• Hello there guest and Welcome to The #1 Classic Mustang forum!
    To gain full access you must Register. Registration is free and it takes only a few moments to complete.
    Already a member? Login here then!

anyone ever hear of a marti report being wrong?

stang32

stang32

Member
i just pulled a report on a car I was looking to buy. buyer swears the car was white & everywere you look on the car you see white, (car was stripped & media blasted)
but the report says the car was silver frost.
no door tag to confirm either.
so i am not sure what to do now.
call marti or bail on the car
if the report is not right, maybe there is some other things not right about it.
 
I've not heard of a Marti report being incorrect. The few I've seen are all accurate.

Are both fenders off? Regardless, I'd check the passenger side fender apron to see if the VIN matches. There is a VIN stamped there also but is is often covered up by the fender so it does not get noticed.
 
Many, many cars are completely stripped of all paint and redone, even older restorations. So the color on it now may have been from a good restoration some years back. I have never heard of a Marti report missing the on the factory color.
 
Well, the report may not be wrong, but the car may not match it. Mistakes were made I looked at a Shelby years ago. One owner car, everything about the car said White since day one, tag said Yellow.

Have heard of other mismatches, few an far between, but IMHO they did happen on occasion.
 
On my 69 GT500 that I used to own the scheduled build date on the Marti report and what the door tag said were off by about a week. I called Marti about it and they said the original door tag had to be wrong. I wasn't convinced that was true.
 
Unless you're going Concours why worry? If the car passes your inspection then go for it. These cars have been through a lot pver the years. Even the unscupulous POs have changed out door tags.
Mine Tag says it was NightMist Blue....VIN and Marti syas Green. I tore out the interior for update and ...it was greeen. :shrug

Check the overall car and just understand as with most of these cars they will need attention.
 
"bigb427" said:
On my 69 GT500 that I used to own the scheduled build date on the Marti report and what the door tag said were off by about a week. I called Marti about it and they said the original door tag had to be wrong. I wasn't convinced that was true.
Click to expand...
The date on your door tag was the production control planned build date. The actual date your car was built may vary by as much as two weeks early or late. My 69 convertible door tag indicates September 20, 1968. My son's 69 Sportsroof shows September 30, 1968. Turns out both cars were, according to Ford Customer Service, actually built on October 2, 1968. My Marti report shows October 3.
 
I knew someone would make a post like you did RagTop.
The "date" as listed on my original door data tag was not the same as the "scheduled for build" date as listed on my Marti report. They should have been an exact match. I received a repro door data tag from Marti and the "date" on the repro tag did not match the "date" on the original tag. There is a copy of the door data tag at the top right hand corner of the Marti report. The date on it did not match my original tag either. It did match the repro tag. There was indeed an error! The dates were off by about a week. The "actually built" date on my Marti report did not match the "date" listed on either the original or the repro tag either FYI.
 
Why is it surprising that there could be a human error? Marti has Human entered data from the 60's. There very easily could have been a mistake on either the assembly line or from the people in charge of the paper work.
 
"RyanG85" said:
Why is it surprising that there could be a human error?
Click to expand...

It is not surprising to me at all. As I stated before, I called Marti and they offered no resolution. They stated that there was no possibility of error in their data or their products. Pretty bold statements! They suggested my original tag was in error or the tag I had was not the original, but a poor repro from somewhere else. The later I don't believe to be true.
 
The info on my Marti matches the car exactly. The only difference in the new door tag is it is stamped dead center in the fields. The original was stamped low and the bottom of the tag was cut short.

Build date on door tag was scheduled date, 13E or May 13 1969. According to Marti the car was actually built May 12 1969, released the same day and sold May 24 1969 by Queen City Ford in Long Beach.
 
Mine is also correct as I'm sure the majority are but a few errors along the way is no surprise.
 
Marti bought a license to use Ford's data base. The data provided by Ford may or may not be precisely correct. Marti sells reports that are supposed to accurately relay Ford's data. When Marti is asked to prepare a report on a particular car, they are relying on that Ford data so the question really is: "Is Marti's report an accurate reflection of the Ford data?". I suppose it is conceivable that someone at Marti made a mistake when researching Ford's data and the report reflects that mistake however, given the low volume of requests, it is probably an extremely remote possibility.

A few months ago I posted about a car that I am working on for a friend who has owned the car for 41 years. The door tag is original to the car and it contains an data impossibility, an error by Ford when the car was serialized. That error lists the body type as a deluxe interior car yet, shows the trim code as a standard interior....it can't be both. In fact, there must have been some confusion on the assembly line as most of the deluxe interior pieces were installed on the car but not all.....some of the deluxe hardware was actually found under the carpet having never been installed. The Marti report confirms that Ford's data is consistent with the deluxe interior that was mostly assembled on the line so someone screwed up when the data tag was produced and that screw up apparenlty caused some confusion during assembly that I discovered when disassembling the interior for the first time since the car was built. At this point, there are no plans to have a correct data tag produced though the missing courtesy lights have been installed under the incorrectly installed door grills and connected to the correctly installed but up until now, unused courtesy light harnesses.
 
bigb427 said:
It is not surprising to me at all. As I stated before, I called Marti and they offered no resolution. They stated that there was no possibility of error in their data or their products. Pretty bold statements! They suggested my original tag was in error or the tag I had was not the original, but a poor repro from somewhere else. The later I don't believe to be true.
Click to expand...
Marti report shows axle 1, 3.00 but my door data plate and actual axle tag says axle code 0, 2.79.
 
Marti Report admin will never admit that there could be a fault in their data bank cause then their report is worth sh!!t and they won't sell anymore. My 2eurocent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top