GTP Cool Wall: 1965-1966 Shelby GT350

[Slash]

I just noticed he said that. Couldn't be farther from the truth.

 

[Johnny1996]

This car is so sub-zero, its cooler than the flipside of an ice fisherman's pillow.

 

[Famine]

I just noticed he said that. Couldn't be farther from the truth.

Take one 1966 Shelby GT350. Locate the word "Mustang" anywhere on the car or title. Go.


Still too much having to explain why it's not a Mustang. Still too played out. Just like the GT500 we had a few weeks back.

 

[TB]

Still has a Ford engine.

Using that logic, a Fiesta is a Mustang? Or an F-150? Or a Class C Winnebago?

 

[mustang fanatic]

Using that logic, a Fiesta is a Mustang? Or an F-150? Or a Class C Winnebago?

That's not really what I meant. I meant to say that even though it's a Shelby, it still retains its Ford engine.

 

[TB]

That's not really what I meant. I meant to say that even though it's a Shelby, it still retains its Ford engine.

And yet the post you quoted was regarding it not being a Mustang, not that it didn't have a Ford engine. Hence my comment.

 

[Slash]

Take one 1966 Shelby GT350. Locate the word "Mustang" anywhere on the car or title. Go.

Still too much having to explain why it's not a Mustang. Still too played out. Just like the GT500 we had a few weeks back.

It is a Mustang. It is identified as a higher performance Mustang, similar to Roush and Saleen models.

The Shelby is a higher performance variant of the Ford Mustang which was built by Shelby American from 1965 to 1967, and Shelby Automotive from 1968 to 1970.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelby_Mustang

And then later on it was more of Ford's doing (see 1969 models).


It was built by Ford as a Mustang. It started life as a 289 Hi-Po car. Same as many others.
Nothing Shelby did change the fact that it is a Mustang, all he did was put some hop up parts on it and a signature. The core car is still the same. It even looks the same. It would be different if it had an entirely different body.
It has Mustang badges.
It says Mustang all over it.
The VIN number identifies it as a Mustang.
The door tag identifies it as a Mustang.
The bill of sale identifies it as a Mustang with a list of modifications and options.

I believe the correct identification for the car is "1966 Ford Shelby Mustang GT350".

So it's still not Mustang right?


I agree with you it might be a burden explaining it, but how difficult is it to say "oh it's a Shelby, a high performance version". Big deal. Hell, you wouldn't even need to say anything if people can read.

 

[Sage Ages]

Take one 1966 Shelby GT350. Locate the word "Mustang" anywhere on the car or title. Go.

Still too much having to explain why it's not a Mustang. Still too played out. Just like the GT500 we had a few weeks back.

It has the Mustang logo on the front grill.

 

[Zenith]

That's not really what I meant. I meant to say that even though it's a Shelby, it still retains its Ford engine.

Also worth noting this engine is unique to this car. Ford "K Code" 289's exist but not in the trim available from Shelby.

 

[Slash]

Also worth noting this engine is unique to this car. Ford "K Code" 289's exist but not in the trim available from Shelby.

This. Different parts were installed between the two engines, notably the intake manifold and valve covers. Though most get replaced anyways.

 

[Zenith]

This. Different parts were installed between the two engines, notably the intake manifold and valve covers. Though most get replaced anyways.

But it's not a Ford engine. You could not buy the engine available in the GT350 from Ford.

 

[Slash]

It started as a K code 289 and was modified as such from Shelby.

Correct you couldn't buy it directly from Ford with those modifications but the same the could be said about how you can't buy a massively built 347 stroker with your hand selected aftermarket parts from Ford either.

Just because you couldn't buy it directly from doesnt make it any less of a Ford engine (to an extent, it may not be entirely genuine in which opinions on what is and isnt a Ford can change). The block is stamped with Ford logos all over it. Though one may argue that's only part left on it from Ford but very few parts were changed, mostly just bolt on parts. I'm pretty sure Shelby wasn't casting, building and supplying their own engines that had "289 WCP# FoMoCo" stamped on it in the lifter valley.

 

[Famine]

It was built by Ford as a Mustang. It started life as a 289 Hi-Po car. Same as many others.

All Ruf RGTs started life as Porsche 996 911 GT3s. All Alpina E39 B10s started life as BMW 540is. What it started as is not really relevant to what it ends as.

Nothing Shelby did change the fact that it is a Mustang, all he did was put some hop up parts on it and a signature.

And remove all references to it being a Ford or a Mustang and sell it as a Shelby GT350 with a different VIN.

The core car is still the same. It even looks the same. It would be different if it had an entirely different body.

Why? Because you say so?

Ruf's RGT isn't a Porsche 911. Alpina's B10 isn't a BMW 540i. They share the same bodies.

It has Mustang badges.
It says Mustang all over it.

Then you should have absolutely no trouble doing what I asked. Quick hint - that's not true.

The VIN number identifies it as a Mustang.
The door tag identifies it as a Mustang.
The bill of sale identifies it as a Mustang with a list of modifications and options.

Nor is that.

I believe the correct identification for the car is "1966 Ford Shelby Mustang GT350".

Nor that.

So it's still not Mustang right?

Right.

I agree with you it might be a burden explaining it, but how difficult is it to say "oh it's a Shelby, a high performance version". Big deal.

Explaining why your car is interesting is boring. A car you have to explain is uncool. And you try to explain a lot of cars.

Hell, you wouldn't even need to say anything if people can read.

You wouldn't have had to say anything had you read the post you quoted and followed the instructions...

It has the Mustang logo on the front grill.

The grille badge incorporates the Mustang logo into a new one - the same one carried by the previous year's Shelby Mustang GT350 - but it doesn't wear the Mustang badge. And, even if it did, that doesn't fulfil the requirements you quoted.

 

[Adamgp]

I dunno, kind of looks like a Mustang badge to me:

 

[mustang fanatic]

I dunno, kind of looks like a Mustang badge to me:

Comparison:

The horses in the logos look more or less the same to me.

 

[Famine]

Indeed they do - emphasising exactly what I said. Ford Mustangs had the large Mustang logo in the centre of the grille (and "FORD" above it), Shelby Mustangs - and, from 1966 on, Shelby GT350s - had no Ford badges and incorporated the Mustang into a different grille logo (one usually seen on Mustang fenders and I recall seeing it on a 2011 Mustang steering wheel).

And it still doesn't say Mustang anywhere on the car - except for one place, because the '65 cars actually were Mustangs.

 

[Mustangmiha]

Jesus, it may not be technically a Ford Mustang but it looks like Mustang and drives a little bit faster than a Mustang, to the average joe they're all Mustangs and I don't think you'd make a serious mistake calling a Shelby GT something a Mustang, calm down you people.

 

[Adamgp]

1965 & 1966 GT350 serial numbers say Mustang:

 

[Famine]

And it still doesn't say Mustang anywhere on the car - except for one place, because the '65 cars actually were Mustangs.

1965 & 1966 GT350 serial numbers

That being the one place - Shelby VIN plates were poprivetted over the Ford ones and all said Mustang GT350 - regardless of whether the car was (and title said) Mustang GT350, GT350 or GT350H

Jesus, it may not be technically a Ford Mustang but it looks like Mustang and drives a little bit faster than a Mustang, to the average joe they're all Mustangs

And they aren't Mustangs. See the Ruf/Alpina comment earlier.

And there's nothing that an Alpina owner loves more than explaining why his car isn't a BMW. Which is really boring. Which = uncool. Cars you have to explain are uncool.

 

[SomePlayaDude]

UNCOOL?! ON ONE CAR THAT MADE CARROLL SHELBY A LEGEND?!

 

[Adamgp]

That being the one place - Shelby VIN plates were poprivetted over the Ford ones and all said Mustang GT350 - regardless of whether the car was (and title said) Mustang GT350, GT350 or GT350H And they aren't Mustangs. See the Ruf/Alpina comment earlier.

So it does say Mustang on the car, making this untrue:

And it still doesn't say Mustang anywhere on the car - except for one place, because the '65 cars actually were Mustangs.

The cars arrived at Shelby's factory as incomplete K-code fastback Mustangs. Removing badges and covering VIN plates does not change what the car is.

 

[Famine]

So it does say Mustang on the car, making this untrue:

How does it make it untrue?

And it still doesn't say Mustang anywhere on the car - except for one place, because the '65 cars actually were Mustangs.

The cars arrived at Shelby's factory as incomplete K-code fastback Mustangs. Removing badges and covering VIN plates does not change what the car is.

Assigning it new VINs (Shelby ones) and titles (Shelby GT350 ones) does though.

Exactly like what happens with the Ruf RGT and Alpina B10. Gosh, it's almost like I used those examples for a good reason.


Shelby GT350. Not a Ford, not a Mustang. Having to explain either is boring, cars you have to explain are boring - as the folk who are insisting it is a Mustang are demonstrating quite ably.

 

[Sage Ages]

 

[SomePlayaDude]

 

[Adamgp]

How does it make it untrue?
Assigning it new VINs (Shelby ones) and titles (Shelby GT350 ones) does though.

Exactly like what happens with the Ruf RGT and Alpina B10. Gosh, it's almost like I used those examples for a good reason.


Shelby GT350. Not a Ford, not a Mustang. Having to explain either is boring, cars you have to explain are boring - as the folk who are insisting it is a Mustang are demonstrating quite ably.

Not a Mustang yet the GT350's started life as ~85% complete Mustangs, say "Mustang" on the serial number, has Mustang badges, and was sold through Ford dealerships and came with a Ford warranty.

 

[XS]

Jesus, it may not be technically a Ford Mustang but it looks like Mustang and drives a little bit faster than a Mustang, to the average joe they're all Mustangs and I don't think you'd make a serious mistake calling a Shelby GT something a Mustang, calm down you people.
View attachment 123336

No offense, but it's slightly ironic you chose that picture for this argument. Shelby wanted nothing to do with the 1970 Mustang but lent his name to the car due to the binding contract. Most were made at Ford, not Shelby, even. But don't get me wrong, it is still a Shelby regardless of whether or not Carroll himself had a falling out with Ford and the Mustang before then.

 

[Sage Ages]

I'm gonna start calling you all Donny.

 

[Dennisch]

Did I hear someone say Ferrari Dino?

 

[Famine]

Not a Mustang yet the GT350's started life as ~85% complete Mustangs, say "Mustang" on the serial number, has Mustang badges, and was sold through Ford dealerships and came with a Ford warranty.

Now replace every instance of Ford and Mustang with BMW and 540i, and GT350 with Alpina B10.

And, just as the Alpina B10 is neither BMW nor 540i, the Shelby GT350 is neither Ford nor Mustang.

I trust that the fact that perpetuating this proves the point I originally made isn't lost?

Did I hear someone say Ferrari Dino?

Quiet, you.

 

[Doodle]

I like this car. Looks and sounds great. Cool.