ConcoursMustang Forums
1st Generation 1964 1/2 - 1973 - Questions & general discussions that apply to a specific year => 1967 Mustang => Topic started by: bazza on December 18, 2015, 09:15:34 PM
-
I know there were a lot of changes through the 67 model year.
Was 68 sun visor bracket and stickon rear view mirror one of them?? My 67 has 68 visor bracket and it looks like its original to the car.
-
I am not aware of any 67s that used the 68 style of mirror bracket. What is the build date of your car and what assembly plant was it built in?
Marty
-
Its in my signature. Probably last day of production.
Marti confirms date.
Thanks
-
Sorry about that I missed it.
Are you the original owner or do you have any documentation that the mirror is original? Is there any thing else unusual about the car?
-
The mirror is long gone, but if the visor bracket is original, I assume a 68 mirror is correct.
I have been wrong before tho.
I have owned the car since 2010. I've sorta finished my 65 convertible restomod, so I'm getting started on this one.
Gunna try for closer to original on the 67. What a learning curve!!
-
The 68 visor bracket used two screws. The 67 mirror/visor bracket used three. If you have access above the headliner, the number of screw holes in the sheet metal should be a clue.
-
Looks like the original headliner.
Not sure if the pics will post.
Looks like 1 hole has never had a screw in it
-
In your last photo, there is a metal tab or bracket screwed to the roof structure. Check that bracket for the third hole. It would be on centerline, farther from the windshield than the other two screws. See the upper right corner in this photo from WCCC.
If the hole is there, it would be helpful if you could post a nice photo of the bracket, as this topic has come up a couple of times and photos seem to be hard to come by.
-
Is this what you wanted of the bracket? If not, I can take a pic once I remove the roof console.... which wont be anytime soon. :)
I think I can assume this car has never had a 67 mirror, so 68 parts are correct. Anyone agree???
WT8095, when you say, "this topic has come up a couple of times", are you referring to the use of 68 parts, or something to do with the bracket??
-
It appears that the 68 bracket is original. Be sure to keep these pictures as documentation in case you ever have the car judged.
-
WT8095, when you say, "this topic has come up a couple of times", are you referring to the use of 68 parts, or something to do with the bracket??
Sorry, I was referring to general discussion of the variety of mirrors and brackets used in '67. There was one thread in which someone posted a photo of the center sheet metal bracket, but the photo was a wide-angle view and not very high resolution, so it was difficult to see what was going on. I have not run across any previous discussion of '68-style brackets being used in '67.
I'm certainly no expert on 67s, but the circumstantial evidence suggests your 68-style brackets are original as Marty assessed. The general condition of the headliner, visor bracket, visors, and roof console suggest they are all of a similar age and likely original. That leaves four possible explanations I can think of, in order of decreasing liklihood:
- '68-style brackets were installed at the factory.
- '67-stye brackets were originally installed, but the factory missed drilling the third hole, and '68-style parts and a new headliner were installed at a later date.
- '67-stye brackets were originally installed and the bracket was drilled, but a replacement bracket without a hole was installed later, along with '68-style parts and a new headliner.
- Your car is really a '68. :o
-
- Your car is really a '68. :o
Interesting,
According to the Mustang Production Guide, the last recorded (submitted) Dearborn 67 Mustang built at Dearborn is VIN 7F02S232939 with a scheduled build date of 11V, August 11th. Earliest recorded 68 build is 8F03C100479 with a 14H August 14th build date. As has been discussed often and supported by Marti Reports, scheduled, and actual production dates are often different.
Not saying it's not a 67, but if it is, it's a very late car. Where did you find your August 17 date? Has it got a 67 serial door tag?[/list]
-
I came up with one more possibility: the overhead console was added, and the bracket is covering the original third hole (or the third hole was on the bracket that the console one replaced - sorry, I don't know as much about 67s as I do on 68s). Looking back at your photos, it seems like the two wider-spaced holes are in about the right spot for a '67 bracket. The "middle" hole looks really sloppy due to the way it hits the sheetmetal bracket, and results in an off-center hole pattern. I would try gently running a screw into that third hole to see if it's really threaded or not.
Regardless of which bracket was originally installed, your build date is very interesting in light of the info GT500KR posted.
-
I think more pictures of this car are warranted. Also more investigation in the build date as suggested above.
-
The 67 has a scheduled build date of 11V, August 11th.
Marti report confirms the roof console and the actual build date of August 17. 7F02S232917
Coupla pieces of trivia I have found, Dearborn production ended last, and the last car in each plant was an S code.
Its a shame that the engine bay has been changed over its lifetime, I'm sure a lot of details have been lost. The rest of the car is fairly untouched, except for paint and exhaust.
-
The 67 has a scheduled build date of 11V, August 11th.
Marti report confirms the roof console and the actual build date of August 17. 7F02S232917
Coupla pieces of trivia I have found, Dearborn production ended last, and the last car in each plant was an S code.
Its a shame that the engine bay has been changed over its lifetime, I'm sure a lot of details have been lost. The rest of the car is fairly untouched, except for paint and exhaust.
It would be interesting to see the Marti report for your car. Perhaps the late build, after 68 production had begun, would be due to the lack of some unusual options/parts needed to complete. Being built along side 68 units would explain the mirror, and possibly other 68 parts or procedures.
Maybe others can chime in on what other differences you might look for.
I'm guessing your Marti indicates that this car was a "Retail" order.
-
Hmmm, I should probably be researching 68 procedures as well as 67, I'm sure there are some differences, just don't know what.
Its probably the worst type of car to try to show, with judges frowning at the differences. But heyy, it will be unique. :)
-
Hmmm, I should probably be researching 68 procedures as well as 67, I'm sure there are some differences, just don't know what.
Its probably the worst type of car to try to show, with judges frowning at the differences. But heyy, it will be unique. :)
Do you have a shot of the Marti report showing the real build date as you listed in a prior post?
Judges don't frown on differences - changes up things and makes them interesting. Its often the owners that don't like it when their asked for some documentation or proof.
Other than "that's the way it was when I bought it" :)
.............. Perhaps the late build, after 68 production had begun,...........
????
Building 67's after regular 68 production had started - don't think so.
For this particular item you might want to start documenting very late Dearborn 67's to see if they released the new mirror before production ended at that plant
-
????
Building 67's after regular 68 production had started - don't think so.
For this particular item you might want to start documenting very late Dearborn 67's to see if they released the new mirror before production ended at that plant
I'm not sure that the first 68 scheduled for 14 August was actually built then. Maybe they cleared the 67 orders first.
I'm also not sure how to go about documenting the mirror change. Any suggestions???
-
Wow, radio delete on a coupe with decor interior and AC!
Strange one indeed! I think somebody is selling the delete panel now here if you need one, I doubt that car still is equipped without a radio after all of these years!
The "missing 3rd mirror hole" is evidence the car came without a ceiling-mounted mirror. The place the hole would be is in the center on the ceiling console bracket as already shown in one of the OP's last pictures. The black bracket for the console has a larger hole in it to clear the 3rd hole typically seen on a 67. I haven't looked at too many 68's up front by the visor center mount, but that image the OP showed definately has the spot-welded bracket for that 3rd screw welded to the windshield reinforcement and clearly has no hole in it. Instead, there is an irregular hole that seems to be hitting the console bracket, as if the spread between the holes on the 68 style visor bracket was closer than the forward holes of the 67 mirror base.
I am with Marty on this one. Better to document your findings if you wish to show this on the concours show field with a windshield mounted mirror. Either that or convert it to the 67 style to fit the "accepted mold" and chalk it up as a transitional anomoly. I seriously doubt you will find other examples like this, even though I would not be surprised that they DO exist! .
-
:) Even stranger ... still doesn't have a radio. Tho i don't think its a factory delete plate ....... ????
I can imagine a guy walked into his dealer and said "I want the best car you've got, but I don't want one of those noisy wireless thingies, with loud pop music or flashy stuff on the outside"
I believe the mileage to be accurate, car just wasn't taken care of.
-
I'm not sure that the first 68 scheduled for 14 August was actually built then. Maybe they cleared the 67 orders first.
I'm also not sure how to go about documenting the mirror change. Any suggestions???
Take pictures of the mirror and the mounting area then search and find other cars built around the same time and plant. The idea is if they did it originally on your car it would not have been the only one (mirror base) delivered to the line (at least 200-500 units I would guess) so there would be others. Alone by its self its difficult to accept that it was factory especially considering the other changes pass owners have made to the car
If you can get three or more independent confirmations of the same thing you will have a much stronger case for giving the car and finding the "benefit of the doubt "
:) Even stranger ... still doesn't have a radio. Tho i don't think its a factory delete plate ....... ????.......................
Yes some home made thing installed. Apparently there was a radio in the car at some point (got an antenna hole?)
It was not out of ordinary for some dealers to order cars without radios in the hope that when the cars arrived the salesmen could up sale the excited new owner an even more expensive radio and pocket the higher installation and markups
-
Take pictures of the mirror and the mounting area then search and find other cars built around the same time and plant. The idea is if they did it originally on your car it would not have been the only one (mirror base) delivered to the line (at least 200-500 units I would guess) so there would be others. Alone by its self its difficult to accept that it was factory especially considering the other changes pass owners have made to the car
If you can get three or more independent confirmations of the same thing you will have a much stronger case for giving the car and finding the "benefit of the doubt "
The mirror itself is long gone, which is why I started to work this out.
Because of the late build date, and soon to be started 68, I'm sure they had 10s of thousands of the bases.
Now I know that they didn't necessarily come down the line in sequence, but given the verified date, there are maybe a hundred odd more cars to go, and some of them could have been Cougars.
I think I could look for the rest of my life, (from Australia), to not find 1 more example, let alone enough for a pattern.
To prove something that is, (to me), obviously true.
I'm rethinking my idea that it will be easier to go stock versus modified,(I thought I would have a finish point). :)
Guess if it was easy, it wouldn't be fun.
Thanks for everyones input, it is appreciated.
-
Nice car. I also noticed that it has the trip odometer, and I don't see the tachometer option on the Marti report. Strange for an automatic transmission optioned car.
-
Take pictures of the mirror and the mounting area then search and find other cars built around the same time and plant.
Pay attention to, and photograph the headliner and the front and rear window gaskets. If you can prove the headliner is original, it adds support for the way you found the car. The lack of a third screw hole, and no apparent outline on the headliner from having a larger 67-style mirror mount are strong (but not 100% conclusive) evidence that it did not have a 67-style mount.
Was the clock part of the interior decor group for '67? It's not listed on the Marti report.
-
We are not here to condemn but to help, you must understand we see so many cars that have been changed by previous owners over the years and we must be skeptical.
More pictures of all parts of the car may help us help you find the truth about your car. Some time changes that were done 40 years ago can look very original.
I look forward to helping you solve this question and build a car the you will be very proud of. No it is not easy! But it is very worth it at the end.
Good luck
Marty
-
Pay attention to, and photograph the headliner and the front and rear window gaskets. If you can prove the headliner is original, it adds support for the way you found the car. The lack of a third screw hole, and no apparent outline on the headliner from having a larger 67-style mirror mount are strong (but not 100% conclusive) evidence that it did not have a 67-style mount.
Was the clock part of the interior decor group for '67? It's not listed on the Marti report.
Yes the clock was part of the interior décor group.
-
For those of you wondering why I tore up an original headliner. :)
This is how I got the car.
I really think it is all original.
-
Interesting, Dearborn VIN 232917, Marti's book indicates that the hightest Dearborn VIN number was 233100 (likely rounded up, since all numbers end in 00). Making this car 'sequentially', 183 or less units from the end of 1967 production.
Scheduled build date 11V (August 11, 1967), Marti Report says actually built on August 17, 1967.
One of the last ones to leave the building for sure.
-
For those of you wondering why I tore up an original headliner. :)
This is how I got the car.
I really think it is all original.
It appears to have the rounded 68 style glove box latch button.
Marty
-
It appears to have the rounded 68 style glove box latch button.
Marty
Like this??
Now how to document that???
Mmmmm .... I know! The key works. :)
-
Devil's advocate "Yeah, but is the trunk lock original?"
-
Like this??
Now how to document that???
Mmmmm .... I know! The key works. :)
Is it a original key?
-
Is it a original key?
No, it opens the trunk tho.
-
Would an early 68 Dearborn car have had a mirror with the day-night switch going sideways, versus front-back?? Or a rotary knob??
Would it be colour coded to the interior??
Thanks
-
Would it be colour coded to the interior??
Might be easier if you mentioned what interior your asking about rather than have us check every interior. Many of the (other than black) interior used black interior mirrors but haven't checked every color yet
-
Might be easier if you mentioned what interior your asking about rather than have us check every interior. Many of the (other than black) interior used black interior mirrors but haven't checked every color yet
Sorry bout that.
Its the car, thats the topic of this conversation. Ivy gold deluxe as shown in the pics.
-
Early 1968 mirrors have the side-ways lever.
(http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w115/CougarCJ/th_mirrors_zpsc51e2bfa.jpg) (http://s174.photobucket.com/user/CougarCJ/media/mirrors_zpsc51e2bfa.jpg.html)
-
Thanks Krelboyne.