the discussion (always fun)

"if we find owners who had missing washers and can show their cars had original Koni's " Since the 66's all came with Gabriels from Ford I think it might be a problem.

Anyone have an original Add/Delete sheet or note/letter between Shelby and Ford requesting the Koni's during 66?


I think you may be able to tie it to a shift or supply issue at San Jose maybe (like we have with a couple of other details) but IMHO you have to look at the Ford VIN's not the Shelby VIN's to get a pattern that will stick.

Other 65-66 non-typical patterns that have shown up. Dec 65 coupe red headliners (white was substituted for approx 3 weeks) and Jan 65 black undercarriages (looks to be 3-5 weeks)

[s2ms]

Originally Posted by Snakepit

Just to continue the discussion (always fun)
...Since the 66's all came with Gabriels from Ford I think it might be a problem.

Anyone have an original Add/Delete sheet or note/letter between Shelby and Ford requesting the Koni's during 66?

Hmm, guess I need to get up to speed on the non-carry over 66 GT350 Koni issue. Info from the "1966 GT350 Running Production Changes" section of the last (97) Registry states: Koni Shock Absorbers. Installed on all cars as a general rule. Occasionally standard production Autolite shocks (made by Gabriel) were used instead of Konis. Use followed no discernable pattern." But as far as this discussion IMO the shock thing isn't relevant anyway so possibly we can continue it on a seperate thread as I'd like to hear more on that.

Originally Posted by Snakepit

I think you may be able to tie it to a shift or supply issue at San Jose maybe (like we have with a couple of other details) but IMHO you have to look at the Ford VIN's not the Shelby VIN's to get a pattern that will stick.

I agree Ford VIN's would be more relevant but for obvious reasons that won't happen without SAAC's involvement and I believe they have bigger fish to fry right now. For the moment the best we can do is gather as much info as possible from the Shelby VINs.

[Bob Gaines]

Originally Posted by s2ms

Hmm, guess I need to get up to speed on the non-carry over 66 GT350 Koni issue. Info from the "1966 GT350 Running Production Changes" section of the last (97) Registry states: Koni Shock Absorbers. Installed on all cars as a general rule. Occasionally standard production Autolite shocks (made by Gabriel) were used instead of Konis.

Gabriel adjustable shocks were used not standard Autolite shocks as it reads. This is misinterpreted information or a typo. This same shock with minor variations was used to the end of Shelby production with the 1970 model. They were all the Autolite adjustable shocks and Gabriel was the OEM manufacturer. Interestingly I have seen the 66 Shelby Gabriel adjustable shock, painted from the factory- Koni orange (probably to mimic the missing Konis)as well as Ford blue like 68 shocks and some were black like 67 shocks . The blue color is by far the most common color for the Autolite adjustable shocks in 1966.

[patty.dilabio]

Hi again! Just a few observations and comments.Bob-no feelings hurt..Im not trying to send out wrong info,thanks for the correction.What has developed now is the real heart of the s2ms question..were there misbuilds? and why?And for Snakepit have you ever seen 6S003 ? It was owned by a guy from the L.A. area and was very well preserved original paint and all..dent in the drivers door..Karl ? bought it from Pete Brocks brother in law if memory serves.All this to say this was a low mileage untouched car,and it would make a nice sample of a carryover car.Also if you look up the mount in the Ford parts catalog there are different part numbers,maybe we could chase it as you suggested like with a build sheet reference?I still cannot imagine not wanting the strength in such a critical area.TRANS AM cars used aluminium plates as stiffeners/spacers under the brackets,and wired the bolts,but that is another subject. And to everyone Merry Christmas!! Have a Great New Year!! P.D.

[Snakepit]

Originally Posted by patty.dilabio

........ and why?And for Snakepit have you ever seen 6S003 ? It was owned by a guy from the L.A. area and was very well preserved original paint and all..dent in the drivers door..Karl ? bought it from Pete Brocks brother in law if memory serves.All this to say this was a low mileage untouched car,and it would make a nice sample of a carryover car.

No not in person.... but would be willing to travel to get access (for pictures) for any original car. Got to keep the achieves feed About 30,000 pictures and it grows by 500-1000 every week I get a chance to get out.

Originally Posted by patty.dilabio

Also if you look up the mount in the Ford parts catalog there are different part numbers,maybe we could chase it as you suggested like with a build sheet reference?

Which parts catalog? If its one of the master parts catalogs it may be listed by a different part number for a different reason. The Add/delete sheets at least provide the number Ford was using the same week as the cars were build If we can get access to the correct engineering page for the part it may provide some insight but only as far as what Ford planned to do

Originally Posted by patty.dilabio

.............TRANS AM cars used aluminium plates as stiffeners/spacers under the brackets,and wired the bolts,but
that is another subject.

Trans AM cars used aluminum plates??? What Group? Since the cars could only modify the suspension or the engines from production cars in 66 I think they didn't touch those (later owners and classes allowed it though. Interesting I don't see them below

See one of the engine pictures I have of the car listed as #14 in the registry. It has the stamped steel front shock supports with the welded washers - picture taken in 66 when the car arrived in NZ or right after the first race there.




Bob - Sorry I would have written FoMoCo or AUTOLITE stamped/marked Gabriel adjustables,



Merry Christmas to all also......

[Bob Gaines]

I plan on putting a pair of rear 66 Shelby Fomoco/Gabriel adjustable shocks on Ebay after Jan 1.

[eljimb0]

Originally Posted by Snakepit

Just to continue the discussion (always fun) ........Other 65-66 non-typical patterns that have shown up........ and Jan 65 black undercarriages (looks to be 3-5 weeks)

Snakepit (Jeff)
Hi,
My clone is built on top of a Jan 65 San Jose FB. It has a factory black paint underneath.. did any of the real cars come through that way, I have always wondered.

Merry Christmas everyone.
jimbo

Bob,
did you get the stuff I sent?

[JamesFee]

[quote=Snakepit;29188]James, respectfully, how do you know the Koni installation was done at San Jose? If either/both were dealer installed that would have little to do with the shock supports unless they replaced them with standard Mustang ones.

I also have stories from original owners where they replaced the stock shocks with Koni's with in days or weeks and now do not have the washer welded shock supports. They can not explain why nor can they be sure if their car came that way.

Would suggest that you don't have "the fact" since this is a report or an observation IMHO.


Interesting the claims that 66 cars after the left overs came with Koni's. How are owners (other than recall) supporting it?

QUOTE]

Jeff,

I'll grant you that this is an observation. It is also supported by a Shelby American window sticker for "Special Heavy Duty Adjustable Shock Absorbers" (Yes, I realize it does not state KONI). The owner's manual at the time was still stating Koni and the buyer's recollection was that they were the original issue.

But more important (for me anyway), this car was run as a B-prod - it just does not follow logic that they would upgrade the shocks and downgrade the shock tower supports. It is far more likely that it just did not have the washers welded on.

jim

[tommyleea]

Originally Posted by Edward66GT350

Hello,
Do you have a black gt350? If so, we met about 9-10 yrs ago in Washington at a car show. I have #1761. No shock tower washers. Do not believe it ever did. We discussed this at the show. I was there w/ a Shelby owner, Bob Laughlin(from Tacoma). Our serial #'s are very close. Mine is Ivy green.
Ed
ewkmam@aol.com

Good morning and Merry Christmas...I have #1732 and it is Ivy Green also. I guess I am trying to figure out what washers we are talking about here. Then I can go out and look at my car to see if I have them. Thanks

[s2ms]

Hello Tommy and Merry Christmas to you and everyone on the forum! Your Shelby VIN is an important one for this discussion so please let us know whether you have the washers or not. Here's a pic of an original set of 65-66 shock towers showing the tack welded reinforcement washers. Thanks, Dave

[Snakepit]

Originally Posted by eljimb0

Snakepit (Jeff)
Hi,
My clone is built on top of a Jan 65 San Jose FB. It has a factory black paint underneath.. did any of the real cars come through that way, I have always wondered.

Looks like that car falls inside the range we have found many others with black undercarriage.

If you find the time could you please email the VIN to me so I can add it to the list - VIns are the only way we're going to document this and other details

Originally Posted by s2ms

Hello Tommy and Merry Christmas to you and everyone on the forum! Your VIN is an important one for this discussion so please let us know what you have. Here's a pic of an original set of 65-66 shock towers showing the tack welded reinforcement washers. Thanks, Dave

Dave, since some may be hesitant to share VIN's (just a thought) and the VIN's only provide a three -six week range of when they were built maybe they can provide a approx date. That is if owners have the Mustang Production guide or can get an indication of when the car was built from the sheet metal dates - since they seem to be the closest on the car to the real build dates - provide them.


From the data I could pull up quickly

With washers
6R09K120xxx - Restored - Mid Oct 65 (by Mustang production Guide) - Invoiced 11/30, Fender dated 10/29 & 9/12
6R09K163xxx - Unrestored - Mid Feb 66 (by Mustang production Guide)
6R09K176xxx - Unrestored - Mid Mar 66 (by Mustang production Guide)
6R09K177xxx - Unrestored - Late Mar 66 (by Mustang production Guide)
6R09K178xxx - Restored - Late Mar 66 (by Mustang production Guide)

Without washers
6R09K181xxx - Not unrestored - Late April 66 (by Mustang production Guide)

Have cars with Shelby VINs before and after the car above with washers - only included cars which I had Ford VIN's for and clear pictures of the front shock mounts

[s2ms]

Originally Posted by Snakepit

Dave, since some may be hesitant to share VIN's (just a thought) and the VIN's only provide a three -six week range of when they were built maybe they can provide a approx date. That is if owners have the Mustang Production guide or can get an indication of when the car was built from the sheet metal dates - since they seem to be the closest on the car to the real build dates - provide them.

Thanks for the info Jeff. I think you misunderstood my previous post to Tommy, made some changes so hopefully it's more clear now. Certainly wasn't asking for a Ford VIN

Approx build dates is a good idea, here's mine:

6S1757 - scheduled build date March 29, 1966. Was able to determine this from two members of the HiPo Forum who have a SJ K-codes with Ford VIN's that surround mine and have the same scheduled build date.

[eljimb0]

Originally Posted by Snakepit

Looks like that car falls inside the range we have found many others with black undercarriage.
If you find the time could you please email the VIN to me so I can add it to the list - VIns are the only way we're going to document this and other details

Date code 01B consecutive number ---182548


I'll put it here my car is a clone. My vin is eternally safe ...besides when I croak they are going to set it on fire with me in it and push it out to sea
(dead dog in trunk) I'm going to Valhalla in style.. vikings don't care about the trifles of serial numbers..

[tommyleea]

Originally Posted by s2ms

Hello Tommy and Merry Christmas to you and everyone on the forum! Your Shelby VIN is an important one for this discussion so please let us know whether you have the washers or not. Here's a pic of an original set of 65-66 shock towers showing the tack welded reinforcement washers. Thanks, Dave

OK, now I will look tomorrow and report back. Thanks

Tommy