For Sale GT/CS (Possible Prototype) with Michigan DSO

Mosesatm · Nov 25, 2020

OK, this one is a little weird. I would have dismissed it but the sequential number in the VIN fits the story, as does the DSO. Any thoughts?

Seller's Description
1968 Ford Mustang 390 GT/CS loaded with options, a/c, ps, pdb, restored very rare overhead console etc.... This car was owned by a friend of mine back since 1972. He said it is a prototype. You see the Marti report, it was pulled off the line and made a GT/CS at the factory. I do not have the correct fog lights but they can be obtained. CALL the number in the pictures, will not respond to is it available. FoMoCo classic trades considered. Thanks, Johnny Parsons.

stangfan · Nov 25, 2020

Except that this is a Dearborn car. Even if it were a prototype, would it not have been built at San Jose?

Mosesatm · Nov 25, 2020

stangfan said:
Except that this is a Dearborn car. Even if it were a prototype, would it not have been built at San Jose?

Not necessarily. Paul did a lot of good research for his book and while the book doesn’t clarify this prototype question it does seem to suggest the first prototypes could be Dearborn cars.

stangfan · Nov 25, 2020

I did not know that. Thanks!

Mosesatm · Nov 25, 2020

Ok, this is interesting.
The first four cars in the Registry all have July 1967 date codes but weren't actually built until November 1967.

wallace · Nov 27, 2020

Grill

But what about the Grill? Standard 68 grill with Horse and Corral.

Mosesatm · Nov 27, 2020

The car could have been crashed and the changed out. I'm not saying it is a GT/CS, but at this point I can't say it isn't either. It does fit in nicely with the other three early cars. I'd love to find those cars and inspect them.
There is a blue car on the Los Angeles stage but all those cars should have come from San Jose. It seems there were no certainties with Ford in the '60s.

I asked the seller for some detailed photos.

nineofive · Nov 30, 2020

First post: The Marti shows 8F01S112477

Later post
"Ok, this is interesting.
The first four cars in the Registry all have July 1967 date codes but weren't actually built until November 1967."

The snip from the Registry shows 8F01S112477 listed as the 4th car.

Aren't they the same?

Mosesatm · Nov 30, 2020

nineofive said:
First post: The Marti shows 8F01S112477

Later post
"Ok, this is interesting.
The first four cars in the Registry all have July 1967 date codes but weren't actually built until November 1967."

The snip from the Registry shows 8F01S112477 listed as the 4th car.

Aren't they the same?

Sorry, my post was confusing. There were three cars in the registry until I added this one, making four.
Those four cars, and around 25 others, are in registry limbo for now.

nineofive · Dec 1, 2020

Thanks for the reply - makes sense.

robert campbell · Dec 2, 2020

Wish this car was closer!! Is anyone near by? Funny how it is grouped nearly perfectly with the other three. And again a very loaded car!

Rob

1968Cally · Dec 2, 2020

Mosesatm said:
The car could have been crashed and the changed out. I'm not saying it is a GT/CS, but at this point I can't say it isn't either. It does fit in nicely with the other three early cars. I'd love to find those cars and inspect them.
There is a blue car on the Los Angeles stage but all those cars should have come from San Jose. It seems there were no certainties with Ford in the '60s.

I asked the seller for some detailed photos.

Yes it could have been crashed and the hood was replaced also as there are no hood locks. If you get more pictures they may show the hood lock retainers on the radiator support. Or no trace that they were ever there.

Also, could a production car not be built exactly as a prototype might have been built? Or maybe the hood locks and grill parts were not readily available in November of '67? So, may it have been built with just the fiberglass parts, script and stripes? The Marti says nothing about California Special. Lists it as a GT.

Not sure if it being a prototype can ever be proven. Probably would have been by now. Unless there is some Dearborn worker who remembers building a few prototypes.

robert campbell · Dec 2, 2020

Arlie,
You are an awesome registrar! You never say never and record but hold cars with questions. This group looks very interesting! This was right smack in the middle of the Ford strike in the Fall/Winter of 1967/1968. As we know many cars were staged (built and taken aside) for conversion to the GT/CS platform. As we have talked about before, they would already have been built and the Marti would not contain a GT/CS option. They could have been "traded" between dealers and a Dearborn car may have landed in San Jose. Then converted to a GT/CS on the San Jose line.

You and I have discussed this before and I type this for some of the new members. Also as you said never discount a car for the lack of some proper features such as the grill. Many cars were in accidents and the grill would be damaged and replaced. To my knowledge, the grill was never offered as a replacement part over the counter, so the common 1968 grill would be the only option.

Rob

franklinair · Dec 2, 2020

Rob;
The '68 grill has too many tabs for mounting the corrals & running horse. A '67 grill can be modified to a CS type. Mike used to do this.

Neil

robert campbell · Dec 2, 2020

Dad,
Totally agree, but back in the day (early 70's) most people would just order the 68 grill and put it in the car. And if the front end accident was bad enough to damage the grill, the fog lights and grill mouth would be also be damaged.

So in the case of a GT/CS being in cosmetic front end collision early on, it may have been replaced with a standard 68 grill and other front in parts. Doubt that anyone would see the need to replicate the front end to be a GT/CS back then. Just slap on the parts available over the counter and go.

Again hard to say if this is what happened to the car we are discussing, but it is a possibility. And many a GT/CS may have lost the grill in such a manner.

Rob

Ricky Knapik · Dec 3, 2020

does the recessed rear 1/4 reflectors play a role?

Mosesatm · Dec 3, 2020

Definitely. Cars that early would have recessed reflectors.

robert campbell · Dec 4, 2020

1968Cally said:
Yes it could have been crashed and the hood was replaced also as there are no hood locks. If you get more pictures they may show the hood lock retainers on the radiator support. Or no trace that they were ever there.

Also, could a production car not be built exactly as a prototype might have been built? Or maybe the hood locks and grill parts were not readily available in November of '67? So, may it have been built with just the fiberglass parts, script and stripes? The Marti says nothing about California Special. Lists it as a GT.

Not sure if it being a prototype can ever be proven. Probably would have been by now. Unless there is some Dearborn worker who remembers building a few prototypes.

Again, if it was pulled from the line to be converted to a GT/CS it would not show on the Marti report. The car was already built as a regular production 1968 Mustang coupe. That is what the Marti would say.

An inspection by a knowledgeable person could identify some of the GT/CS parts and assembly. Witness lines on the scoops. Underside of the trunk lid. Wiring harness to the taillights. And so on.

Rob

greyfoxart · Mar 29, 2024

Who ended up buying this car? Arlie said it was up for auction at Mecum in May. Looks like to refreshed it.... interesting commentary about it in this thread.
https://www.mecum.com/lots/1114007/1968-ford-mustang-gt-coupe/?aa_id=579762-0

For Sale GT/CS (Possible Prototype) with Michigan DSO

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Member

Similar threads