new CarTech book on Shelby, question about the 1970 models

First of all I have to praise the photography and general scholarship of the new book The Definitive SHELBY MUSTANG Guide 1965-'70 authored by Greg Kolasa and published by CarTech. It really raises the bar re the information level for Shelby collectors and those wanting to build a tribute of their own. The only all new info to me was the part about where he says A.O.Smith, builders of Shelbys from '68-70, got in a tussle with Ford over finishing the cars after Shelby left and months went by when nothing was happening. I would have thought that, if everything went smoothly in '68, even if Shelby himself left the helm in '69, why would the production of Shelby Mustangs all fall apart in '70? The author of the book doesn't put any company memos or correspondence in there to back up his story but to be fair there was no room for that in this kind of book--the title alone lets you know this is a book about available options, trim levels, paint availability, types of wheels, running changes and the like while my question is more about internal politics. Still Kolasa has opened the door and now has piqued my curiosity as I don't recall reading anything about a FoMoCo vs. A.O. Smith battle in any books or articles previously (other than the serial number update from '69 to '70 models). I shouldn't be surprised== if you look at automotive history, there has been several instances of a "spokesman" whose name is on a car leaving the project and the subseuqent drop in desirability for the car. one example being the front-engined DeTomaso Mangusta where DeTomaso walked out and the builder of the car had to take DeTomaso's name after the car, which failed soon after.

 

Thanks for shining a light in a dark corner

I know that the new book is primarily aimed at those who want to know precisely what equipment was on the '65-'70 models and not intended to be a business history per se. I don't have the book in front of me but on the first read I got the impression it was Shelby who wanted out (I will check that in the next couple days to see if I remember reading that) and not A.O. Smith that wanted him out. Still, that being said, Colin Comer in one of his books on Shelby reproduces at least one letter from a Shelby entity (not called Shelby American, some other Shelby business name) --a great letter (entertainment wise) that tells the poor guy in effect too bad you didn't understand "427" was just a nomenclature when he discovered his Cobra came with a 428. That letter reveals a lot about where they were coming from. So I think if there is a letter from A.O. Smith saying they want out of the arrangement , it would have not been superfluous to reproduce in the book to back up the contention that it was A.O. Smith firing Shelby, not Shelby bailing out on his own. I think Shelby was still burned about the whole Trans-Am program, how he felt Ford didn't give him the best support in comparison with other teams. But most likely this is all far afield from the focus of the new book-- what equipment came on the cars, which is what concours judges are concerned about and tally up on their judging forms. To some, company politics are not important but, looking back, no matter what car company it is, I find them fascinating because it's the personalities involved that made a car a success or failure. In a way it's reminescent of when Ford bought DeTomaso, made the Panteras for America only to have DeTomaso walk out and go his own way, so that Ford was stuck with finishing out the Pantera run. DeTomaso had the last laugh though, making Panteras for decades after Ford abandoned the car. He had the resources to make the cars on his own (i.e. a rich wife)

 

As a guide to concours judges, I was wondering about that.

At least it shows how each car looked with over 500 pages in a fairly slim book. But I wondered about that, for instance, when there was a running change (change to another part during a single model year) then you probably need a part number reference on that page, to say something like "after SN such-and-such they installed this new part." And to put that in every time there was a running change would sure slow up the narrative. So I guess those judges should bring their own ref. notes since most of the time at fancier concours they know way ahead of time what class they will be judging and the people who go to a concours hope that the judges are learned experts in their field. But as several decades have gone by, it's hard for even a regional club member "expert" to tell on a given car that was say in rough shape when bought, if all the parts existed on it contemporaneously. For that to happen it would have to be a one-owner no accident car, and that's rare but not impossible to find. I was only a concours judge once, in the MG class, pressed into service at the last minute and disliked the pressure of the owners taking issue with each note I made on my page (like were the radiators on a TC really polished brass--I doubt it). And of course the monkey wrench is "executive cars" --those rare cars made for executives that had that little difference here and there, like when I knew Bill Mitchell at GM , he would have the trim on his Cadillacs gold-plated! True, not in the catalog yet it was done because he was The Boss