. Your thoughts on the new California Special book/registry

[CougarCJ]

Hi all, I see there is lively discussion around my car!

Ruppstang gave me a call to let me know, sorry I haven't been more involved with the site, my business keeps me way too busy. After talking to him my curiosity got the best of me and I had to head over to the forums right away.

I can say that I am convinced the car I own is the one that was on stage. A lot of evidence points to that.

I would also suggest that just because my car says California Special on the Marti doesn't mean that every car at the event would. It could very well be that the first few were modified coupes and the rest were built with the California Special option designated. So while it is clear not many minds are going to be changed, I think there might be room for more than one "correct" story.

With that said, I'm attaching the Marti and the photograph that has been mentioned. Some items to note:

• DEALER is the Ford District Sales Office in Pico Rivera
• The car was never "RELEASED" or "SOLD"
• The dates fit the story told by Lee Grey
• The 1 of 1 designation is only with options visible in the photographs. Nothing obscure.

For some nostaglia, here is the thread that started it all. It was Rob's reply that prompted me to contact Paul Newitt!
http://californiaspecial.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8119

I will try to keep up with this site more often, but can't make any promises...

PS I still have cars for sale!

The deck lid does looks the same in both pictures.
The bumper does not. Besides the lack of rear guards, the reflection of the gas cap shows that the car on stage has the rear bumper mounted a bit higher in respect to the second picture. Also look on the left side where it curves up, different gap in the two pictures. Maybe the rear bumper was changed at some point?

 

[Maverick]

I got my book last week (i am in the Philippines) and it looks great and is full of great information. Paul Newitt included my car (the only one registered in this country) in the registry and even a photo of my car on page 206! He even numbered my book to match the last 4 numbers of my VIN! Can't thank him enough!

On May 26, I will be joining the Manila Sports Car Club 4th Concours d'Elegance and am going up against 24 other cars from a 1916 Studebaker, 1957 Mercedes 300SL Gullwing, 1967 Ferrari 330GT, 1970 Lamborghini Miura, and even a 1972 Lancia Stratos, among other great cars. With his book, I have a great chance to show off the history and "Special" nature of this car. It took me THREE long hard years of sacrifice and work to finish my car, which has been in my family since i was born, and I hope to represent the GT/CS proud on this side of the Pacific

Great book for experts, enthusiasts, and your everyday joe alike! It isn't perfect maybe, but you can see the painstaking effort and time and passion put into it. This book will not only skyrocket the GT/CS popularity and legitimacy, it will increase its value as well, in my humble opinion

Thanks!

 

[gtcs1]

Is the Marti for a GT/CS? The rest of the Marti info would be helpful.

Scott

Hi Scott,here is the Deluxe Marti. Yes it is a GT/CS on the Marti.

Note that this is not my car, I just kept the Marti copy on file by loading it from the Internet.

 

[mustang.biz]

It seems really silly for so many people to debate something without all of the facts.

We have access to Ford's full database of 1968 cars via Marti. I am happy to run a search to see if any non-California Special mustangs with that option list were built between Dec 15 1967 and Feb 15th 1968. If there aren't any, then could it still be argued that my car was not the car on stage?

If that sort of data would be proof enough, then let's get a list gathered of all of the known options on the stage car. Paul N has the event photos and has shared a few with me. So if there are some potentially identifiable options we can't get from the images we have, I'll ask him to help.

To be clear, I am already convinced. If there ARE non-GT/CS car with those exact options built, I would still believe I have the stage car, but it wouldn't prove others wrong and we could continue debating.

 

[Midnight Special]

It seems really silly for so many people to debate something without all of the facts.

To be clear, I am already convinced. If there ARE non-GT/CS car with those exact options built, I would still believe I have the stage car, but it wouldn't prove others wrong and we could continue debating.

...Personally, I'm just along for the ride while being very excited about the thought of you having the "stage car". However, there is huge value in this sort of debate opposed to many assumptions that have generated "facts" in print with limited resources of a given time frame.

As a founding member of a historic railroad museum, I have seen many printed facts revised over time with more careful analysis of photos and data that prior authors did not possess or reveal in their publications.

This is not "bashing" or "competing"...Rather, it's taking the latest from an author's final "reveal" and working out the mysteries that obviously still exist (and continue with GT/CS intrigue) based on physical evidence possessed by the real owners, not consistent with documentation.

That said, I want to know (among other things) - Why are the scripts on your car lower than the stage car? Why are there holes on Rob's car in a higher (early) position on a seeming original panel without a Martied CS option?

While the debate may appear annoying to some, this is really "Carcheology" at it's finest from other folks with years in the trenches.

Long may these investigations continue! Your long awaited "book" is not the end of the story.....>

 

[Ruppstang]

Interesting discusion. I do not belive that there was a early tail light panel but poor quility fiberglass work or inconsistant instaltion as Scott pointed out above would explain some of these odd panels. The same tail light panels were used on Shelbys for months preceding the GT-CS. It could be that the Shelby line call for a higher standard of fit and finish. I may change my mind if a (early panel with a different part # is found) but I highly doubt it. Marty

 

[robert campbell]

Tim could not have said it better ! gtcs1 posted a Marti of another very early blue car. Lets look and the dates on these two cars. This is an example of how they can vary drastically. Proof about a car on the stage? No! Example of how these dates and consecutive unit numbers are very vague in proving dates? Yes.

gtcs1 136345 Curtis’s 131680

Ordered N/A N/A
Car serialized 01-22-68 01-11-68
bucked 01-23-68 02-05-68
Scheduled for build 01-29-68 01-30-68
actual build 01-24-68 02-08-68
released 02-29-68 N/A
sold 09-29-68 N/A

gtcs1's car was built nearly 2 weeks before Curtis's car. But not released until after. Where did it sit during the month of February? It was serialized later, but built sooner. All GT/CS cars were built at San Jose.

So did Ford reach back and grab completed standard coupes before they left the plant? And convert them into a GT/CS?

The above is submitted to spark interest. No bashing. But how far did Ford reach back?

Rob

Posted this and the table fell apart and is hard to read. Will try to insert an object instead

 

[mustang.biz]

Tim could not have said it better ! gtcs1 posted a Marti of another very early blue car. Lets look and the dates on these two cars. This is an example of how they can vary drastically. Proof about a car on the stage? No! Example of how these dates and consecutive unit numbers are very vague in proving dates? Yes.

gtcs1 136345 Curtis’s 131680

Ordered N/A N/A
Car serialized 01-22-68 01-11-68
bucked 01-23-68 02-05-68
Scheduled for build 01-29-68 01-30-68
actual build 01-24-68 02-08-68
released 02-29-68 N/A
sold 09-29-68 N/A

gtcs1's car was built nearly 2 weeks before Curtis's car. But not released until after. Where did it sit during the month of February? It was serialized later, but built sooner. All GT/CS cars were built at San Jose.

So did Ford reach back and grab completed standard coupes before they left the plant? And convert them into a GT/CS?

The above is submitted to spark interest. No bashing. But how far did Ford reach back?

Rob

Posted this and the table fell apart and is hard to read. Will try to insert an object instead

I'm failing to see the relevance of the Marti GTCS1 posted. The option list and color of that car do not match the stage car. It certainly could have been at the event, but there is no evidence that it was the one car that was on stage.

 

[mustang.biz]

...Personally, I'm just along for the ride while being very excited about the thought of you having the "stage car". However, there is huge value in this sort of debate opposed to many assumptions that have generated "facts" in print with limited resources of a given time frame.

As a founding member of a historic railroad museum, I have seen many printed facts revised over time with more careful analysis of photos and data that prior authors did not possess or reveal in their publications.

This is not "bashing" or "competing"...Rather, it's taking the latest from an author's final "reveal" and working out the mysteries that obviously still exist (and continue with GT/CS intrigue) based on physical evidence possessed by the real owners, not consistent with documentation.

That said, I want to know (among other things) - Why are the scripts on your car lower than the stage car? Why are there holes on Rob's car in a higher (early) position on a seeming original panel without a Martied CS option?

While the debate may appear annoying to some, this is really "Carcheology" at it's finest from other folks with years in the trenches.

Long may these investigations continue! Your long awaited "book" is not the end of the story.....>

I hope you didn't take my "silly" comment the wrong way. I don't think it is silly to discuss and research, I just think it is silly to do let a pile of data go untouched while discussing.

My car has had at least one repaint and who knows what else done to it, so I'm not sure photographs of how it sits now are the best evidence. Perhaps it is the engineer in me, but I'd rather us just pay Marti to get the real data.

So I am still curious, what parameters would satisfy the group that my car is the car on stage?

 

[GTCSMustang]

Scott, see what you can glean from his gallery. I can't tell if the mufflers are original. May have had the old round glass packs welded in, but the tailpipes look original.

What do you think?

I can't see enough of the exhaust to tell for sure if it's original or not. But I can see that the driver side tailpipe has been modified from original. The tip is probably original and maybe part of the tailpipe.

Scott

 

[Midnight Special]

I hope you didn't take my "silly" comment the wrong way. I don't think it is silly to discuss and research, I just think it is silly to do let a pile of data go untouched while discussing.

My car has had at least one repaint and who knows what else done to it, so I'm not sure photographs of how it sits now are the best evidence. Perhaps it is the engineer in me, but I'd rather us just pay Marti to get the real data.

So I am still curious, what parameters would satisfy the group that my car is the car on stage?

...If I'm reading this thread right, some are not sure that Marti has the "real data" on all of the early CS cars, so the discussion has gravitated toward remaining physical evidence. Nothing silly about your comment, nor do I (personally) doubt you have the stage car. 'Just that some of us have run the course with authoritative assumptions and are darn curious.... In a good way on an open forum, discussing what we see opposed to being told. That's all

 

[robert campbell]

I'm failing to see the relevance of the Marti GTCS1 posted. The option list and color of that car do not match the stage car. It certainly could have been at the event, but there is no evidence that it was the one car that was on stage.

Biz,
I did not post this to say it was the stage car! I posted it for people to see the wide range between build dates, ordering and such. To show how your consecutive unit number is lower, but the other car was built earlier.

To show how Ford may have reached back and grabbed already assembled cars. the may have been ordered as a standard coupe, but left as a GT/CS.

To answer your question about what you need to do to convince the site about your car. Your car has a different taillight panel than the debut car IMO. Your car also has the GT/CS scripts in the lower position than the debut car IMO.

Maybe you can pry a side shot out of the author that clarifies some of this. Long before their was any tension between myself and the author, he told me “wait for the book”. I am still waiting for a larger side shot of the car on the stage. Even in the small pictures in the first book, it is obvious that the scripts are higher on the stage car than your car.

Rob.

 

[mustang.biz]

...If I'm reading this thread right, some are not sure that Marti has the "real data" on all of the early CS cars, so the discussion has gravitated toward remaining physical evidence. Nothing silly about your comment, nor do I (personally) doubt you have the stage car. 'Just that some of us have run the course with authoritative assumptions and are darn curious.... In a good way on an open forum, discussing what we see opposed to being told. That's all

Gotcha, thanks for clarifying. I am thinking that if we exclude the "California Special" option from our Marti research, we might be able to determine if there are any similarly optioned cars that are good candidates for the stage car. If there aren't any, then we know this is it. If there is one (or many) then we know further research is needed.

Does that make sense? I'm suspicious of relying on the current condition of the car because I have no idea what all has been done to it. I'll learn more as it is dismantled, but that is all on hold until I get some more time (and sell some more cars!)

 

[mustang.biz]

Biz,
I did not post this to say it was the stage car! I posted it for people to see the wide range between build dates, ordering and such. To show how your consecutive unit number is lower, but the other car was built earlier.

To show how Ford may have reached back and grabbed already assembled cars. the may have been ordered as a standard coupe, but left as a GT/CS.

Got it, thanks for clarifying.

To answer your question about what you need to do to convince the site about your car. Your car has a different taillight panel than the debut car IMO. Your car also has the GT/CS scripts in the lower position than the debut car IMO.

Maybe you can pry a side shot out of the author that clarifies some of this. Long before their was any tension between myself and the author, he told me “wait for the book”. I am still waiting for a larger side shot of the car on the stage. Even in the small pictures in the first book, it is obvious that the scripts are higher on the stage car than your car.

Rob.

Curious, is there any Marti specific data that would satisfy you? See my previous post, since we essentially have access to all of the cars built for 1968, it seems we should be able to see if there are any cars that were built that could potentially be the stage car. If, as you contend, they modified a coupe, we should be able to find it.

That seems much more reliable to me than relying on old photographs and a car with unknown history.

 

[DLedin]

...Curious, is there any Marti specific data that would satisfy you? See my previous post, since we essentially have access to all of the cars built for 1968, it seems we should be able to see if there are any cars that were built that could potentially be the stage car. If, as you contend, they modified a coupe, we should be able to find it.

That seems much more reliable to me than relying on old photographs and a car with unknown history.

Curtis has asked this question twice now and no one seems to be responding to it. Why not? It seems to make sense to me that this would be a useful direction to research.

-DLedin

 

[Midnight Special]

Curtis has asked this question twice now and no one seems to be responding to it. Why not? It seems to make sense to me that this would be a useful direction to research.

-DLedin

...Speaking for myself, It would "make sense" only if I wanted to prove that Curtis' car was not on stage. I have no desire to imply that.
Besides, there could be 15 to 1500 cars with simular options - then what do we do?

I'm having more fun with the photograph comparisons with hopes more historical knowledge of Curtis' high-optioned, early CS car comes to light, and perhaps more theory about Rob's GNS possibly being and un-documented "real deal"...

 

[di81977]

No vested interest in how this unfolds, but a very interesting topic. I am kind of surprised, given its importance to these cars, that after all these years it has not been completely documented.

My question is, what efforts have been made to track down someone from Ford that was involved back then and would have information on how these initial cars were produced and ordered? I'd then take that info back to Kevin Marti and have him determine if his licensed Ford data would provide any useful information.

No book received yet, so I have not read Paul's account. Sorry if I have missed something.

I did thumb through someone else's book, looks very nice. I wonder what the future value of my initial $100 pmt would be right now and if I could have bought 2 books from Branda for the prepayment several years ago.

david

 

[DLedin]

...Speaking for myself, It would "make sense" only if I wanted to prove that Curtis' car was not on stage. I have no desire to imply that.
Besides, there could be 15 to 1500 cars with simular options - then what do we do?...

Yes, I suppose you're correct in that. Currently, Curtis' CS is a one of one car based upon the "California Special" option being included in the data statistics. It would be interesting to see if the CS option were removed, how many candidates there would be that would fit within the time frame of being available for the debut.

-DLedin

 

[mustang.biz]

Yes, I suppose you're correct in that. Currently, Curtis' CS is a one of one car based upon the "California Special" option being included in the data statistics. It would be interesting to see if the CS option were removed, how many candidates there would be that would fit within the time frame of being available for the debut.

-DLedin

That is precisely what I want to do. If by chance there was only 1 car produced, the we know for certain my car was the stage car. As Midnight Special said, we might find many potential matches, but at least we would know that the possibility is still open for an alternative car.

I'm not going to pay for the research, though, until I have an agreed upon set of parameters. I want to make sure we get maximum return on my investment.

What dates should be searched and what is an appropriate date range?
What are the known stage car options? <- I have a list started that I will need to dig up.

 

[DLedin]

That is precisely what I want to do. If by chance there was only 1 car produced, the we know for certain my car was the stage car. As Midnight Special said, we might find many potential matches, but at least we would know that the possibility is still open for an alternative car.

I'm not going to pay for the research, though, until I have an agreed upon set of parameters. I want to make sure we get maximum return on my investment.

What dates should be searched and what is an appropriate date range?
What are the known stage car options? <- I have a list started that I will need to dig up.

That all makes sense and it would be worthwhile if Rob were to weigh in on this. I'm also wondering if the stated delivery destination would be a searchable parameter. It seems that might help sort out things should two or more cars fit the parameters but only one has a stated destination within a practical location, such as Pico Rivera, while the others are off in Timbuktu.

-DLedin