can anybody ID these parts?

Hi Again everyone on this thread! It is amazing to read comments from some people about shows and judges,opinions,and the like.The hobbie will shrink if this gets in the way of the main purpose of what we own.Shelby used the phrase The Road Cars in 1967,and thankfully people like Eric still drive their cars,on the road.Car shows will always have opinions that hurt feelings,and flare tempers.We need to get over this and share the hobbie,check out the Ford G.T. forum.these folks are really enjoying their cars and useing them.Go to a convention and see how many people are now raceing.The show side has really shrunk..and if we are to keep it alive,and healthy we need to get over the attitude we here all to often.My Dad has said if you are not part of the solution-You are part of the problem.Maybe that means to be in a different class at a show..but at least go,dont stay home and hide! And when you look at what people are critizing..relax..it is not a million dollar deal,it is a fun day to share a part of history.Enjoy!

 

Mark I fully understand where you car coming form and neither do I want to stir up this constructive dialogue but I would suggest that we always take magazine articles and pictures from the time with a grain of salt. We have all heard the reports from workers and people involved with these cars where the cars were altered and or improved for the press.

In the same breath most of us have also seen our share of "original untouched survivors" that you can tell were changed or repaired at some point. Every year we see cars just like this. They are the best treasures we have but each must be inspected, compared, evaluated ... and most importantly enjoyed. Just not always fully accepted IMHO

The more we find our about these cars the more they are the same and not that everyone was different from another. Not all the same, but in general it is rare to have one individual production car really that different from the one that was built next to it. Yes there were patterns and running changes, but in general allot of the individuality comes from what early owners did with the cars from the fair share I've seen

Viva the discussion !!

 

Could not agree more....
I also have an "early car"....I have heard every line there is for the last 25 years.....I also drive my car...drove it to the 2002 Amelia Island Concours, did the show, and drove it home...I do not even own a trailer anymore...

I restored my car, not overrestored it.....My goal was to make it look like it was 6 months old, not something that never existed.....

I've talked to a few former Shelby empoyee, and the cars never looked like some of the cars that exist now!!

 

MarkBoss,

I trust that none of your last comment about "heard all the lines over the past 25 years" is directed at me or anything that I have posted on this thread. If it was, then be real specific and explain to all of us just exactly what you think that I have posted is not true.

I believe in healthy discussion about our cars. All I ask is that you or anyone else do not attack/criticize me or my car unless you have your facts straight.

Thanks,
Eric

 

I am not attacking you or your car...I have never seen your car.....
In the Jan 67 issue of R & T...I did not see any pictures of the junction box...

This is a discussion board, as was posted in the first picture, from a very untouched survivor car, the block was installed differently, same as my car, that is all that was stated......

Please do not make more of this than that...a discussion...
This sounds like an MCA forum!!

 

MarkBoss,

Thanks for your response. You seemed to be very persistent that the junction block was installed incorrectly on my car even after I referenced the magazine photos. I believe that all we have here is an example of the cars were not built the same way all of the time, especially in the "little details" aspect.

Apparently, I misunderstood the intent of your comments. With that behind us, lets move on with the discussion.

You are correct, the January 1967 issue of Road and Track features a different car and does not show the junction block. The good pictures of the engine compartment of my car appear in the February 1967 issue of Road and Track and the March 1967 issue of Sports Car Graphic.

Thanks,
Eric

 

I talked to one of Shelby's former employee, who lives here in FL....He laughs at the extent of the "Concours" that these cars are judged....Like he told me, if we needed a bolt, we went to the hardware store...Too Funny!!

I learned a long time ago, there are so many people who will argue with you about your own car, it's just better to agree with them, and you will never see them again...if you argue with them, they will stay there for hours....

The early cars are so different, and running changes were made..

My understanding is that the junction block came from an air conditioned 65-66 convertible mustang..according to my friend, a guy who has owned about 20 Shelby's/Mustangs

Mark

 

Mark,

I am not sure about the origin of the junction block used on the early '67 Shelbys. I have never seen that style junction block installed on any other Mustangs or Shelbys.

What I can tell you is this, the original junction block was broken on my car when I bought it in 1979. Sometime in the early 1990s I decided that it was time to try and find a replacement junction block. Nothing "automotive" seemed to match what I needed. A friend of mine who owns '67 Shelby serial number 0009 and I thought to ourselves, these cars were built at an airport, maybe the part is off a plane rather than a car. Well, my friend works for one of the airlines, and after a few days of looking through aircraft parts listings he was able to come up with the terminal strip. It was a nearly perfect match. So that is what is on my car now.

Based on the band saw marks that are on both ends of my original junction block, I believe that a long piece of terminal strip was the source of the junction block used on the early '67s. Check yours out closely. Does it have band saw marks on its ends also?

Thanks,
Eric

 

Hi guys! Did anyone remember that Erics car was an engineering car?It is what was used to evaluate changes,and it is also one of many cars throughout the production run that was designated as an engineering car by vin number.Mr Markboss must realize that if the terminal block is mounted differently on his car it wont affect how it works!!Also the buddy he has with the idea it is the same as a mustang convertible is close but wont get a cigar.if it was that easy we would all be able to have one.It serves a similar purpose,when used as a power top source but it aint the same part.Most likely this is one of dozens of changes made by Shelbys staff to allow the cars to be built faster and cheaper.When you compare any part of shelbys conversion,the steps changed.I'll give 3 examples:1 lower side scoops.early cars were center ducted,and they cut away the sheet metal to make room for the ducting.2 upper scoops had running lamps installed,and they made a seperate ground wire and ran the power feed from the stoplamp switch.3 flat gas caps.a special flat aluminium disc bolted in place just to hold an adhesive emblem.How much labor time saved to just simplify those 3 operations?times 3000 cars and you can easily see why it was done,this doesnt account for parts cost either.eleminate the ducting,the lights and the disc...you follow me.Sorry if this is off the terminal block subject.Aircraft parts were very available to shelby american and the 2 ear type is most likely sourced from an outside supplier,thus it makes more sense to use a ford supplied part,that serves the same purpose.Has anybody else chased this part??