Project 67 Mustang

This was still tacked to the back of one of side panels what are the chances this is the original color?

This is Mustang M2621. It is probably a 69 or 70. I was told that this is the original upholstery on the front seats. The back seat has been reupholstered. It used to be the Skiing Skeeters tow when it was new. It is in the year range when Tim said they changed over to a wider selection of fabrics. It appears to be pretty much original sans wheel, and the color of the upholstery looks close. I have only seen it on the water a couple of times in the 12-13 years I have been on the chain. It is driven by old people like me, no surprise.

Either someone got drill happy or that boat didn't start out intended for a HM, another case of use what you can get

TRBenj wrote: Gary S wrote: Either someone got drill happy or that boat didn't start out intended for a HM, another case of use what you can get I'm not following you Gary... Care to enlighten us on what you see?

Gary,
I can't see what you are talking about ether?

It also has the through hulls for a Chrysler. The engine choice may have been an option which was chosen later. The 68 Cuda we had, had the same through hulls for a Chrysler and it had an Interceptor in it, so it had that same useless loop tying the 2 inlets that were not needed together.

Gary, I can't say that I've ever seen another 1st gen stang without a fuel sight glass besides yours- including several that have what appear to be factory electronic fuel gauges. We'll need to do through some pictures to see if HM's were handled any differently, as I haven't had a chance to closely inspect as many of tees as I would like. Reid doesn't have any pre-71 stang HM's as far as I know. We should dig up Vondys thread and ask JohnB what his boats have/had. I believe I see a sight glass on this one:

http://correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=200&sort=&pagenum=7

Cc production techniques must have been a little sloppy back then. There are enough engine specific differences to think that they'd probably need to know what a hull was eventually destined to have- things like exhaust outlet size and location (on the engine end) varied between the HM, chryslers and Interceptors. Still, some details are common regardless of the engine, like the dual pickups that Bruce mentioned (all of my 67-71 boats have them regardless of engine). I'm guessing fuel sight glasses probably were handled the same. Not sure why that would have been at all related to engine option anyways, as it would seemingly be an unrelated option?

I like those transoms without the I/O pads. I didn't realize they were on the later models.

John, do you still have that glove box and if so, would you sell it?

Bruce I think Tim has reason to believe that the boats with the transom pads are faster,I know Marshall's fits that description! My boat had the light under the deck too,at the time I could not figure it out. It also has the dual pickup's. John what was the serial number on your SS again please. Should have Art look it up too.

Ha, I thought Marshall's boat was fast because it had a hot 340 in it!

Is there more hook in the hulls without the transom pads?

Gary S wrote: John what was the serial number on your SS again please. Should have Art look it up too.

The Mustang no more:
SS2595

My keeper:
M2799

One on my chain:
M2621

I forget if the build sheet denotes the model year... June would put you right near the time they switched. If I had to guess id say it's one of the latest 67's as opposed to an early 68.

My helper did all the hard work

So I've been tearing down my engine slowly in my garage and the smell from old engine oil does smell up the garage some ha So the wife thought she is cleaver by trying to deodorize things with a air freshener now whats funny is my wife is a smoker and she only smokes in the garage and I can't stand the smell of smoke so this was a way to combat that smell

Get that Fram filter off that Block kirk