Missing options on Marti Report

7173Mustangs.com

Help Support 7173Mustangs.com:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I’ve long wondered about some options that are on my car that don’t show up on the Marti Report and I’m wondering if anybody has some insight. My car has power windows, tilt steering, rimblow steering wheel, and Select Air air conditioning. None of these options show up on my Marti report. Does that seem strange or typical?
The Marti Report shows what the car came with from the factory. If you have other options that are not on the report, then they were added later on.
 
Lois Eminger was a very close friend of my father's, dating back to the early-60's when the CTCI was in its infancy. Lois was a legal secretary at Ford, and she was one of the early members of the Classic Thunderbird Club International as was my dad (member #6). Pops helped Lois save all of the 55-57 Thunderbird factory invoices, and soon after that was done, encouraged her to do the same with the Mustang invoices. At first she balked, because we're talking about tons and tons of paper that needed to be safely kept in dry storage, which had to be rented. By the time Lois finally agreed it needed to happen, the 1965-1966 invoices were "toast".

Anyhow, all of the invoices that Lois DID save, we (NPD) eventually took care of the storage for her in 1983 when we opened our Livonia MI warehouse. We stored the invoices for many years, until Lois sold them to Kevin Marti, and we delivered them to Kevin with our own semi truck.

It is my understanding that Kevin has what was Ford's actual computer database on the cars, and a Marti Report has absolutely nothing to do with "interpretation" of the invoices. The invoices were computer generated from a Ford database, and Kevin's Marti Reports are generated from a Ford database, so it's a bit puzzling how one wouldn't match the other. I can understand potentially different terminology and detailed descriptions between databases, but I can't understand actual options being missed or deleted.

Not saying you haven't tangibly observed this in the past, I'm just saying it's pretty darned strange, because Kevin's data is as pure and un-dorked-with as the invoices are. Straight from Ford, no editorial license being applied.

Your mention of the CTCI jogged my memory of someone at work.
Our Blue Oval Coordinator was a Certified Car Crazy flathead aficionado. He had several flathead-powered cars and enough parts to fix just about anything that could possibly go wrong with his vehicles or anyone else's for an eternity. He also had a set of Ardun Hemi heads which was the crown jewel of his collection. He swore absolutely no one or anything could persuade him to rid himself of what took him his entire life to collect! But enter this pretty lady, his dream car, a Dusk Rose '57 T-Bird, and the flathead cars and parts were history! He did let me ride in it but nearly had an aneurysm when I jokingly asked to drive it! (I already knew what his answer would be)!
.
So glad the '55-57 T-Bird invoices were saved. I know there is a very loyal following for those vehicles. Surprisingly there were still a few parts available from Ford through the mid-'90s. Mainly hoods, bumpers, and fenders. They were very expensive but were genuine Ford pieces. I believe the '57 Fenders had gone to $2,500.00, but customers were still buying them!
I wish the '65-66 Mustang invoices could have been saved. You know as well as I do that a lot of Vin cooking and creativity has taken place with these model years. When you compare the value of an A or C-code Mustang of any body style to a K-code version, you can see the incentive to deceive the very people that trust them. With no original Ford invoices available to help keep these knuckleheads in check, they have Carte Blanche to do as they please. They know all the little things to have in place that the "Experts" usually look for on an authenticity check.

I applaud the effort and expense on NPD's part to undertake such a monumental task to help save this irreplaceable piece of history for the first-generation Mustangs and transfer them to Marti's operation. I know the staggering amount of paperwork generated in just one year at the dealer level. So when you start dealing with production-related paperwork and documentation from multiple assembly plants.... as you said, the measurement had become Tons and Tons.

Now, to avoid making this a total hijack of Randyi00's post, I'll comment on the previous remarks on the Marti reports. My use of "Interpretation," while probably not the best descriptive word, is what I felt is the description of the process they use when transferring the data from the Ford database they possess. The "Marti" report, while derived from Ford data, is not a Ford-generated original document but is a Marti-produced document. While similar, they are not the same as a Ford 999 report. As I mentioned earlier, the dealer invoice is one of several pieces of paperwork the Motor Convoy driver left with the dealership when delivering vehicles. It contained all the information needed for the dealer to enter the vehicle into the dealer's inventory and accounting system. So if something is not on that invoice, it DID NOT leave the assembly plant with it. As I stated earlier, this is one of the most accurate original Ford-generated documents to own on your vehicle. So, I am as puzzled as you are if his reports are generated from the same data as Ford used to print the invoices. Yet, there are several instances of missing options and items listed on the Marti report that were not production installed or even available as an option on that particular model. I have two '71 Machs1s that the Marti reports indicated were equipped with bumper guards, but they were not and were not available as a production-installed option on the '71 or 72 model Mach1. The bumpers guards do not show on the window sticker or invoice. I had a discussion with a fellow forum member who owns what is probably the nicest '71 J code Convertible in existence. He encountered the same dilemma when his report indicated bumper guards on his vert, but there was no evidence that they had ever been on his car. His goal was a 100% correct concourse level restoration, so this type of research and sorting out discrepancies was essential.
Another member is the original owner of a Mach1 he ordered and still owns that had a few options not listed. So somewhere in Martis's system, from when they pull the info from the Ford database to when the Marti report is generated, some data is not making the trip.
Nothing that is going to cause the Earth to reverse rotation and fly out of orbit into space. The Marti reports provide us with some very unique production info for all of us Ford/Mercury fans that the other car enthusiasts only wished they had.
So I and others have experienced some "Bumps in the Road" with these reports, but nothing so major as to dissuade me from using Martis services in the future. In fact, I'm working on a list of VINs now for some previous Mustangs, Torinos, and Fox Mustangs I've owned that I want some reports for.
OK, now I'm done! :)
 
The solution to some of these questions would be to obtain the invoice from Marti, and have him amend his report to match. While it shouldn't be needed, if the goal is 100% authenticity, then steps need to be taken when questions arise.

In Randy's case, I think it's worth an email to Marti regarding the discrepancy. The tilt column and Rim Blow are fairly easy swaps, the power windows and fold down, not so much.

One discrepancy I've noted recently is the report calling the Mach 1 Sports Interior the "Interior Decor Group" - which was a '71 only option, and not available on the Mach 1 at all. Two or three of these popped up on the FB Mustang groups recently, and they are all from the '08-'11 timeframe. Here's one I saved

1685014953749.png
 
One discrepancy I've noted recently is the report calling the Mach 1 Sports Interior the "Interior Decor Group" - which was a '71 only option, and not available on the Mach 1 at all. Two or three of these popped up on the FB Mustang groups recently, and they are all from the '08-'11 timeframe. Here's one I saved

View attachment 77130
This is how the marti report for my 73 mach1 is. I ordered it in 2009. Do you know if marti is replacing them with corrected reports or do we haveto re-buy one and hope its fixed?
 
The solution to some of these questions would be to obtain the invoice from Marti, and have him amend his report to match. While it shouldn't be needed, if the goal is 100% authenticity, then steps need to be taken when questions arise.

In Randy's case, I think it's worth an email to Marti regarding the discrepancy. The tilt column and Rim Blow are fairly easy swaps, the power windows and fold down, not so much.

One discrepancy I've noted recently is the report calling the Mach 1 Sports Interior the "Interior Decor Group" - which was a '71 only option, and not available on the Mach 1 at all. Two or three of these popped up on the FB Mustang groups recently, and they are all from the '08-'11 timeframe. Here's one I saved

View attachment 77130

I think it's worth a conversation with Kevin, because it's doubtful that he's just free-wheeling the descriptions. I'd wager that it's verbatim from the Ford data he's got, and I'd be curious how a Ford 999 report would compare. Option titles/names tended to fall upon the marketing/brand-manager types, and just because Ford called it one thing in the brochure and on the window sticker, didn't necessarily mean that the identical wordage got edited/changed in the back-end systems. Let's remember that back then Ford's systems weren't a beautifully-linked cloud-based wholistic system running off one single database. They weren't all connected, so inconsistencies would actually make sense and probably be inevitable. And if "Interior Decor Group" morphed to "Mach 1 Sports Interior" (or whatever, I'm just shooting from the hip), internally, option titles could have been looked upon as technicalities, phonetics, potato/pototto.. I've also seen inconsistencies in how Special Paint Option cars are invoiced and window-stickered. Given the multiple plants and hence multiple databases, combined with databases at Ford HQ, I think the inconsistencies existed throughout Ford back in the day, and are not simply Kevin Marti typing-out option packages incorrectly.
 
Lois Eminger was a very close friend of my father's, dating back to the early-60's when the CTCI was in its infancy. Lois was a legal secretary at Ford, and she was one of the early members of the Classic Thunderbird Club International as was my dad (member #6). Pops helped Lois save all of the 55-57 Thunderbird factory invoices, and soon after that was done, encouraged her to do the same with the Mustang invoices. At first she balked, because we're talking about tons and tons of paper that needed to be safely kept in dry storage, which had to be rented. By the time Lois finally agreed it needed to happen, the 1965-1966 invoices were "toast".

Anyhow, all of the invoices that Lois DID save, we (NPD) eventually took care of the storage for her in 1983 when we opened our Livonia MI warehouse. We stored the invoices for many years, until Lois sold them to Kevin Marti, and we delivered them to Kevin with our own semi truck.

It is my understanding that Kevin has what was Ford's actual computer database on the cars, and a Marti Report has absolutely nothing to do with "interpretation" of the invoices. The invoices were computer generated from a Ford database, and Kevin's Marti Reports are generated from a Ford database, so it's a bit puzzling how one wouldn't match the other. I can understand potentially different terminology and detailed descriptions between databases, but I can't understand actual options being missed or deleted.

Not saying you haven't tangibly observed this in the past, I'm just saying it's pretty darned strange, because Kevin's data is as pure and un-dorked-with as the invoices are. Straight from Ford, no editorial license being applied.
There is definitely an issue with how Marti interprets the Ford data to produce his reports. If his reports were in fact a copy of the factory invoice then altered to produce his reports, there would be no one talking about it today. My car is a perfect example as the factory invoice does not list the "Bumper Guards" whereas the Marti report lists them. there was no evidence of these Guards ever installed on my car, but sadly, my Build sheet was disintegrated when I got to it. I have seen this on a few cars as I noted in my first response. I am aware of other options being listed on his reports that owners have disputed as well. As I mentioned, I reached out to him to discuss, but he never responded back...
 
There is definitely an issue with how Marti interprets the Ford data to produce his reports. If his reports were in fact a copy of the factory invoice then altered to produce his reports, there would be no one talking about it today. My car is a perfect example as the factory invoice does not list the "Bumper Guards" whereas the Marti report lists them. there was no evidence of these Guards ever installed on my car, but sadly, my Build sheet was disintegrated when I got to it. I have seen this on a few cars as I noted in my first response. I am aware of other options being listed on his reports that owners have disputed as well. As I mentioned, I reached out to him to discuss, but he never responded back...

I'm not disputing or questioning the existence of inconsistencies, I'm just doubting that they are due to "flawed interpretation" on Marti's part. It's likely Ford's data that's flawed, and all he can do is regurgitate it, because he can't crystal ball it, or use editorial license.

Regarding your bumper guards, your car could've been entered into the system (that's where the VIN # is assigned) with bumper guards, but it could have (hypothetically) rolled off the line without them (due to no supply), and invoiced as-such.

I know I know, I'm diving down the rabbit hole of "anything could happen at the assembly plant", which is usually a rabbit hole. But Kevin's I.T. guy is one of my old I.T. guys, and it's my understanding that the process of compiling data for reports is not an edited/interpreted process.
 
I'm not disputing or questioning the existence of inconsistencies, I'm just doubting that they are due to "flawed interpretation" on Marti's part. It's likely Ford's data that's flawed, and all he can do is regurgitate it, because he can't crystal ball it, or use editorial license.

Regarding your bumper guards, your car could've been entered into the system (that's where the VIN # is assigned) with bumper guards, but it could have (hypothetically) rolled off the line without them (due to no supply), and invoiced as-such.

I know I know, I'm diving down the rabbit hole of "anything could happen at the assembly plant", which is usually a rabbit hole. But Kevin's I.T. guy is one of my old I.T. guys, and it's my understanding that the process of compiling data for reports is not an edited/interpreted process.
You can continue to vouch for him... I will continue to state it as I have both seen and researched the issue. If the owner is not going to reply to my queries, then it must be so...
 
If the owner is not going to reply to my queries, then it must be so...

That's where I believe you're taking a big assumptive leap. Ever since Covid hit, I know that Kevin has been struggling to keep his head above water with the sheer volume of orders. He's months behind still, and yeah, probably not eager to get into an extended back/forth conversation over the Ford data-grapevine and its inconsistencies and potential inaccuracies.

One of my dad's best friends worked in I.T. at Ford during that era, before things were far more "locked-in and locked-down" from a data and production-scheduling standpoint in the mid/late-80's. Back in the day, he could go into the system and edit a car's spec (sometimes in ways that couldn't be done by any dealership) and also move-up the production schedule. Lord knows what the ripple-effects were of so many different cooks having access to that kitchen, and how that flowed into other systems/computers at Ford in multiple locations.

It's not just a matter of "vouching" for Kevin, it's me trying to be realistic about the expectations of integrity between different systems. Attempting to reinvent it and/or editing or changing things to match paper invoices, opens a huge pandora's box. It would make sense to me that Kevin would refuse to apply editorial-license and liberty to his data, and he tries to report it exactly as it exists in the databases he received from Ford.
 
Back
Top