Ford making a 777HP Stang - This is getting interesting.....

[TUFCAT]

When you were a Kid, did a long or short yellow Bus pick you up for School?

I walked.  I had legs.  Like this thread.

[ECS]

However, this is the EXACT reason why some cars, like a 650HP Cadillac CTS-V converted by Lingenfelder are not considered "OEM" Cadillac.  Cadillac can only rate the CTS-V with the horsepower it had when it left the factory floor....just as Ford does with its Shelby GT500 models.....

Now you're using Cadillacs to try and prove Ford protocol?!?  Stick with Ford since they manufacture the Mustangs we are discussing.  I'll be happy to post an original copy of a Boss 429 Monroney Sticker.  According to your logic it will show the HP ratings for the 428 Engine it had when it left the Dearborn "factory floor"......right?  

The Mustang's body however was not wide enough to encompass the massive Boss 429 engine and as a result, Ford hired Kar Kraft out of Brighton, MI to modify existing 428 Cobra Jet and Super Cobra Jet Mach 1 Mustangs to properly fit the new Boss 429 engine.

[TUFCAT]

Now you're using Cadillacs to try and prove Ford protocol?!?  Stick with Ford since they manufacture the Mustangs we are discussing.  I'll be happy to post an original copy of a Boss 429 Monroney Sticker.  According to your logic it will show the HP ratings for the 428 Engine it had when it left the Dearborn "factory floor"......right?  

The Mustang's body however was not wide enough to encompass the massive Boss 429 engine and as a result, Ford hired Kar Kraft out of Brighton, MI to modify existing 428 Cobra Jet and Super Cobra Jet Mach 1 Mustangs to properly fit the new Boss 429 engine.

Do I need to make a checklist for you?  

[DC_1]

So far Tufcat has explained his position quite concisely and without leaving any question to the validity of his argument......... On the other side I still see holes in ECS's logic and claim that the Shelby 1000 deserves the title he is suggesting over the Hellcat

[timmycharger]

 

[mopar0166]

Takes a Mopar to catch a Mopar! 

[ECS]

So far Tufcat has explained his position quite concisely and without leaving any question to the validity of his argument......... On the other side I still see holes in ECS's logic and claim that the Shelby 1000 deserves the title he is suggesting over the Hellcat

Then maybe you can make things perfectly clear for all of us by answering this question.  It requires a simple "YES" or "NO" response.  

Was the 1969-1970 Ford Boss 429 regarded by the DOT and Automotive Industry as a Factory Assembly Line Vehicle?

[TUFCAT]

So far Tufcat has explained his position quite concisely and without leaving any question to the validity of his argument......... On the other side I still see holes in ECS's logic and claim that the Shelby 1000 deserves the title he is suggesting over the Hellcat

Then maybe you can make things perfectly clear for all of us by answering this question.  It requires a simple "YES" or "NO" response.  

Was the 1969-1970 Ford Boss 429 regarded by the DOT and Automotive Industry as a Factory Assembly Line Vehicle?

Diversion as expected.

[ECS]

So far Tufcat has explained his position quite concisely and without leaving any question to the validity of his argument......... On the other side I still see holes in ECS's logic and claim that the Shelby 1000 deserves the title he is suggesting over the Hellcat

Then maybe you can make things perfectly clear for all of us by answering this question.  It requires a simple "YES" or "NO" response.  

Was the 1969-1970 Ford Boss 429 regarded by the DOT and Automotive Industry as a Factory Assembly Line Vehicle?

Diversion as expected.

You won't answer the question because the 2012 SHELBY 1000 was built under the EXACT same premise (BY THE SAME COMPANY) that you continue to dismiss.  By admitting that the BOSS 429 is a "FACTORY ASSEMBLY LINE VEHICLE" (and it is) you will contradict everything you have been trying to refute.

[ECS]

Diversion as expected.

Was the 1969-1970 Ford Boss 429 regarded by the DOT and Automotive Industry as a Factory Assembly Line Vehicle?

Why don't you answer this question tufty?

[ECS]

Why don't you answer this question tufty?

Your silence speaks volumes!  Case closed.

[TUFCAT]

Then maybe you can make things perfectly clear for all of us by answering this question.  It requires a simple "YES" or "NO" response.  
Was the 1969-1970 Ford Boss 429 regarded by the DOT and Automotive Industry as a Factory Assembly Line Vehicle?

You won't answer the question because the 2012 SHELBY 1000 was built under the EXACT same premise (BY THE SAME COMPANY) that you continue to dismiss.  By admitting that the BOSS 429 is a "FACTORY ASSEMBLY LINE VEHICLE" (and it is) you will contradict everything you have been trying to refute.

Why don't you answer this question tufty?

Your silence speaks volumes!  Case closed.

You're embarrassing.     I'm biting my tongue so hard that I'm nearly chewing it off.  At least MaximRecoil has the ability to make himself sound like an intellectual.  With you, its like arguing with a 6 year old who has been up for 15 hours on a Sponge Bob marathon eating nothing but candy and Oreos.  

[ECS]

Was the 1969-1970 Ford Boss 429 regarded by the DOT and Automotive Industry as a Factory Assembly Line Vehicle?

Why don't you answer this question tufty?

Your silence speaks volumes!  Case closed.

You're embarrassing.     I'm biting my tongue so hard that I'm nearly chewing it off.  At least MaximRecoil has the ability to make himself sound like an intellectual.  With you, its like arguing with a 6 year old who has been up for 15 hours on a Sponge Bob marathon eating nothing but candy and Oreos.  

Wow!  All that typing but you can't find the time to answer a simple question concerning the protocol that Ford uses in building some of their special vehicles.  "Cadillacs....Oreos......candy?!?!  I can see that you are truly the "intellectual" in this discussion.

I'd really like to continue matching "wits" with you but since you're only half prepared, I think I'll pass.  Take care!   .

[bakerhillpins]

So far Tufcat has explained his position quite concisely and without leaving any question to the validity of his argument......... On the other side I still see holes in ECS's logic and claim that the Shelby 1000 deserves the title he is suggesting over the Hellcat

I see it very simply, maybe because I'm a simple guy.  No mustang leaves the Ford factory with 1,000HP.  Another company/partner buys a Mustang GT or whatever from the Ford factory, modifies it and then it becomes a 1,000HP mustang.

Your "simple" depiction is not representative of the situation.  Shelby did not "buy" a Mustang and then convert it.  Ford did the EXACT same thing with their Mustang that Dodge did with their Charger Daytona in 1969.  Chrysler owned the vehicle from the time it left their regular production "Factory" and then was shipped to Creative Industries for it's "conversion".  

Just like the Shelby 1000, the 1969 Dodge Daytona had all of it's features listed on it's original Monroney label.  If you say that the Shelby 1000 is not a "factory" car, then the 1969 Dodge Daytona was not a "factory" vehicle either.  You can't have it both ways.  

I'm with DC_1 and BananaDan on this...  Can you show me where I can order the Shelby 1000 off of a Ford website or from a Ford dealer? I can't find it. That seems like a simple litmus test no? And lets just stick with the 2014 discussion rather than trying to bounce back to the 70s for "comparison".

[TUFCAT]

I'd really like to continue matching "wits" with you but since you're only half prepared, I think I'll pass...  

priceless.

[ECS]

Can you show me where I can order the Shelby 1000 off of a Ford website or from a Ford dealer? I can't find it. That seems like a simple litmus test no? And lets just stick with the 2014 discussion rather than trying to bounce back to the 70s for "comparison".

The Shelby 1000 was only built in 2012.  I'm sure that is the reason you won't "find it" as a current offering.  The only reason I mention the other (vintage) vehicles is to illustrate that Ford has provided "Factory" specialty cars of this nature for many years.  The Shelby 1000 was considered a "Factory" built vehicle and it was only offered through certified Ford Dealers.  I have no idea why some here keep referring to "Lingenfelter" as a comparison to these Ford built cars.  As I stated earleir, the Monroney Labels for these specialty (Ford) vehicles and their DMV registration are listed as a production vehicle.  You won't see the DMV registration or the Factory Monroney Label on a "Lingenfelter Conversion" referenced with their original paperwork!  

I don't know why this is so difficult to understand.  It is no different than the 1968 Dodge Hemi Dart or the 1969 Dodge Daytona.  Those cars are considered "Factory" built Cars even thought they went through a conversion process by an outside Company.  Their ORIGINAL paperwork and registration conveys ALL of the changes that was made to the vehicle.  They do not have an addendum Dealer Sticker that accompanies the Original Monroney Label.  The cars were still owned and under the jurisdiction of the Manufacturing Company until they were sold to the Chrysler Dealerships.  Once a vehicle is "sold" and then routed through a Company like "Lingenfelter" it is no longer the property of the Manufacturer that built it.  The conversion will NOT show up on the original title information that the Car was built with.  Ford Motor Company actually owned the rights to the "Shelby" name and Carroll Shelby was livid with what they did to "his" Shelby Mustang vehicle in 1969-70.  They made changes to the Shelby Mustang that made him furious.  How could Ford have done that if "SHELBY" owned his brand of vehicle?

[JB400]

And here I was almost under the impression this dinner date was over

[bakerhillpins]

Fair enough, not being a ford fanatic I didn't realize it was a single year model and hence not available after. Therefore I see why I can't currently find it on their webpage. Can you tell me if I could order it through a Ford dealer at the time? Sentiment here indicates that you were not able to.

I don't know why this is so difficult to understand.  It is no different than the 1968 Dodge Hemi Dart or the 1969 Dodge Daytona.  Those cars are considered "Factory" built Cars even thought they went through a conversion process by an outside Company.

Ignoring the paperwork or what ever sticker was on the window argument since, if I understand you correctly, they are similar so it drops from the discussion.... The difference that I am hearing is 2 fold:

1) in the 68/9 example you give Dodge/Chrysler engineering designed and built the car, however, the production room didn't have the capacity to handle the non standard options added, so they subcontracted that out, bringing the completed vehicle back to the corporation/factory for final delivery from their product line. (While this MAY have happened in the 70s Ford case I can't comment cuz I don't know.) What I find when I read about the 1000 is that Shelby designed and built it. As an example:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-reviews/first-drives/2012-shelby-1000-1

Shelby himself is responsible for the 1000, and he's says he's been much more involved with the development of this tractable 200-mph Mustang than with his company's other recent creations. "When we had Carroll in Vegas to drive the 800-horse version of the Super Snake," explains Shelby's Gary Patterson, "we all expected to get a bunch of accolades and `attaboys' after he finished driving the car. But even before the car had stopped rolling, Carroll was asking us when we'd have a 1000-horse Mustang."

Granted, it's from the internet and we all know that makes it "true" but that seems to be the press position on the car.

2)that in the Dodge circumstances you ordered your car from Dodge/Dodge Dealers, just as you do now when you purchase the Hellcat variants. You didn't purchase your 2012 Mustang 1000 from Ford or a Ford Dealer did you?

The Shelby 1000 was only built in 2012.  I'm sure that is the reason you won't "find it" as a current offering.

I am confused, Can you please explain why I get hits for a 2013/14 model as well? Did Ford only create the 12' version?


Um, Lingenfelter?? Isn't that the land of the bow-tie, who mentioned that?

[bakerhillpins]

And here I was almost under the impression this dinner date was over

Dessert. 

[TUFCAT]

The Shelby 1000 was only built in 2012.  I'm sure that is the reason you won't "find it" as a current offering.  The only reason I mention the other (vintage) vehicles is to illustrate that Ford has provided "Factory" specialty cars of this nature for many years.  The Shelby 1000 was considered a "Factory" built vehicle and it was only offered through certified Ford Dealers.  I have no idea why some here keep referring to "Lingenfelter" as a comparison to these Ford built cars.  As I stated earleir, the Monroney Labels for these specialty (Ford) vehicles and their DMV registration are listed as a production vehicle.  You won't see the DMV registration or the Factory Monroney Label on a "Lingenfelter Conversion" referenced with their original paperwork!  

I don't know why this is so difficult to understand.  It is no different than the 1968 Dodge Hemi Dart or the 1969 Dodge Daytona.  Those cars are considered "Factory" built Cars even thought they went through a conversion process by an outside Company.  Their ORIGINAL paperwork and registration conveys ALL of the changes that was made to the vehicle.  They do not have an addendum Dealer Sticker that accompanies the Original Monroney Label.  The cars were still owned and under the jurisdiction of the Manufacturing Company until they were sold to the Chrysler Dealerships.  Once a vehicle is "sold" and then routed through a Company like "Lingenfelter" it is no longer the property of the Manufacturer that built it.  The conversion will NOT show up on the original title information that the Car was built with.  Ford Motor Company actually owned the rights to the "Shelby" name and Carroll Shelby was livid with what they did to "his" Shelby Mustang vehicle in 1969-70.  They made changes to the Shelby Mustang that made him furious.  How could Ford have done that if "SHELBY" owned his brand of vehicle?

Thanks Baker, you were 100% in everything you said.  Now would somebody please point this idiot back to the post where I explained all of this in the first place?

By the way ECS, that was another non sequitur!  I'm starting to understand why MaximRecoil gets so annoyed.  

[ECS]

Um, Lingenfelter?? Isn't that the land of the bow-tie, who mentioned that?

The same cretin who appears to be arguing with himself!  


To respond to your comments, I have to say that I have a different view of "Factory" built Cars based on my association with the DOT & DMV.  Most Auto Enthusiast get wrapped up in the "assembly line" procedure as it pertains to their perceived regulations.  They make imaginary rules that state a vehicle has to continuously roll down the same line, never deviate from the line procession and stay under the same roof or it is no longer considered a "Factory" built Car.  The Automotive Industry defines a "Factory" vehicle based on its legal registration and when it is released from the Manufacturers ownership.

Once again, below is the process for how Boss 429 Mustangs were built.  Many would consider their process to be a "conversion".  Oddly enough, the classic Auto Industry has never expressed that the Boss 429 was anything but a Factory built vehicle.  All of the Boss 9's were DMV certified as a Factory built Car and sold though Ford certified Dealerships.  Keep in mind that not every Dealership had to offer a particular vehicle for it to be considered a "Factory built" Car.  The Viper is a "Factory" vehicle but not every Dodge Dealership has the right to sell those Cars.

The Mustang's body however was not wide enough to encompass the massive Boss 429 engine and as a result, Ford hired Kar Kraft out of Brighton, MI to modify existing 428 Cobra Jet and Super Cobra Jet Mach 1 Mustangs to properly fit the new Boss 429 engine. Kar Kraft was contracted by Ford to create the Boss 429, because Ford was stretching itself thin across a number of projects, such as the Boss 302 and its Trans Am version that competed in the SCCA Trans Am Series of races in the same years the Boss 429 was being produced for NASCAR. Kar Kraft at the time was also in the process of creating the Trans-Am Boss 302 as well. Production on the Boss 429 began in 1968 in Brighton, Michigan at Kar-Kraft's factory; the cars were transported to this plant directly from the auto maker's plant, and the work began. Kar Kraft made extensive modifications to the Mustang, including widening the shock towers and extended out the inner fenders to allow this massive engine to fit.

[TUFCAT]

To respond to your comments, I have to say that I have a different view of "Factory" built Cars based on my association with the DOT & DMV.

Can you explain this VIN and how it relates to the DOT & DMV?  It must be a "factory built" car right?  It says so right on the VIN.

Hint: the 7th digit (assembly plant) is "B" - Hamtramck, MI.

[pettybird]

Once again, below is the process for how Boss 429 Mustangs were built.  Many would consider their process to be a "conversion".

I don't know why you keep hanging on to the Boss 429 and the wing cars... "many" people might consider them conversions but those "many" people would be total idiots.  Both went to outside contractors AS special vehicles.  Their VINs reflect their birth...Mustangs were shipped to Kar Kraft with 9(or 0)F02Z from Ford.  Daytonas went to Creative wearing XX29.  Darts went to Hurst as LO23's.  The Shelby 1000 went to Shelby as a 662hp car as Ford built it, by customer request.  YOUR ARTICLE clearly states a price PLUS the donor car.  There is NO unique identifier for a 1000hp model as there is for every other iteration of Mustang built at that time.  The car went to Shelby, per customer request or FOB, as a 662hp car with a 662hp P8J or P8K VIN and came back with the same VIN.  Tufcat's 'upfitter' reference, Yenko, Tasca, Motion and even your own Mr Norm's scenario is what happens with the 1000hp models.  You wouldn't get another Monroney label from Shelby on that car for the same reason Pep Boys doesn't give you one when they install a set of tires...Shelby 1000's are USED CARS.  They might bolt on a little plaque to go with the tube of astroglide in the glove compartment for your $150k purchase but it's not a different vehicle when it leaves.

Your article:   "As you'd expect, the Shelby 1000 and 1000 S/C won't be cheap and won't be produced in large numbers. The standard 1000 treatment starts at $149,995, not including the donor GT500; the track-only 1000 S/C starts at $154,995 and also requires you to provide your own GT500. Shelby American will begin accepting reservations for examples of the limited-run cars in April."

That way, Shelby doesn't have to pass OEM level NVH standards, they don't have to crash test the hoods and bumpers, don't have to recertify the engine for emissions, etc.  It could have 0.2 miles on it but you have to buy the car first and then send it to them.

[BananaDan]

I'm with DC_1 and BananaDan on this...  Can you show me where I can order the Shelby 1000 off of a Ford website or from a Ford dealer? I can't find it. That seems like a simple litmus test no? And lets just stick with the 2014 discussion rather than trying to bounce back to the 70s for "comparison".

Don't forget that the Shelby 1000 voids the factory warranty.  When Ford won't warranty the car, that reinforces our point pretty well.  When you have a problem and they tell you to go to Shelby to have it fixed because they can't/won't fix it, that's even more evidence to our point.

[Indygenerallee]

You're embarrassing.  icon_smile_dissapprove   I'm biting my tongue so hard that I'm nearly chewing it off.  At least MaximRecoil has the ability to make himself sound like an intellectual.  With you, its like arguing with a 6 year old who has been up for 15 hours on a Sponge Bob marathon eating nothing but candy and Oreos.