Well here’s a an extra extra read all about it .
I’ve talked to a few well known cougar people , and the subject of Cougar 1 keeps popping up. They all say it’s a rebodied car. Just saying folks , what is pedigree , who is pedigree , oh that’s right only your sh@t stinks. Not mine!!
This GTE has been down talked quite a bit. Now it may be a true legit car. This will be interesting , can’t wait to hear all about it, and all the so called experts opinions.
Oh boy, this should be interesting!
Rob, as a decidedly non-expert when it comes to originality, I do have a question based on the above statement.
Given that the Cougar is a unibody, is it conceivable that the car was rebodied but the front clip was reused? My understanding is that the inner fender isn’t part of the unibody (unless that’s another term for what I think of as the fender apron). It would seem that, to declare any car as still the original body, there would need to be matching date codes or hidden VIN’s on the main part of the unibody itself.
Is that accurate or am I misunderstanding something?
Bill,
I cannot speak to this particular GTE, just to Cougars in general. For me the inner fender (or fender apron), where the VIN is stamped, would be a part of the unibody. Maybe others think differently.
If a car needs a rebody there are only 2 reasons that I can think of. One, the car has major rust issues. Two, the car has major collision damage. If the car has rust issues then generally the front aprons, shock towers, etc will have rust problems. If the car was hit in the front the clip most likely will not be reusable. The car would need to have suffered a side or rear impact to save the front clip.
Since this particular GTE has been around for a while I would doubt that a past “restorer” would have thought to save the front clip and to transfer it to another rear body section. Years ago not much thought was given to matching numbers. Although it is possible that someone did do exactly that, I have no way of knowing.
I have heard about hidden VINs being on cars. I do not know if there are any on a Cougar, I have never found any. If anyone knows where to look I would like to know. Then the next time I pull a parts car in to strip I can look to see if it has a hidden VIN.
Randy Goodling
CCOA #95
I haven’t seen any other VIN locations on 67/68s and I’ve cut them up over the years. I have seen a VIN on a 69 Mach 1 (after media blasting) on the driver side rear frame rail just where it straightened out along the gas tank close to the flange.
A total front clip is a possibility. It is a huge undertaking, but possible. I plan to take the rear seats out and get more date codes. Most of the date codes I have are from front pieces. Whatever happened is very interesting to me and the new owner.
Jury is still out, but at least we can put this to bed once and for all! I have been told that the last two owners would not let anyone inspect the car. That is a huge red flag and I can totally see why it is in doubt.
Rob
The subject of Cougar 1 being re-bodied has never “popped up” in at least the past 20 years. That is silly stupid stuff. The story of Cougar 1 is very well known, and there is a ton of photographic proof that it is the original car. I don’t know who the supposed “well know Cougar people” are maybe you can and should share that with us. John Benoit at Cascade Classics did the restoration. Perhaps you should speak to some one that actually does have the facts.
Also, do not rely too heavily on anonymity. The car you are speaking about is being marketed for over $400K and you know that. You have a history of attacking the owner of the vehicle. It is not hard to get to motive here. It doesn’t matter that this is “what some one told you”, what matters is that you said it. I will not allow the board to facilitate slander, defamation, or any other damaging behavior. In discovery we will cooperate fully with any investigation. Straighten up your act. I will leave you account active long enough for you to apologize to Jim.
Standards to Prove Libel
To win damages against someone who has libeled you, you must prove the written statement was:
false
harmed your reputation or your business’s reputation
published to at least one other person
about you or your business specifically, and
made with some degree of fault and intention.
Note that a false and harmful statement broadcast over the media, whether on television, over the Internet, or via something similar, is still considered libel, even if it wasn’t in writing.
Thanks Rob, for your willingness to share the ongoing story & discovery with us.
Cougarshark –
You are woefully misinformed. Cougar 1 is not rebodied. Its’ entire history is, and has been, available to the general public.
For the record you can find that information here: https://cougar-1.com
I suggest that you check the facts and cease making claims for which there is no justification.
Jim
I am not sure why COUGARSHARK continues to troll this message board regarding Jim. Just no explanation works here.
All,
I pulled back the right front fender to uncover the VIN per Jim’s request. I was confident from the bottom that it was the same as the dash and the door. They are. The left front fender also matches the other VIN’s. I chose not to disturb this fender because it is obvious that it is correct. I use a magnifying mirror to read them from the bottom.
I removed the rear seats and all the sheetmetal date codes in the rear area match the date codes on the front pieces. Most are late February and some earlier. The car was built on 15 March.
Below is the VIN number photo. I will post some of the rear sheetmetal date codes. This car was originally red as the Marti report states.
Rob
All,
More pics:
Over all of seat area. The car was originally red. The front date sheetmetal date codes I sampled all predate the 15 March build date of this car. I did not take pics because they are visible without disturbing anything.
Right cross brace January 20 1968
Left cross brace January 20 1968
Panel forward of gas tank side to side. February 18 1968
Panel on left rear quarter that taillight panel spot welds to. February 9 1968
Panel that top of left side cross brace spots to.
This is very exciting news! It sure looks like another GT-E has survived. Many owners ago I asked if it might be possible to take one of the rear tail light bars off and look for any kind of Ford prototype markings on the back. We have seen other prototype parts that had tags that indicated that they were pre production items. In any event I would like to get some very accurate measurements and photos so I might be able to reproduce them. They are simple enough that I think it might be possible even for guys to make their own. I think they are really cool others might not be so enthusiastic.
Really? I get around quite a bit in the Cougar community and have never heard such a statement. Care to name said parties? I was around when Marc Ogren and then Jim were using it as a driver.
Wish we could drop the Cougar 1 stuff that has nothing to do with this thread…
Rob
Rob, I am sorry the thread got jacked. If I delete the posts then people will say that there was something to hide… I think a lot of the confusion about the car you are working on came about because previous owners were reluctant to let the car be inspected. How about this; would you mind starting a new thread?
That’s the whole point. That people say and make statements about a car ( or anything else for that matter. ) when they have no concrete information , or facts , or hands on knowledge. But people follow.
This GTE has been hung out to dry about being rebodied for years. Bad for the previous owners. And why because a few people ran there mouths about it being fake. But looks like a good buy for the new owner, but only after he has to jump through hoops.
And some of you guys on this site need to get a life.
No need for anyone to be sorry. I will continue to bring factual evidence forward and let it be what it will be. I just want to let the evidence speak for itself.
Rob
Rob,
This is all very interesting. I am glad that facts are now being added to the story. Just curious, are you planning on removing all the non correct XR-7 interior parts and replacing them with the correct parts? What color interior did the car originally have? Which style, standard or decore?
Randy Goodling
CCOA #95
I am not the owner. At this point the owner seems to want it to stay just as it is. It has a lot of “non GTE” pieces, but he does not care. His drive is to provide the evidence of the car as it is. This car has a checkered past for some good reason, but some speculation and comments that may have not been true. Prior owners were reluctant to let people inspect it. That is history now and all numbers will let it stand for what it was and is.
It seems to have a race history which may explain why its has some modifications such as the dash and the tach. Tomorrow I will peal back the left front fender to expose that VIN number per Jim’s request. We will see.
Rob