Messages

Hi to all,
Looks like you need a contact in England. Maybe someone in the AC Owners club could help. Good luck on your search!
R.R.

Hi again,
The Ford spring rating is representing total capacity. The Eaton chart shows lbs. Per inch thus the difference. Can be confusing yet it is still done this way by Ford.
Hope this explains it simply.
R.R.

Hi to all,
Just to add to the excellent responces from Bob and J.D. If you look on the chart provided the initial build had lighter rated springs (AM stamping 625 lb.)After mid November they were AR stamped and rated 665 lb. This should give you proper info to get replacements if you really need them. Originals can be rebuilt and often are.
May suggest talking to a spring shop as a next step....wouldn't want the car to end up looking like a 4x4.
Regards R.R.

Hi Roy,
From the Ford Side Shelby was set up as a fleet type account. He had several people on his team..Ray Geddes and Gary Nuznoff were key players in the ordering process and were with Shelby right from the beginning of S.A.I. Both were from Ford and were key in planning the Shelby Build each year,as was Chuck Cantwell.
 
On the Shelby side of production they must have had forms to follow and I seriously doubt any were computer type. Howard will hopefully be able to help with this.
R.R.

Hi folks,
Maybe you are looking for the top cover for a top loader transmission??
If so David Kee makes a nice reproduction. Inspection cover makes most of us think of the flywheel cover that is used on an FE equipped 4 speed.Hope this helps.
R.R.

Hi Roy and all,
The book by Chuck Cantwell & Greg Kolasa paints a good picture of what the "Production"
Process was set up like during the airport years. From what we know it was able to meet the small market for the first year,and as was mentioned in another post the Hertz contract really saved the second year profits due to Ford's involvement in the deal. It mentions several production troubles that prevented sales like the lack of certain parts from suppliers. Hoods and wheels mentioned as major setbacks. Another thing to consider is how
They did the car in 66. It was so much simpler in 66 vrs. 65. Howard should be contacted.
When it involves 65 & 66 cars he is "THE MAN"
R.R.

Hi to all.
A big THANK YOU for the pictures. Outstanding views and really am impressed by the ones posted by Chris. Very nice to see!!
R.R.

Hi Again Ford G.T. fans,
After some digging it turns out this car was "Recreated" and has been shown/raced.Won best recreation in 2016 Amelia Island show. As far as the magazine article is concerned it is not R&T or the English "Autosport" Very possible multiple different magazines
would be interested in this new design and could have a feature article.Now to find which one remains the challenge. Please keep us in the loop.
R.R.

Hi All,
Just to put a date with the picture-car was flown out of England on April 1st
Displayed by Ford and sent back to England. Had very few test miles and was damaged.
Was powered by the Indy 256 DOHC as were the first 3 cars. May survive according to the book by Ronnie Spain.
R.R.

Hi Kieth,
I am fairly confident that this picture is of G.T.101 on the field when it was flown to New York for a Ford Display. This photo was used by several media folks and later in several books. Most likely it is in with the Ford Archives as well.
Wish I could help more on this particular article.
Have a Great Thanksgiving!!
Anthony  aka R.R.

Hi again 67 fans,
One thing overlooked by this discussion is Warranty replacement. If Doug's car had an oil leak or pressure concern when new, and the adapter was the fault it would explain why a  C8 part was on an engine built in 67. And if this was done when the car was new it would appear "original"
You would need to know the complete history and it is a rare find in today's world. Hope this helps people understand what makes it so important to document everything.As well how important it is to have certain judging standards and stick to them. Just my 2 cents
R.R.

Hi,
The picture shows a C8 Casting number so this will not be correct for a 1967 build.
Maybe you could trade it for a correct part. Hope this helps.
R.R.

Looking at the pictures you posted it appears someone may have sanded the texture smooth and then repainted it. Takes some time and effort to accomplish, plus some high build primer. Would need to see it in person to confirm--a paint thickness gauge will not work on fiberglass as they are magnetic. Also if it fits the car properly it could be an original part. If you can compare closely with a car that is 100% original it would help you see details to confirm. Hope this helps.
R.R.

Hey again,
A huge Thanks to all that responded, esp. Pete's picture....now the hunt begins

Hi To 1968 owners.
Im looking for the correct way to install the bracket and spring for the Dzus hood lock. It fits directly to the radiator support, and my guess would be a simple nut/bolt maybe flanged type?? Amazing what gets lost or vanishes when a car is disassembled for repaint. The part number for this is CMMA 16943 A IF that is accurate. Any pictures
Would help out as well. Thanks in advance for the help.
R.R.