Disecting the first Production/Prototype/Shelby Bronco

[sprdv1]

That's awesome Todd. Thanks for sharing

 

[tasker]

GOOD STUFF!! thanks Todd and Andrew!

 

[Classic 4x4]

Were you able to check numbers , such as any chassis stampings, BOMs on the axle, date codes on T-case and trans, etc? If this was a preprod before it was Shelby's gift, then those code will predate normal production.

I renew my objection to calling this "Bronco #1." If you go by the numbers, it's "Bronco "0" but in reality it's a preprod with a special serial number. Without doubt, it's the earliest known surviving Bronco and it being a preprod makes it incredibly important, but this is the time to come up with a better reference than "Bronco#1" or it will soon, and inaccurately, be stuck to it and 20 years from now historians will be calling all of us boobs for doing so.

 

[okie4570]

Cool historical items for sure, thanks for looking and sharing! So was this a Budd body or a whole different animal?

Were there any signs (other than the grille) that the front clip may not be original sheet metal or that the tub may not even be a Budd body?

Fanko's source says that there was a Bronco at the ranch (presumably this one) that was wrecked badly and had extensive repairs. This would account for the grille obviously, but we need to see if it still has early Budd body features on the tub.

I don't think there were any other signs that the front clip wasn't original. Unfortunately I forgot to ask to open the door(s) and look more closely at the interior.

I'll have to leave it to you experts to check that out when you see it.

Todd Z.

Surely there's a pic somewhere of the driver door open or a side shot showing a rear shock?

 

[toddz69]

Surely there's a pic somewhere of the driver door open or a side shot showing a rear shock?

The rear shocks angle forward like all the pre-March '66 models.

Todd Z.

 

[toddz69]

Were you able to check numbers , such as any chassis stampings, BOMs on the axle, date codes on T-case and trans, etc? If this was a preprod before it was Shelby's gift, then those code will predate normal production.

I renew my objection to calling this "Bronco #1." If you go by the numbers, it's "Bronco "0" but in reality it's a preprod with a special serial number. Without doubt, it's the earliest known surviving Bronco and it being a preprod makes it incredibly important, but this is the time to come up with a better reference than "Bronco#1" or it will soon, and inaccurately, be stuck to it and 20 years from now historians will be calling all of us boobs for doing so.

Andrew looked for a VIN on the frame but didn't find anything. Similar situation to several of the Stroppe race Broncos we've looked at.

I have a picture of the tag on the transfer case that I'll post when I get a chance. I want to compare its number to the list that Viperwolf? compiled a few years ago - that should tell us where it falls in the production scheme.

I guess folks will continue to call it various things - hence my title on the thread. Yes, it can be argued that it's pre-production since it was built at Allen Park rather Wayne Truck. I don't know what the configuration of that line was - I've heard it called a prototype production line. But I'm guessing that they mainly had areas where prototypes could be hand assembled in one location. But conversely, it does have the first serial number that Ford assigned for production Broncos for '66. None of us know how many prototypes may have been made prior to it - I wish we could figure that out.

Update: I did a quick google search and came across this quote in a Mustang book by Bob Fria, who was heavily involved with the introduction/development of the Mustang.

"Ford's Allen Park Pilot Plant was the mini-factory/hand assembly location where many Ford car line pilot vehicles were assembled. Pilot vehicles are hand built chassis that are assembled without the use of assembly line procedures and fixtures. They are hand-assembled using the very first generation metal chassis components to check part fit". So my initial assumption above appears to be correct.

Todd Z.

 

[okie4570]

Did the owner know what events it will be at this year?

 

[toddz69]

Did the owner know what events it will be at this year?

He didn't mention specific ones but he said he wanted to take it to as many events as possible for folks to see it.

Todd Z.

 

[House]

And probably to get his company name out there to sell more Broncos.
This is probably one of the best "marketing write-offs" I have ever seen!

 

[DirtDonk]

Did you happen to note where the fuse panel was? Guessing that they moved the firewall connectors in preparation for the mods to that area for installing the V8. Wonder if they moved the whole panel too, since the two parts are pretty closely attached in the factory harness.

The circle panels are very interesting.

Paul

 

[DirtDonk]

I wonder if Ford installed the steering stabilizer as a prototype mount, before setting on the location we all know. Or if it was added later by someone?

Paul

 

[toddz69]

Great press for Andrew!

http://www.gasmonkeygarage.com/firs...otype-reemerges-almost-40-years-family-truck/

Curious why Vinny said what he did about classicbroncos.com - I don't recall anyone here ever claiming what he states.

Todd Z.

 

[okie4570]

I don't remember that post either, other than some talk about the UF4 instead of U14. Are there not keyholes in the doors, or can I just not see them? Interesting in the old pic of the front, where the turn signals should be, it looks like those are just large metal rectangles with no lenses.

 

[fordfan]

I don't remember that post either, other than some talk about the UF4 instead of U14. Are there not keyholes in the doors, or can I just not see them? Interesting in the old pic of the front, where the turn signals should be, it looks like those are just large metal rectangles with no lenses.

I think the beltline molding covered the holes. The '67 holes were moved up to allow for the molding...

 

[okie4570]

I think the beltline molding covered the holes. The '67 holes were moved up to allow for the molding...

Yep, was just wondering if they're missing or hidden. I see that the door shell is a different fade than the rest, almost like it had been replaced.

 

[toddz69]

Photobucket isn't cooperating tonight but I looked more closely at the data plate on the transfer case and the SN is 564627 - much earlier than any of the others that Viper posted in his thread a few years ago.

By comparison, the SN on the one in our Stroppe racer is 695944 and I have written next to it, 8/11/65. I'm not sure where I came up with that date now.

The BOM # on the t-case appears to be SKT-120744 2, which doesn't seem to jive with anything in the chart either.

Jim - can you shed some light on it?

Todd Z.

 

[BajaBronco]

Todd the date of 8-11-65 is the casting date of the case itself on Red Racer.

 

[gnpenning]

Interesting read Todd and Andrew. I appreciate your willingness to release what you can.
It's good to see that your checking other references about how things worked at the plant along with other details.

Hope you find the answer to the circle

You never know what will pop out down the road so your being cautious is a good thing.

Keep up the good work.

 

[Viperwolf1]

Photobucket isn't cooperating tonight but I looked more closely at the data plate on the transfer case and the SN is 564627 - much earlier than any of the others that Viper posted in his thread a few years ago.

By comparison, the SN on the one in our Stroppe racer is 695944 and I have written next to it, 8/11/65. I'm not sure where I came up with that date now.

The BOM # on the t-case appears to be SKT-120744 2, which doesn't seem to jive with anything in the chart either.

Jim - can you shed some light on it?

Todd Z.

Here's the latest chart.

 

[House]

And here is the mysterious post from the previous owner, but it looks to me like it was posted on EB Barn and it's archive is hosted by classicbroncos.com but not posted on classicbroncos.com...?