SAAC Forum

Deals and Appeals => Up For Auction => Topic started by: azdriver on December 05, 2024, 10:51:30 AM

Title: 67412F5A00565 on BAT
Post by: azdriver on December 05, 2024, 10:51:30 AM
This car is local to me. Never seen it..

Pat

https://bringatrailer.com/listing/1967-shelby-mustang-gt500-23/
Title: Re: 67412F5A00565 on BAT
Post by: JD on December 05, 2024, 11:16:40 AM
Was listed for sale in Hemmings January of 2021, in California was asking $215,000.00
Title: Re: 67412F5A00565 on BAT
Post by: thinkshelby on December 08, 2024, 01:25:52 PM
This post is me seeking to learn more about (67 and 68) Shelbys.

How should the red/orange primer parts look?  Does the answer apply equally to '68s?

It seems too glossy (e.g. photo 85).
It also looks like orange was sprayed over some uneven surfaces, and folks just stopped painting at odd places, like in photos 96 and 97 and 106 (no orange above the power steering components).
And there are different orange colors: 105.

Should my attention be elsewhere?

Thank you.
Title: Re: 67412F5A00565 on BAT
Post by: Coralsnake on December 08, 2024, 01:33:29 PM
The correct color is "red oxide" primer. It was not glossy when originally applied.

You may have slight variations in the color and different parts of the undercarriage were not sprayed at the same time.

The idea was to cover all downward facing surfaces, however, some surfaces may not have received primer.

67 and 68 Shelbys were built at different plants and techniques varied


The body color, pinch welds and engine bay were sprayed after the primer and should be without hard edges, causing overspray

 
Title: Re: 67412F5A00565 on BAT
Post by: Coralsnake on December 08, 2024, 02:02:32 PM
The forum is not allowing private messages for some reason

You can find me here

www.thecoralsnake.com

Title: Re: 67412F5A00565 on BAT
Post by: Coralsnake on December 08, 2024, 02:31:07 PM
The car above is not really indicative of the factory appearance
Title: Re: 67412F5A00565 on BAT
Post by: 1175 on December 08, 2024, 02:54:03 PM
Rear shock plates mounted 90 degrees the wrong direction.  Bomb can red oxide 'refresh' leaves a lot to be desired.

Jon
Title: Re: 67412F5A00565 on BAT
Post by: Bob Gaines on December 08, 2024, 03:41:57 PM
Quote from: Coralsnake on December 08, 2024, 02:31:07 PMThe car above is not really indicative of the factory appearance
You can say that again. :o
Title: Re: 67412F5A00565 on BAT
Post by: J_Speegle on December 08, 2024, 09:44:52 PM
Kind of getting off thread

Quote from: thinkshelby on December 08, 2024, 01:25:52 PMThis post is me seeking to learn more about (67 and 68) Shelbys.

How should the red/orange primer parts look?  Does the answer apply equally to '68s?

As mentioned you should not really compare the two. Each has little to do with the other when you get to the details. Somethings similar but not the same in other words. As Pete mentioned - Mustangs were built at different plants and by different workers and the conversions - just the same - two different companies, processes, suppliers for many things ....

Quote from: thinkshelby on December 08, 2024, 01:25:52 PMIt seems too glossy (e.g. photo 85).
It also looks like orange was sprayed over some uneven surfaces, and folks just stopped painting at odd places, like in photos 96 and 97 and 106 (no orange above the power steering components).
And there are different orange colors: 105.

In my eye the floor color original had a greater shine that what most people think of. Guess its the term many used - Red Oxide - that brings up memories of Rustoleum rattle can red oxide. In this case it was an epoxy based paint/sealer and not an open (flat) primer that was designed to be over coated with another layer of paint making it more rust proof.  Now all of the over spray from the exterior body color, pinch weld black out and black wheel well and engine compartment painting each create a flatter and rougher look where there is fine or slightly more over spray on the floors and frame rails. And originally there was overspray on most of the floors from about the firewall rearward due to high flow and high pressures the guns used.

Add to all of this 50 years of age and use and the surface is flatter due to those elements also. Not saying it is a high gloss finish but you can get a light to reflect off of a cleaned original floor color both the epoxy primer sealer or a batch color used on other years and models

This might help in relationship with the 67 undercarriage. Still need to create one for 68 NJ built Mustangs/Shelbys

1967 San Jose Undercarraige Details (https://www.docdroid.net/dNrBoiu/article-opensource-67sanjoseunder-19v6-pdf)
Title: Re: 67412F5A00565 on BAT
Post by: shelbymann1970 on December 09, 2024, 07:50:32 AM
Quote from: J_Speegle on December 08, 2024, 09:44:52 PMKind of getting off thread

Quote from: thinkshelby on December 08, 2024, 01:25:52 PMThis post is me seeking to learn more about (67 and 68) Shelbys.

How should the red/orange primer parts look?  Does the answer apply equally to '68s?

As mentioned you should not really compare the two. Each has little to do with the other when you get to the details. Somethings similar but not the same in other words. As Pete mentioned - Mustangs were built at different plants and by different workers and the conversions - just the same - two different companies, processes, suppliers for many things ....

Quote from: thinkshelby on December 08, 2024, 01:25:52 PMIt seems too glossy (e.g. photo 85).
It also looks like orange was sprayed over some uneven surfaces, and folks just stopped painting at odd places, like in photos 96 and 97 and 106 (no orange above the power steering components).
And there are different orange colors: 105.

In my eye the floor color original had a greater shine that what most people think of. Guess its the term many used - Red Oxide - that brings up memories of Rustoleum rattle can red oxide. In this case it was an epoxy based paint/sealer and not an open (flat) primer that was designed to be over coated with another layer of paint making it more rust proof.  Now all of the over spray from the exterior body color, pinch weld black out and black wheel well and engine compartment painting each create a flatter and rougher look where there is fine or slightly more over spray on the floors and frame rails. And originally there was overspray on most of the floors from about the firewall rearward due to high flow and high pressures the guns used.

Add to all of this 50 years of age and use and the surface is flatter due to those elements also. Not saying it is a high gloss finish but you can get a light to reflect off of a cleaned original floor color both the epoxy primer sealer or a batch color used on other years and models

This might help in relationship with the 67 undercarriage. Still need to create one for 68 NJ built Mustangs/Shelbys

1967 San Jose Undercarraige Details (https://www.docdroid.net/dNrBoiu/article-opensource-67sanjoseunder-19v6-pdf)
Jeff, I cannot get the link to work. I'd love to see a 68 detailed underside done.
Title: Re: 67412F5A00565 on BAT
Post by: FL SAAC on December 09, 2024, 08:20:15 AM
Nice car
Title: Re: 67412F5A00565 on BAT
Post by: thinkshelby on December 09, 2024, 10:04:05 AM
The link is working for me.  Here it is "spelled out" in case that's useful:
https://www.docdroid.net/dNrBoiu/article-opensource-67sanjoseunder-19v6-pdf
And Wow!  Impressive document, thank you.
(also interested in one for '68 :-)
Title: Re: 67412F5A00565 on BAT
Post by: J_Speegle on December 09, 2024, 11:32:05 AM
Quote from: shelbymann1970 on December 09, 2024, 07:50:32 AMJeff, I cannot get the link to work. I'd love to see a 68 detailed underside done.

Hmmm - Just clicked on it and it loaded. A bit slow but that could be my connection or just due to the size of the file.

Posted versions in past threads for 65 and 66 San Jose as well as 69 Dearborn Mustangs based on the years that typically are in greatest demand over the years.