Posts by round2K_old

That one doesn't appear to be in the registry.

That happens a lot on ebay with both K codes and Sunbeam Tigers. Seems like anyone that has a vehicle even close to a Shelby is taking advantage of his name.

There are six San Jose built cars with that partial VIN in the registry. If you post the rest of the VIN it can be narrowed down and perhaps you can reunite the part with the original car.

If you belong to the MCA you can download their concours judging rules and find the details for both Mustangs and Shelbys.

The 3911 I have does not have the dimple on the arm. I thought I could retrofit based info in Bob Mannel's book - he lists the part # for the second spring - but it won't work without the real deal arm. Live and learn.

Build date 12/30/64: My car has the rear end bumper plate referred to in the 4th edition on page 89 as HiPo variation #1 found on early cars through 65. The exhaust system is shown on page 75 and is listed as very early 65.. The car also has the rear seat exhaust support plates shown on page 88, which are required for the early exhaust system.

Nothin' freaky about it if your car was built with transverse duals prior to 3/65. You are very normal.

Thanks for the tip. I have since found out that my later style lid is correct for my build date.

If you belong to MCA you can download the judging rules which have detailed descriptions for both regular cars and Shelbys.

Lock nuts came in the AMK package. They had it right.

Were the original hipo exhaust manifold studs equipped with brass nuts and lock washers or crimp nuts?

Ditto the ebay comment; there have been a half doze NOS in the past six months.

Pump looks great.

Oops - I may be wrong, but the car in the picture appears to have the radiator shroud on upside down.

Recent ebay auctions (last 30 days) for NOS button tops:

Non-hipo 3911S - $324.

Hipo 3939's have been from 525 to 900+.

Was there any zinc phosphate on the 66's?

If that should be the case, then an ammendment to the book should be given consideration and the section on Body Identifcation corrected. Does this summarize the information?

Hipo bodies had two possible undercarriage configurations:

Prior to 3/22/65: two types of reinforcing plates were installed, at the rear seat and the axle bumper. This would include non-GT cars only equipped with transverse duals or early straight through duals.

After 3/22/65: three types of reinforcing plates were installed, at the rear seat, the axle bumper, and the frame rails. This would include GT's and non-GT cars with straight through duals.

Can anyone else contribute to this for sake of accuracy or additional content? Any assistance would be appreciated.

Dave

I will bring it to Chico and we can compare it to the 3939 in your Shelby museum. Thanks.

One other note on the lack of frame rail plates: you will also be missing the two bolt holes for the GT style hangers in the frame rail, which further explains the lack of rail plates. You can put your pinky in the opening, but you won't find the reinforcement there.

Marv suggested I post on this so here goes. No disrespect to Tony or Marv, but the book states that the frame rail plates for exhaust hangers are mandatory on a hipo:

"A true "K" car body will have all three kinds of plates."

Referring to frame rail plates, rear seat plates and the rear axle bumper plate: I don't know that this is entirely accurate and would like help in solving it.

Frame rail plates:

I have 65 non-GT fastback, 12/30/64 San Jose. My car has every hipo characteristic on the undercarriage with the single exception of the frame rail plates. The brake line, rear seat plates and rear axle bumper plate are all correct. Are there other cars like this one, that were originally sold with transverse duals (at a point when production was changing to stratight-through duals)that lack frame rail plates? With tranverse duals the plates aren't necessary.

Transverse exhaust systems:

I have seen posts by various folks trying to solve their exhaust system and/or hanger dilemmas. In some cases they have found that the car was equipped with transverse duals. I suspect that there were more cars configured this way than we realize as evidenced by the availability of the reproduction transverse dual systems that are being sold by NPD and others.

This holy trinity of undercarriage rail details is a touchy situation with those of us that don't have rail plates. Once things are published they become accepted fact and can have an adverse effect on the perceived authenticity of a car. Can we survey the board membership to determine which cars were equipped with transverse systems and no rail reinforcements? (Maybe I'm just nuts, and won't be offended if it's pointed out.)

If it is determined that there are K codes out there without the frame rail plates, can a correction be issued?

Paul,

Mannel's book has great info on this topic in chapter 4. He shows photos of all three possible timing covers and the various valve covers as well.