85-86 Hood Decal Again

[redlordamazon]

I came across this ad in a old magazine today while cleaning the basement at my Mothers. The GT on the hood is in silver. Has anyone ever seen a red car with the decal in silver before?

[tbirdman]

I have not seen any red 85 or 86's with a silver hood "GT" decal. There are some other peculiarities about that pic which suggest it was taken before Ford decided on final colors and markings for the 85's. The first would be the black trim paint/headlight buckets/mirrors, as well as a black hood decal instead of the charcoal. The only production GT's I have seen with the silver "GT" decal would be the black ones. They probably thought that black would present a more striking contrast for the picture, rather than the charcoal, and as such would be more likely to grab the eye.

[85GTTops]

I have this ad in actual print as well. Take a close look at it again and tell us something else peculiar about the Mustang in the photo. I'l give you a hint: look at the far left.

[85GTTops]

Oh, and there's another peculiar issue with this mustang that's also on the far left. This is for bonus points.

[redlordamazon]

No antenna

[Blue86]

Oh, and there's another peculiar issue with this mustang that's also on the far left. This is for bonus points.

The front facia (lower). It's a pre-production car used for pictures. The hood decal was an '84.

[eeprete]

The hood decal is an 85-86 it looks like however with the 84 "GT" logo over it. I do agree the front fender extensions don't look correct. The whole side of the vehicle lacks definition.

[85GTTops]

You guys are good. There are a couple more "differences" in the far left side of the pic. I'll point out of them: the 5.0 badge is missing. Can you figure out what the other one is?

[tbirdman]

Yup, you're right, that is an 84 "GT" decal on the hood. It has the separations in the letters as the 83-84 emblems did. I missed the no antenna part.

hood

The hood decal is an 85-86 it looks like however with the 84 "GT" logo over it. I do agree the front fender extensions don't look correct. The whole side of the vehicle lacks definition.

[tbirdman]

Are those 10 hole wheels, or TRX's?

You guys are good. There are a couple more "differences" in the far left side of the pic. I'll point out of them: the 5.0 badge is missing. Can you figure out what the other one is?

[85GTTops]

Are those 10 hole wheels, or TRX's?

They're certainly not 10 holes, and they do look like TRX wheels.

[eeprete]

shouldn't the molding also be charcoal? Looks almost black.

I was going to comment on the wheel too, but then got fixated on the hood.

[tbirdman]

Hey redlordamazon, what month/year was that magazine dated?

[85GTTops]

shouldn't the molding also be charcoal? Looks almost black.

I was going to comment on the wheel too, but then got fixated on the hood.

I just pulled mine out again and sure enough, it looks like black instead of gray. The mirrors and headlights are also black.

Also, take a look at the rear view mirror. It looks a little too wide, making it an earlier mirror.

[eeprete]

so, what we have here, is a 1 of 1 car, someone must locate it, purchase it and save it!

If this were today's ad, this car would actually be a good candidate for photoshopdisasters.com (even though photoshop wasn't used for this). Ah, the good old days of paste up and mechanicals and real airbrusing. Nothing I miss more than those small jars of rubber cement and my Paasche airbrush.... LOL

There are a few things I see from a art direction/design standpoint that are not 100% correct either. That shadow on the underside would never be as strong. The white highlight on the passenger fender extension, totally non-existent item its reflecting. Drivers side of bumper molding not quite right. I think the drivers side tie rod is broken too...

[banzaibullitt]

Is that a slapper bar hanging down on the D/S rear??