| |
In February 1967, Jim began working as a Development
Engineer at Shelby American. He reported to Fred Goodell.
Goodell's brother-in-law, Ray Brozak, was also part of the
group. The following paragraphs about the 1967 Convertible
Engineering Car appeared in Issue #49 (1986) of The Shelby
American.
33 years later, we
were also able to obtain the audio recording of the
relevant portion of the interview and we've done our best to
transcribe it.
|
SAAC: |
December 9, today,
Jack (?), Ron Mack, John Johnson and I’m Allen (?)
and myself, (Bill?) and we’re talking to Pete Sheir. Pete,
what was your classification at Shelby when you
worked there?
|
|
Pete: |
(unintelligible) |
|
Jim: |
He was
our best mechanical, quite frankly. (More
unintelligible).
|
|
SAAC: |
This
was at AO Smith?
|
|
Jim: |
No,
Shelby. We were separate entities, they were a
subcontractor to us and did the assembly, and we
theoretically did all the engineering work in what
is now the (Cage C Hall ?) down here. It was a
former Buick agency, so it had lifts and what not,
and we had, uh, 3 or 4 offices, a couple of drafting
tables and – how many lifts did we have? – about 4
lifts? Other space to work, and we did some
experimental, and development work there.
|
|
SAAC: |
And
what is your name?
|
|
Jim: |
Oh,
I’m Jim Frank, and I was the development engineer
for Shelby. There was the chief engineer, Fred
Goodell. Uh, Ray Brozak was an engineer, and I
was (#3 in the group). Only 3 people were titled
engineer. So far as I know, Brozak was the only one
who had a degree.
|
|
SAAC: |
And
you came from the plant in California.
|
|
Jim: |
I came
from them in California. I went to work for them in
Feb '67, and got transferred out here, when they
moved the production of the Shelby Mustangs to
Ionia.
|
|
SAAC: |
Do you
know about the time of the production year? (cuts
out)
|
|
Jim: |
(cuts
in) They were a little bit better.
|
|
SAAC: |
What about
the in '67, there was a proto convertible? Did
you hear anything about that?
|
|
Jim: |
Sure,
they built the damn thing and it got stolen almost
immediately.
|
|
SAAC: |
that
car still exists.
|
|
?: |
There
were two of them. But that car that does exists is
in Chicago and has been rebuilt as a '68.
|
|
Jim: |
It was
a, the first one we built, um, was of course an
engineering car. And they ran on a system that
anybody could drive the first engineering car if
they got to it at night and said "keys!" (Laughter)
And we had a sort of a visiting engineer who was an
(Argentinean) if I’m not mistaken. And he was out
there doing some consulting with us or (?) from
Ford, and he took it one night and parked it in the,
parked it in the carport at his apartment. It got
stolen. We got it back about a week later it was on
down in the Palos Verdes Hills, and of course
everything had been stripped: the manifold, the
carburetor... (cuts out)
|
|
SAAC: |
...
(cuts in) got a 302?
|
|
Jim: |
This
was not a '67, it was never built as a ’67. It was
built as a ’68, it was a prototype of a '68
production. |
|
Pete? |
It was
built on a ’67 chassis. |
|
Jim: |
Oh, a
'67 chassis yeah. It was a '67 Chassis. |
|
? |
(unintelligible) |
|
Jim: |
it was
never, it was never built, it was never built
originally ’67, it was built as a prototype '68.
|
|
? |
Was it
a prototype '67 or '68? |
|
Jim: |
No, It
had '68 glass or close to it. It was made in some
temporary molds that was thrown together out there. |
|
? |
it
never had ’67 glass? |
|
Jim: |
No.
|
|
SAAC: |
Ok,
then if that car is real (unintelligible), that
explains the car. The car had a '67 VIN but it looks
like a '68. '68 glass. The present owner, I think he
thinks, that it was built, it was originally a '67
convertible.
|
|
Jim: |
No,
he’s got a '67 chassis, '68 glass. And it was put
together that way. But it was the only car like it
in the world, and then it got stolen (laughter). No,
it was absolutely the only one. It was the first one
we built, and it was done for a week, and we got it
back (unintelligible) tires. |
|
|
%20-%20Cobrasations%20-%20Jim%20Frank%20-%20Thumbnail.jpg)