Topic: Projected versus actual build date

[Bossbill]

Recently I decided to change the "build date" of the Shelby in my sig.
Why?

When other fellow Concours site users post their information about their car, it appears the majority are using the "projected build date assigned to the VIN when the order was received at the car assembly plant" (quote by Jeff in another thread).
In other words, the date on their door tag.

In order to compare the Mustang features on my Shelby I opted to change the date from the actual Ford build date on my Marti to the date that would have been on my door if it was a Mustang -- the projected build date.

I'm not sure how others are handling the date of their car, so I started this thread.

[CharlesTurner]

For 67-up cars, it is most useful to post the actual build date.

[J_Speegle]

For 67-up cars, it is most useful to post the actual build date.

+1  Build date (Projected) is no more useful IMHO in comparing details and trends than comparing Ford VIN's.  We know that when using those you can be off by a month or more. Current greatest period between real and projected I have is 8 months. In your case its a month off and yes I went back and correct my last response in the rear spring thread

Another example of the importance of the real date for 67 and up cars is the running changes research current being conducted and ongoing is that the only thing (data) we can trust is that real date and car details from those cars with real dates are the guide posts for all findings.

That is the nice things about doing San Jose cars in 67 is that we have access to all those dates without asking for Marti reports from each.  This from a guy that has spent three days so far entering each and every 67 Shelby's real build date into a usable spreadsheet so that we can narrow down those running changes that Mustangs and Shelby's share.

If only we had the same from 65-66

Bill now will just have to look up your real build date everytime you post a finding. I suggest others now have to do the same thing if they want to compare what they are looking at on their car. This is also why we often ask if, when members post a "build" date - which one it is.

[Bossbill]

Yes, I liked the real date better than projected, but wanted others to be able to compare apples to apples. I'll change mine back to actual since that's its real 'born on date'.
I've only changed the date in my sig in the last two weeks, so previous posts that compare components used the Ford build date.

I remembered you quoted some of the information from my springs and was going to warn you about that, but you are already ahead of me.

[J_Speegle]

Yes, I liked the real date better than projected, but wanted others to be able to compare apples to apples. I'll change mine back to actual since that's its real 'born on date'.
I've only changed the date in my sig in the last two weeks, so previous posts that compare components used the Ford build date.

Just make sure you label what the date is when posting or using it in your signature. Seems that most owners purchase a Marti report  or for Shelby owners have the last 67 registry so they have their real dates

[67gta289]

This also has implications on the running change discussion.  As noted in several previous posts, the MPC "before" and "after" dates are often questioned because we find unrestored examples that "prove" that the date is incorrect.

The trouble is if you were to go to the parts counter in say 1970 to purchase something, and the parts guy asks if it was before or after 1/3/67, what do you as the owner look at?  I would say 99.9 out of 100 times it would be the data plate.

I'm not saying that the MPC date is exactly correct, and we know that the projected date on the data plate is not exact.  Put both of these together and you have some real potential problems.   I would only assume that there were a lot of trips back to the dealer, putting the part back on the counter, and saying "this isn't right".

[Bossbill]

My car is caught up in a few running change rollover dates. EC3 brake line routing (mine uses earlier routing) and valance screws -- to name only two. I'm also in a rollover period of Shelby changes.