PDA

View Full Version : Marti Report: 1982 CHP Hatchback


28HopUp
08-31-2011, 10:43 PM
As most of us know by now, the Deluxe Marti Reports are different than the Eminger Invoices in that you do not need to own the vehicle to get the Deluxe Report. Anybody can run this report on any vehicle they want to, as long as they have the VIN and are willing to pony up the money for the report.

There was a recent thread on Four Eyed Pride about the 82 CHP hatchback (http://vb.foureyedpride.com/showthread.php?t=119210). In that thread, FoxChassis suggested that somebody could run the report for this car, since the VIN was known (and listed in the thread). So last week I ordered the report, which is attached herein.



EDIT: The Marti report was removed because it contained an error. A new report will be provided shortly.

28HopUp
08-31-2011, 10:49 PM
Here are a few comments about the information:

This car has a 6-digit DSO.
There is no paint code on the door sticker, and the car is said to have "special paint".
There were only 4 hatchbacks painted in this manner in 1982. So would it be fair to say that there were only 4 CHP hatchbacks that year?
The letter ends with the best statement possible - that the car was used by the California Highway Patrol for evaluation purposes.


Very cool stuff, IMO!

ImEvil1
08-31-2011, 11:17 PM
Way cool....and verifies lots of things. :2thumbs:

FoxChassis
09-01-2011, 01:27 AM
That "one of 4 ... for the 1982 Mustang 3-door sedan", or any of those other statistics for that matter, only covers the P16 (GL/GT) hatchback, not the P13 (GLX) hatchback. So it is possible that one or more P13 hatchbacks also had "special paint".

I wonder if the other three are 224461, 224462, and 224463.

NoDrama43
09-01-2011, 07:44 AM
:yes:

excellent information straight from from Ford's database. Doesn't get any better than that !

28HopUp
09-01-2011, 08:48 AM
That "one of 4 ... for the 1982 Mustang 3-door sedan", or any of those other statistics for that matter, only covers the P16 (GL/GT) hatchback, not the P13 (GLX) hatchback. So it is possible that one or more P13 hatchbacks also had "special paint".

I wonder if the other three are 224461, 224462, and 224463.


Would the CHP have ordered any GLX hatchbacks for evaluation purposes? If the general concensus is that they would not have, then would it be safe to say that there were only 4 CHP hatchbacks?

Also, we know the list of consecutive VIN's shows that there were 400 V8 notchbacks, and that the known 82 SSP's are contained within that batch of VIN's. There have been other reports stating that the CHP ordered 400 SSP's in 1982, yet other "sources" have claimed there were 406 SSP's in 1982. Are we to the point where we can state with confidence the correct number of 1982 SSP's?

FoxChassis
09-01-2011, 10:05 AM
The "source" that claims there were 406 SSPs in '82, does that include hatchbacks (which were not SSP) and notchbacks OR is that (supposedly) notchbacks only?

NoDrama43
09-01-2011, 10:58 AM
I think what is important is that we not make assumptions. We have a great resource in Kevin Marti who has the hard data. The best way to determine how many 1982 Mustangs (all versions) ordered by the CHP is to have documentation from the CHP.

An example of this is the original documentation we have from CHP regarding the order, PO#, purchase history and delivery paperwork for EVERY 1987 CHP car purchased, including the pilot car inspection paperwork. Without documentation from CHP isn't the numbers just our "best guess"?

I think what is critically important is that if we DO have a number in mind we should always publish it as an "estimate based on" not just print it as fact on the internet.

My "best guess" is 400 notchback, and 4 hatchback, based on the documentation I have seen thus far. I give zero weight to the hype, smoke and mirror theories that are published in various forums....

If you own a 1982 mustang that you believe was a CHP car it is now very easy to confirm. Buy a Marti Report that specifies special service package, DSO 72-0102, DSO 72-0187, CHP testing, etc., or produce an assignment card.

ImEvil1
09-01-2011, 11:20 AM
Very well said.

NoDrama43
09-01-2011, 03:10 PM
thank you. I was in a definitive state of mind. :)

Wolfe1013
09-06-2011, 12:08 AM
This is great!! I was so deflated when they didn't find my Eminger Invoice. At least I can get this to go with the assignment card.

Thanks, Bill.

Greg

FoxChassis
09-14-2011, 03:26 PM
Wonder if there is a possibility for us to verify if the three previous consecutive VINs to this one were also CHP evaluation, through the same special order # 0187.

Perhaps and inquiry could be made if it is possible to identify how many other P16F VINs were ordered through special order # 0187, without actually obtaining the VINS (to which Marti Auto is not allowed to do, per their legal agreement with Ford), and then to ask if the three previous consecutive VINs were those ordered through # 0187.

28HopUp
09-14-2011, 04:09 PM
Perhaps this is question is better suited for Kevin Marti, but do you think the STANDARD Marti Reports would provide us with enough confirmation in terms of DSO and SSP options? Those reports are only $15 each, which would be a whole lot easier on the wallet.

FoxChassis
09-14-2011, 08:55 PM
Standard report should have the special order number (if applicable) along with the DSO but I haven't seen one yet with anything other than a two-digit DSO so I can't say for sure.

Since the "evaluation" hatchback wasn't an SSP it didn't say "Special Service Package" in the list of equipped features so I would assume the others would be the same.

The very last comment on the reports (the production date, just above Kevin Marti's signature) is different between the Standard Report and the Deluxe Report. Standard only tells you the date. Deluxe tells you the date and whether it was produced ahead of schedule, on time, or behind schedule. So I'm not sure if the same comment "This vehicle was used by the California Highway Patrol for evaluation purposes." would be on the Standard Report.

28HopUp
02-27-2012, 11:42 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Mustang_SSP#CHP_Hatchback

Now I don't know how accurate that Wiki entry is (5 hatchbacks). I also do not know the VINs of any of the other hatchbacks. I do know the VINs of all 400 of the coupes, and the three consecutive VINs immediately after the 400th coupe are P16F (base 5.0L hatchback).

The 400 P10F coupes are 213038 through 213437.

The three P16F hatchbacks immediately following those 400 coupes are

1FABP16F1CF213438
1FABP16F3CF213439
1FABP16FXCF213440

If someone were so inclined ;) to run a Marti Report for some of those hatchbacks we might find something interesting...


In the interest of research, we pulled a Marti Report on the first car after the CUN batch of known 1982 SSP's. We were hoping to confirm whether or not Ford made some hatchbacks for the CHP immediately after running the notchbacks. Attached is the Marti Report.

Spoiler Alert - the first car after the last 1982 SSP was a civilian car that had a 2-digit DSO and did not go to the CHP.

28HopUp
09-01-2012, 01:27 PM
As promised in my recent edit of post #1, here is the revised Deluxe Marti Report for one of the four 1982 CHP hatchbacks...

http://www.specialservicemustang.net/VINlist/CHP/1982CHP224464/82-224464marti1.pdf


...which also confirms the CHP hatchback(s) as having been equipped with the SSP option.

:thumbsup:

28HopUp
09-30-2012, 04:49 PM
We re-wrote the SSP History page to confirm that the 1982 CHP hatchbacks were equipped with the SSP option -

http://www.specialservicemustang.net/History.html


We also just edited the 1982-1986 Package Content Page to match that -

http://www.specialservicemustang.net/86Package.html


NOW we're consistent! :)

chp1982
09-30-2012, 06:24 PM
As usual, nice work Bill.

FoxChassis
10-01-2012, 02:58 AM
We re-wrote the SSP History page to confirm that the 1982 CHP hatchbacks were equipped with the SSP option -

http://www.specialservicemustang.net/History.html


We also just edited the 1982-1986 Package Content Page to match that -

http://www.specialservicemustang.net/86Package.html


NOW we're consistent! :)

Bill:

There are some minor details that can be changed/added to the second paragraph (engine) of the SSP Package Content page, if you so desire. Let me know.

As always, excellent job!

Mick

28HopUp
10-01-2012, 09:36 AM
Thanks Mick! I welcome your input on the technical aspect (ok, ANY aspect) of the Fox Mustangs. Please edit accordingly and send me a PM with your revisions.

:)