Shelby Glass - 1966 GT30

Sure. I said extensive restoration. That would include a new windshield.

Again, at least in the case of the green car, the owner claims to have invoices, not option lists. Perhaps he'll show them in a display package some day, until then, I can only report what he claims. Beats me why he'd go to so much trouble if it wasn't right, though.

I've only seen a few of his cars, but he restores them to original. He has a 66 K code GT convertible, 4-speed deluxe interior, console, power top, Rally-Pac, AM/8-Track. Has documentation to prove it came that way. I saw the car before it was restored. Looked like it was dragged out of a swamp.

Note- About that 68 427. Apparently it was cancelled from the Mustang about 5 minutes before production began. The Cougar, built on the same assembly line, did receive the 427, maybe Mercury didn't get the memo, so they built 357 of them.

 

Actually at least one 65 GT350 came with a tinted winshield 5S426. Not sure why it did, but SAAC paper work and the registry show it came with a tinted windshield and it is still in the car today.

 

Since Ford did not charge extra for it (according to the 2011 registry)the anomalous tinted windshield was most likely a mistake. The deviation would be accepted on that one particular car since there is factory paperwork to support the out of the ordinary occurrence. Like any extraordinary claim it requires extraordinary proof. Bob

 

Bob,

Just curious what the 2011 registry says. The invoice for the car does not mention tinted glass, so I am not sure what paperwork the club has. If it was a mistake they also may have made a mistake on the side and vent windows as they are tinted similar to the rear window. I thought that as my car is only one number off the Paxton prototype car that maybe they were trying different ideas for the 66 model.

 

Shelby was not in the habit of just trying different things normally without some plan or reason from what we've seen. The windows would have been a San Jose thing where the Paxton thing was a Shelby thing done to what ever body they pulled from the lot - even thought the Shelby numbers were assigned one after the other the Ford numbers might be off allot

What are the dates on the tinted pieces compared to the guessed build date or period of the San Jose build date?


Just a thought

 

Windshield 5D
Drivers Vent 5D
Pass Vent 5D
Drivers Window 4J
Pass Window 4H
Rear Window 5C

Don't now the San Jose build date but the latest sheetmetal date stamp in the engine compartment I can see is 5 5

 

The registry did not elaborate on the glass other then it was delivered with the tinted windshield. The extra cost for the glass was not even passed on to SA. It is typical that if the windshield was tinted that the side glass would be too. It would be stranger if the windshield was tinted and the side clear . Again since it was such a small anomaly without Ford even charging for it (not their habit) supports a mistake of some sort IMHO. it would make perfect sense that since SA didn't order it with tinted glass and a mistake was made that Ford wouldn't charge for their mistake unlike a intentional effort. Fortunately SAAC has providence to support it. Bob

 

Another possibility (just a possibility) is that there was a mistake on the invoice

Just dealt with a 67 that had paperwork at SAAC where a dealer was reimbursed for repairs to the AC. Problem is - the car was built with no AC

A possibilitybut not suggesting that this is the case in this situation

As for the following
----------------
Windshield 5D
Drivers Vent 5D
Pass Vent 5D
Drivers Window 4J
Pass Window 4H
Rear Window 5C

Don't now the San Jose build date but the latest sheetmetal date stamp in the engine compartment I can see is 5 5
--------------------
So this is a 65 we're discussing - rather than the 66 the thread is titled?


Your last glass date is April 65 and the earliest is Sept 64

I'm finding cars with the April 65 date being assembled around Sept 65 and Sept 64 earlier than that. So looking at your dates and dates from around when your car was likely assembled it looks IMHO that the drivers and passenger windows have been replaced at some point while the rest fit the window

PM or email me if you would rather

 

In the early Mustang, tinted windshield and fully tinted glass were separate options, so it's possible to have a tinted windshield and otherwise clear glass. All fastback rear glass was tinted, so a fastback ordered with tinted windshield only would have tint front and rear, with clear glass in the doors. Perhaps this car was mistakenly equipped with the tinted windshield as per this option. Since these cars were Mustang in origin, an accidental Mustang configuration is certainly possible.

 

You have your opinion on what would be more likely to see and I have mine, it can be debated ether way. It was most likely a mistake regardless of how you spin it . Less of a mistake more of a mistake it doesn't really matter it is still some kind of mistake most likely at the end of the day on the 65 being discussed. There is a typical way the 65 and 66 GT350's were built if there is a deviation from the normal in this respect usually the simplest answer is the most logical explanation. Past owner modifications is the most common. Tinted windshields are a very common replacement as up until recent years a clear windshield wasn't even available.If you have a Shelby equipped out of the ordinary you had better have reasonable back up if you want to try and convince anyone it came that way. We hear that way to much to justify non stock items. Here say and urban myths just don't stand up to empirical evidence. The anomalous tinted windshield on the 65 GT350 being discussed fortunately has legitimate provenience provided by SAAC factory paperwork. Bob

 

Hmmm… I was merely pointing out that a production deviation with tint need not be all or nothing. Since it was perfectly normal to have a mix of clear and tint on a production Mustang, it therefore becomes possible that it may have happened to a Shelby. I've not seen any documentation to show this ever happened on any year Shelby. And since Ford saw fit to destroy the pre-67 Mustang production records, sorting out such things is a lot harder.

Perhaps I'll have a chance at some point to examine the paperwork on the car I mentioned. He's never offered to show the paperwork, since it's his car, his money, and he doesn't care what we think. I've always been skeptical myself. My personal opinion is the car was altered at the dealer in Florida when it was delivered. Lessee, a dark green rental car with black interior being delivered to south Florida. You ever been there? I left a thermometer in a car with tinted glass one time, and the interior temperature was 155°F. That's a medium-well steak temperature, more than enough to cook seafood.

 

Hmmm... you must be reading more into my response then was intended. I had a opinion that it would be more likely "typical"to see all tinted then windshield and backglass only. Nothing was said about all or nothing just less likely.There is absolutely nothing wrong with a owner personalized their own car . On the other hand trying to perpetuate a myth or non original claim does nothing but continue to fuel the myth/claim so others think they can justify the same thing. We see this on the show field while judging time and time again. Copying a magazine or what someone without credibility said .Bob

 

Well, the car is a legitimate 66 Shelby. The non-standard stuff, who knows. I hope you do run across it, then he'd have to show his paperwork. It was not copied out of anything, though. It was presented for restoration as "original", and certainly looked like it. Every part that could be verified checked out. Naturally, there was no way to tell if it came through Shelby like that.