1968 1968 GT Equipment Option

[robert campbell]

All,
I was looking at the last Mustang Monthly issue and it had a 1968 Mustang convertible with a 390, 4 speed, and was a GT. The article commented that it had drum brakes and not power discs. Led the reader to believe that the GT option in 1968 had power discs as part of the option. My memory said no, so I penned a polite e-mail to the editor. He responded back and asked me if I was willing to pen an article on the GT option for all years. I said I would, but in researching this I felt that MM must have done this before. My brother has an extensive MM collection and we found a great article in the April 17 1995 MM issue. That would be the 30 year anniversary of the GT option as it was introduced in April of 1965. In April of next year the GT option turns 50 years!!!

May still do the article, but in researching I found a link to the Ford media website and the link below explains the 1968 GT option as captured in an official Ford brochure. Thought you guys might be interested. I also have the 1966, 67, and 69 link to the official Ford brochures if you are interested.

Rob

https://media.ford.com/content/dam/fordmedia/North America/US/2013/11/18/1968_Mustang_Options.pdf

 

[dalorzo_f]

Nice!

Would suggest if you do write it to clearly note the use of the "390GT" engine in 67/68 S codes, does NOT make the car a "GT". Amazing how many still don't get the distinction, and have people note my convertible is "wrong" as it has 390 badges and no GT ones... and drums, as it came from the factory!

One other spin, often missed but noted in the linked doc, was that if you got the GT option on a S code then the power brake option was a mandatory add-on. Which kinda made it part of the GT option, but only for S codes (a mandatory "option" to an option!). :wink:

I'd suggest you offer to do a comprehensive overview of all the GT options year-by-year, as to this day its still a source of confusion to many. Here in Oz many refer to a "GT hood" (louvered), which only makes it worse...

 

[Ruppstang]

Rob that is the 68 Mustang sales broacher. I have one. I also have the 67 Mustang on also. I have both 67 and 68 Ford dealer option books that explain all of the GT equipment.
I'll post a Ford sales addendum that came out in late 67 that explains the GT option on the S codes that Frank was speaking of.
If you wright the article and want any of this information I would be happy to forward it to you.

BTW Mustang Monthly's response to you speaks volumes about the current revolving door at the editor's office. LOL you found the answers in their own magazine.
Marty

 

[robert campbell]

The 1967 one speaks to the required disc brakes on the S code. another interesting spin in 1967 is people also equate the quad tip exhaust as "GT exhaust tips". But in 1967 any V8 in the Mustang could have the GT option. But only the K and S code automatically got the quad tips. An yet another but is the dual exhaust was its own stand alone option that you could add.....

Part of the customize and design your own package that Ford was pushing. And we wonder why we are all so confused. My brothers Mustang with the 6 Rochester's on it was a one of one car. It was an "S" code 4 speed GT car with standard interior, but it also received the "Competition Handling Package" which was a spendy option and a level above the "Heavy Duty Suspension" option that was part of the "GT Option"....... But the HD option could be added also to any car with a V8.....

Whew. The Competition suspension option was $388.53 while the GT option was only $205.00 on his Marti report. Only 141 Mustangs in 1967 were ordered with the Comp suspension option. His car was one of two delivered to the Philco Corporation. They loaded her up!!!

Rob

 

[CougarCJ]

I can't find the thread on the Concours Mustang forum, but I am pretty sure that in 1968, the mandatory 'power disc brake option' was removed from the GT package. Meaning that a 1968 Mustang GT, didn't always get PDB's.

 

[Ruppstang]

I can't find the thread on the Concours Mustang forum, but I am pretty sure that in 1968, the mandatory 'power disc brake option' was removed from the GT package. Meaning that a 1968 Mustang GT, didn't always get PDB's.

The 68 GT package did not include PB unless you got a S or R code engine. then PB were required at additional cost but still not part of the GT option.

BTW the 67 GT option did include PB on all engines.
Marty

 

[sportyworty]

The R code was the only mandatory PDB for 1968. It was an extra cost option automatically invoiced.

The S and X code whether GT or not had to be optioned to get power.
My S code GT/CS 4 speed had disc no power and was not a GT. No mention of brakes on invoice or Marti
Deadstang GT/CS X code GT with drums. No mention of brakes on Marti

Disc brakes were part of the GT package 65-67 only

The Cougars were no mandatory PDB for the R code for interest sake

 

[Ruppstang]

The R code was the only mandatory PDB for 1968. It was an extra cost option automatically invoiced.

The S and X code whether GT or not had to be optioned to get power.
My S code GT/CS 4 speed had disc no power and was not a GT. No mention of brakes on invoice or Marti
Deadstang GT/CS X code GT with drums. No mention of brakes on Marti

Disc brakes were part of the GT package 65-67 only

The Cougars were no mandatory PDB for the R code for interest sake

I got my information from a 68 Ford sales broacher.

Do you have a addendum to show this change? I would like to know how the cars you mentioned above could have been built under Fords enisle policy, or were there ways to get around them?
Marty

 

[sportyworty]

Marty the brochures were printed before the cars were produced. Often they have incorrect information. The Brochures also show the 427 as an option as an example or the Torino Cobra that was never built being just a Cobra neither Fairlane or Torino.. We have the original invoices and Marti reports today as correct documents. Ford got money for everything and it is listed as an option. If it does not call out PDB it did not get it. I have had a lot of 68 big blocks and collect Reports so this has always been an interesting topic.

 

[sportyworty]

The fact that every 68.5 R code Mustang was a GT and the Marti Reports always call out the PDB as its own option tells us it was not part of the GT package. The reports do not break down packages like GT, Reflective, Visibility etc. If the 390 were to have mandatory PDB it would be called out on the report. It is of course on some cars but it is not on many because it was not ordered nor mandatory. Maybe this post makes more sense. Good debate and I am open to new facts.

 

[Ruppstang]

The fact that every 68.5 R code Mustang was a GT and the Marti Reports always call out the PDB as its own option tells us it was not part of the GT package. The reports do not break down packages like GT, Reflective, Visibility etc. If the 390 were to have mandatory PDB it would be called out on the report. It is of course on some cars but it is not on many because it was not ordered nor mandatory. Maybe this post makes more sense. Good debate and I am open to new facts.

Thanks, I am not wanting a debate just trying to better understand and want to use Ford printed materials where possible to form my opinions but you make a good case with the reports.
I do have a 12-12-67 Ford addendum that says that Scode option would only be available with the GT option. I have been having trouble posting pictures on this site but I will try.
Marty

 

[sportyworty]

A debate is not an argument. We are all hear to learn. You contribute a lot to the hobby and I personally appreciate that.

That "addendum" is proof that printed materials were even incorrect 5 months after production commenced.This is exactly how misinformation propagates in the hobby. Lots of documented non GT 390 S engine cars. We now have 3 incorrect facts on printed materials in this thread alone. I can forward the threads of past discussions on this topic from the VMF, 428 Reg, Concours and FE Forum to who ever is going to write it up for the mag if that helps. Lots of people have contributed to this topic over the years. We just need to collect it as the answer is apparent with out question. This is just one of many topics that goes around and around.

 

[robert campbell]

The 68 1/2 Cobra Jet "option" was just that, a mid year add. From my experience (not as extensive as either of you) the 390 (X or S) without the GT option could be acquired with drum brakes and not discs. But I would like to see the info that Marty has. 1967 was one confusing year for options.

I like to say never say never! And I am not completely convinced on the total accuracy of the Marti reports. But again that is the best (and only) source we have to shed light as to how these 50 year old cars were ordered. Unless of course we stumble onto original owner cars that have not been modified. I have been talking to a new member of our site that has an interesting GT/CS with part of an interior décor group, but some items missing. A barn find that is very untouched. Door grills with "Ford style" cloth tape over the holes for the door lights, but original inserts and holes for the grills on the doors. Sheet metal codes that align. He will post pictures soon.

At the same time I fully realize we need to set some boundaries for MCA judging and such. Full Ford period correct documentation is a great add to Marti reports and corporate history. A friend of mine had a 1965 GT Fastback. He purchased it from the original owner. It had amber colored fog light lenses that back in the day were considered not correct. He dug and dug and found old ford historical documentation that confirmed the existence of these lenses. His hard work rewrote the MCA judging standard to allow for these as correct. And all of this was based on a low owner car and hard work.

Rob

 

[dalorzo_f]

the 390 (X or S) without the GT option could be acquired with drum brakes and not discs. But I would like to see the info that Marty has.

'68 S code "BOSE" FoMoCo internal space filler order, factory drums. S code option engine, no discs, no GT called out...



S GT coupe built 6 days later...GT and PDB both noted as options.



To me this would indicate drums were standard equipment on an S code.

I would guess one could have ordered an S code with PDB and no GT, but don't have a Marti to prove it.

As noted the Ford docs can be confusing/incorrect as they note general sales info not definitive data on specifics in some cases (e.g. which cars got dual exhaust with dual quad tips). Most likely printed well in advance of the model year for pre-sales marketing, and subject to post printing changes in production. Have never seen amended versions or errata docs to amended any glitches that came up later...

 

[somethingspecial]

Here is an S code Marti report with PDB w/o GT option noted.

 

[6t8-390gt]

Will someone show me a Marti report showing an S-code, GT, WITHOUT Power Disc Brakes?

Danny

 

[robert campbell]

The car that kinda started my post was in the last issue of Mustang Monthly. I questioned via e-mail as to the 1968 GT option and whether PDB or DB was part of the GT package. My memory was that the GT option in 1965, 66, and 67 included the PDB as part of the package, but that was dropped in 1968. The MM article leads the reader to believe that this car was not given PDB as part of the GT option and I questioned that. They (MM) have actually asked me to pen some facts together to include in an upcoming issue. But I found a very detailed MM article from April of 1995 that has all they need and does support the dropping of the PDB as part of the GT option in 1968. During some of my research I found the 1968 Ford brochure that outlines the GT option for that year, and it does not include PDB or DB.

That is what has started this healthy debate on this subject. The GT option, as one of the most value adding options has always been murky in some cases. We are discussing one. Already we have discovered some interesting anomalies like the 1968 1/2 Cobra Jet. And let me tell you 1967 is even more complicated in some areas!!

http://www.mustangandfords.com/featured-vehicles/1412-1968-ford-mustang-gt-convertible-caretaker/

 

[robert campbell]

The 68 1/2 Cobra Jet "option" was just that, a mid year add. From my experience (not as extensive as either of you) the 390 (X or S) without the GT option could be acquired with drum brakes and not discs. But I would like to see the info that Marty has. 1967 was one confusing year for options.

I like to say never say never! And I am not completely convinced on the total accuracy of the Marti reports. But again that is the best (and only) source we have to shed light as to how these 50 year old cars were ordered. Unless of course we stumble onto original owner cars that have not been modified. I have been talking to a new member of our site that has an interesting GT/CS with part of an interior décor group, but some items missing. A barn find that is very untouched. Door grills with "Ford style" cloth tape over the holes for the door lights, but original inserts and holes for the grills on the doors. Sheet metal codes that align. He will post pictures soon.

At the same time I fully realize we need to set some boundaries for MCA judging and such. Full Ford period correct documentation is a great add to Marti reports and corporate history. A friend of mine had a 1965 GT Fastback. He purchased it from the original owner. It had amber colored fog light lenses that back in the day were considered not correct. He dug and dug and found old ford historical documentation that confirmed the existence of these lenses. His hard work rewrote the MCA judging standard to allow for these as correct. And all of this was based on a low owner car and hard work.

Rob

Although not a GT option discussion, please look at Cool Manchu's latest post on bringing one back from the dead. You see the standard interior, lower console option, but also the door grills. This is interesting as I would think it would be part of and interior décor option or at least an AM/FM 8 track or some sound upgrade? They appear, by talking to him, the correct doors and punched with the tape on the door light holes I note above. Date codes on doors seem to align with the car. also he notes no dome light, but original headliner. Like it may have started to get the interior décor group and upper console, but was stopped?

Got some thoughts on this one? Never say never......

 

[sportyworty]

Here are a couple of invoices fellas. Note the S code GT had a bigger sticker than the sparse 428 R code GT. Hmmm...now if you could go back into time which one would you order ha!
Hi Danny no mention of brakes on the S car. let's use these instead of Marti reports for this fact finding mission.

 

[sportyworty]

can you guys see these attachments ok?