GT/CS Clone Registry?

[PNewitt]

I know, I know....This is a pandora's box, again, but I was wondering...

What if I included a listing of:

1. VINs of GT/CS or HCS "clones",
2. Built up / modified CS Convertibles
3. Copies of Little Red and Green Hornet
4. any of the '67 Coupe "Shelby de Mexicos" (that look like the Little Red)?

This addition would not be like a full-blown registry, but a simple listing of owner's names, the VIN, and a few notes about the car. This would not overshadow the main GT/CS and HCS Registry, but would be like an appendix.

Also--what about including '66 and '67 HCS cars?

None of this would take away from the main theme of the book-- but by listing the "clones", it would help identify them against the "real" CS cars.

Paul N.

 

[coloradoHCS]

Paul, I like the idea of the 66 and 67 HCS cars being included. How were these cars identified via VIN? The Marti report would not list the HCS in these years as an option, since I believe this was a dealer package rather than a factory install.

Would the Sunshine and Twister and Ski specials be similar, as in only color and decals as the identifier?

The only problem I see with including a clone or a modified car is that they may not stay that way in the future. Then the inclusion is no longer applicable. If inclusion is a way to identify clones in the future then that may help future buyers/hobbists. Mark.

 

[PNewitt]

This is just an idea as this stage--but by "listing" the clones, the owners and everyone else is on the same page as to what these cars are--and have become.

It's kinda like when they did the Cobra 427 kit car registry. It keeps things documented (for good, bad or indifferent reasons).

Although Bob Teets would probably know this-- "we" need to contact some DSO 51 area Ford dealers for any archived information that they might have on the '66 and '67 HCS cars.

What someone should do is form some sort of HCS / Twister / Ski Country / Blue Bonnet, USA ('71), etc.,-- "limited edition" Registry. But that is another pandora's box.

Paul N.

 

[hicountrybob]

hey, people, I'd like to get back to this post later this weekend after I write down a few notes and get some sequence in mind. There seems to be MORE than just "clone" comments and discussion here in this post. And I really would like to address the '66 and '67 stuff, as well as the Ski Country stuff. In all these years with the Cal Spec and High Country Special interest, I only recall 1 clone, which was entered in an Omaha show under the modified class. This Mustang was a red '67 conv. with our lamps, hood, Cal Sp striping and script, scoops and our tail stuff. All the interior was '67 and it had the '67 s/s wheels. Are we over reacting on this bit or not? Is this a real issue or do we have an attitude or am I just a little naive. Think about the late models with these guys installing MUSTANG or COBRA bumpers and script to denote a V-8 in a 6 banger? Hey, so what. But are these 'clones'? or mods? More later this weekend on these other items in this post which seem to be of interest to some of you as they are to me. 'nite, hi country BOB here.

 

[Mosesatm]

I built a clone around ten years ago and since the deck lid, end caps, tail light panel, and tail lights came from a real GT/CS most people would have a tough time knowing it was a clone. If I remember correctly it also had the San Jose build code. The only clues to it being a clone would be the aftermarket scoops and incorrect grille.

Last I knew it was in New York State so if anyone is looking to buy a Highland Greenish GT/CS with white stripes and a white vinyl top, in the Northeast part of the country, please contact me first. A Marti report will also show the car to be a standard '68.

I never represented the car as anything but a clone and neither did the person who bought it from me but who knows what stunts others down the line might try to pull.

Paul if you decide to list the clones I might be able to find the VIN for this car from the guy I sold it to. I also have a few pictures.

 

[nfrntau]

Paul,
I think it would be nice to see all the special edition 68's as well as the original versions in a section of your book. I recently found a web site that had a brief description and photos for all of these different specials. I will find it and send you a link. If you don't want or need it, just hit the delete button.
Regarding clones, imitation is the highest form of compliment. As a car guy, I like to see what others have done to their cars to make them special and stand out from the crowd. I think the GT/CS convertible clone is very cool. I would think the number of clones built only for $$ reasons would be very small.
On the 66 and 67 HCS. My opinion is to add these cars in the same format as the 68's but separated by years in a section following the 68's. As more and more information flows in over the years, there could always be Pauls 4th GT/CS book.

 

[Gandystang]

I too, have made a clone GT/CS about for four years ago but it was a convertible and it was painted pink for fun. But I also have owned 4 GT/CS, currently have two 6 cyl. GT/CS.

If clones or replica's are going to be listed, I think they should only be used as a tool for how to identify a fake GT/CS cars and componets which has been done in pasted issues.

The shelby registry is anal about clones. They would never think about adopting clones into there's.

And I think that way too! As the value of these car increases, the more important the registy will be to record the true cars history for each vin.

Ron

 

[390cs68rcode]

put me on the bandwagon for the NO CLONES in the registry except to be able to spot fakes. Putting clones in a registry will only make them "more popular and valuable" since they have a registry and the biggest point is that it will devalue our real cars. I can only see negatives for making a clone registry.

 

[coloradoHCS]

Paul and High Country Bob, if you need my help with any "leg work", tracking down archieved info at area dealers let me know. I deal with several Ford fleet dealers in the Denver area (Courtesy, Burt and Phil Long)and would be willing to help anyway I can regarding 66 & 67 specials. Mark.

 

[Mosesatm]

Paul's original post said that the clone portion of the registry would be way in the back of the book like an appendix. That seems to be a good way to handle the clones because he is leaving it up to the reader to decide if the list is there to single out "bad" cars or to give a little recognition to people who like the looks of the car so much they copied it. Very diplomatic Paul.

 

[carvensno]

Boy you can jusy smell the DRAMA in this thread!!! ;D

People Paul said this as a idea maybe and would be like a appendix to the book, lets get rid of the drama of "OMG is going to ruin my cars value if he includes that in the book" additude. A real GT/CS is a real GT/CS, a clone is a clone and there is paperwork to prove it. a clone is just someone vison of what they wanted as a GT/CS since they cant afford the real deal, and as long is there is paperwork available (ie... Marti Report) to prove that it is or is not a true CS, then there is nothing to worry about. The only thing you have to worry is the market value at the time of purchasing or selling of a car.

Take for example my CS when i had it, true CS w/GT package VIN #8R01J158056, was valued at 14K$, but because it was a buyers market and the time frame i had to sell it in was only able to get 4500.00 for it. by the way this was in 1996. believe me if i could have made work to keep i would have or at least more time to sell it and maybe meet the right buyer for it for a better price.

 

[390cs68rcode]

People Paul said this as a idea maybe and would be like a appendix to the book, lets get rid of the drama of "OMG is going to ruin my cars value if he includes that in the book" additude. A real GT/CS is a real GT/CS, a clone is a clone and there is paperwork to prove it. a clone is just someone vison of what they wanted as a GT/CS since they cant afford the real deal, and as long is there is paperwork available (ie... Marti Report) to prove that it is or is not a true CS, then there is nothing to worry about. The only thing you have to worry is the market value at the time of purchasing or selling of a car.

I can understand your point of view but I have one question.

Does the Shelby registry have a clone section?

 

[nfrntau]

On the value questions.
Have Shelby clones devalued the original and verified Shelby's?

 

[390cs68rcode]

[quote author=nfrntau link=board=1;threadid=1535;start=0#msg9193 date=1112394526]
On the value questions.
Have Shelby clones devalued the original and verified Shelby's?

[/quote]

I see what you are getting at but my point is more that clones "cheapen" the originals in my opinion. Hard to tell if shelby clones have devalued the real things since they have been around for a long time.

Our GT/CS cars are fairly rare to begin with so ANY clones would seen to cheapen the real things especially in a printed registry.

My main point to make is that I like REAL cars (not clones). I like original cars as well. When a clone is made it seems a cheap way to get the real thing. Kinda like buying a fake Rolex (get my point?).

 

[case12]

I am a fan of an authentic registry. A chapter, or section, on covertibles and clones is ok (Paul addressed this before in his previous books). Little Red and Green Hornet deserve prominence as the prototypes of the GT/CS and HCS - more info on these would be exciting. Casey

 

[nfrntau]

This is the link I referred to in my earlier post on this thread.
http://pages.prodigy.net/d.hughmanick/specials.html

 

[carvensno]

jbsteven,

i see your point, and i understand your the type that like the real deal and nothing else, but for some people making or having a clone or a good fake is ok to them.

And you know for part of making is clone car(GT/CS or shebly) for some people making the car its not all about trying to pass off ( sorry i dont like that) as a real deal, its more of the workmanship or craftsmenship and the fabrication that they put into the car and for them to be able to appreciate it and see what they have created and when someone sees that car and tell them how good of a job they have done. ;D

But for some people to they dont see it as a clone, they see it as a custom car, because they built it how they wanted it to be. It just really depends on how people view the cars.

 

[PNewitt]

First, to answer some early comments--

Mark--please get in touch with Bob "HCS Guru" Teets, and maybe the both of you could find out something. As you know--there are key people at every dealership that might have archive info ...and/or go to the owner, if they've been there for decades. Old timers will remember everything!!

NFRNTAU (what does that mean?)--anyway, are you nuts? --a FOURTH book? the '96 book 'bout finished me off! LOL!! Thanks for the neat-o Mustang limited edition website. I never saw the "'67 Stallion" before.

OK--the point at hand. I really don't want to fan these flames, but there seems to be a class war goin' on here about these cars. Some people love their cars, and would not part with them, and enjoy them, and others are looking for what they can find to increase their "investment".

I think it's important to point out that the past (and new) versions of the GT/CS Registry are ONLY information provided by owners. They were not meant as a selling tool to increase values. I've seen CS cars listed in classifieds, and Hemmings as: "listed in the GT/CS Registry"; as if it automatically, guarantees authenticity, because, "by gosh, Paul wouldn't list any of those dang fake cars...". I never meant to create that impression., although some will still think that.

I will be including a lot more about how to spot a fake. More details to look for items that just aren't available. EVEN IF someone wants to go to all the trouble to fake a car, there is always that Marti Report.

With lots and lots of those "resto-mod" Mustangs showing up, I think it's important to PRESERVE the breed (as it were) of the GT/CS. By listing some cars that are either modifieds, or CS parts put on another car, I thought that listing these cars would have a "reverse psychology" towards those who have built these cars. Cars built for fun, (like Moses') would find a sort of permanent listing, which could let future or current owners know what they have. Resto Mods are a big thing, and the classic Mustang is the new street rod. So--we need to stand our ground, and this is a good way to do it; by identifying what "isn't" real. We're all into this for fun, not to snub the next guy.

For what it's worth--I have every intention to spotlight the "real", and "authenticated" GT/CS (HCS) cars. Again--IF these cars had VIN identification tags, like all Shelbys, this would be different. However, I want to present it in a way that preserves the fun aspect, without sounding judgemental. Besides-- I have a 1968 Ford advertisement in the Autolite newsletter for dealers to actually BUY parts to build CS-looking cars at the dealership. It's going into the next book. So, who has one of THOSE cars??? We have to do something different, and this is one way. If I can also encourage people to make Lil' Red and Green Hornet clones, or just "Shelby coupes" with high tech stuff, those, I think would be a good diversion to those who want to clone a CS only for $$.

BTW--I've seen Shelby clones in the Shelby American magazine "owner's cars". If you only knew of all the Mustangs that had Shelby parts put on them at Shelby American in L.A.--on the weekends!

Paul N.

 

[390cs68rcode]

i understand your the type that like the real deal and nothing else

In this case, I agree.

I do however like restomods as well. I have a 66 with a 347 motor, 150 HP shot of nitrous, 9 inch rear end, front coil overs etc.

Just wanted you guys to know I do like the other side of things (restos) as well.

 

[68sunlitgold]

Paul,

I know many think that dealer added parts are considered "original" to the car. So with your point:

I have a 1968 Ford advertisement in the Autolite newsletter for dealers to actually BUY parts to build CS-looking cars at the dealership. It's going into the next book. So, who has one of THOSE cars???

Would we, or should we, consider these actual GT/CS's? Imagine an owner who bought a '68 Mustang(probably late in the year) that a dealer bought all the parts and sold the car as a "California Special". And now the owner gets a Marti Report and it states it is not??
It brings up the question, is original: From the Factory or From the Dealer?

Just thought I would add that.

Doug