Topic: Build Anomaly

[alanmac]

Jeff,  Just to be clear I didn't add the jumper wire, it was there as a factory mistake.  Let us know how your 69 Boss is configured.  Alan

[J_Speegle]

Jeff,  Just to be clear I didn't add the jumper wire, it was there as a factory mistake.  Let us know how your 69 Boss is configured.  Alan

Understand

As for my 69 Boss its configured like all the others. Both on the passenger side for some reason even though they didn't come with a oil cooler.

[alanmac]

My understanding is non oil cooler cars in 69 or 70 had the horns on the Left and Right side.   

[jwc66k]

My understanding is non oil cooler cars in 69 or 70 had the horns on the Left and Right side.

That is shown in the "1970 Mustang Electric Assembly Manual" (AM0033) pages 5 and 6. The "jumper wire" was a Fairlane harness.
If you don't have a set, I strongly suggest you invest in them.
Jim

[alanmac]

Thank Jim,  I didn't know the history of the jumper wire.  I have the 70 electrical assembly manual and use it for reference.  Ford made assembly mistakes and this is most likely the case for my car with the jumper wire and the two horns mounted on the RH side.     

[RocketScientist]

My two cents..... build it to what's correct rather than what the masses expect it to be. By conforming you are losing a little piece of history and though you will be hassled by the uninformed, you will be happily surprised by the odd person that will comment that theirs is the same.
Brad

[rockhouse66]

My two cents..... build it to what's correct rather than what the masses expect it to be. By conforming you are losing a little piece of history and though you will be hassled by the uninformed, you will be happily surprised by the odd person that will comment that theirs is the same.
Brad

I agree.  If you can document how your car was originally built, I favor putting it back that way.  Otherwise the cars become homogenized to conform to rules or expectations and lose some of their identity.  Then again, I don't enter judged events so maybe I would feel differently after defending details like this one.

[alanmac]

Thanks for the feedback and information from everyone.  Once again this was a great conversation and good knowledge learning. Funny thing is no one has ever asked about it in 43 years....   Alan 

[J_Speegle]

Agree odd ball discoveries, mistakes and other findings can be difficult to untangle and this is often leads to a  choice that owners face as we've discussed it dozens of times here. Do I restore the car to how the company and plant should have built the car or the way I found it?

Think there is one thing missing though in this particular discussion, I don't think we've established that the car was unrestored when alanmac got the car, unless I missed it somewhere in the discussion. Way too many owners only refer back to "this is the way it was when I purchased the car in the 80's or 90's. Not IMHO a good solid point in the cars history to base a choice on most of the time. If the car was unrestored and if there are not marks or damage to the area around the unused attachment point then that would help

Of course with modifications often another owner will come up with the same solution or purchase the same replacement leading to findings that are unreliable as many of the examples of the cars I have pictures of show.  Findings can work both ways

[alanmac]

I bought my car in 79. It was unrestored.  It was completely stock with no modifications except Crager mags were added.  There was no evidence of a fender bender.  It was an untouched car that need a restoration.  Alan