Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





65/66 mustang the only stang worth a damn

kinleykinley Posts: 854
edited March 7 in Ford
65/66 mustang the only stang worth a damn
«134567

Comments

  • What, other than aesthetics, would you say is better about the 65/66 models than say a '67? My parents had an ivy green '66 coupe, which was nice. My first car was a '67 convertible (bought in 1984), which I loved. It was dark blue with a white power top. It was great cruising around the Indiana campus and on road trips.

    I'm thinking about getting another Stang in the future, so I'm interested in others' opinions.
  • kinleykinley Posts: 854
    In my opinion the 67 Stang is to the 65/66 as the 58 T-Bird is to the 55,56,& 57. Had Ford come out with the 67 first I would prefer it to the 69 & later models. There's something about the first issue, first love, first child, first car, first wife, first college diploma etc. I enter my 66 GT coupe (Ivy Green) in shows & have noticed the 65/66 Stangs draw more attention. Mach I is a popular one as are the CA Specials, the only car to be most popular is the Shelby at the shows here in the NW. If anything adverse happens to my coupe - I'll be in the market for a GT convertable of 65 or 66 for they are not as bulky as their successors. My opinion only here.
  • I have always liked the 64 1/2 to 66 Mustangs. I saw a Black '66 GT convertible once with a 4-spd tranny that was beautiful and wish I had bought it, though it was pretty expensive (about $19k). However, I am also a big fan of the '67 and '68 cars as well. Though they are a little bigger than the first generation, I like the more aggressinve look to the front end with the deeper set in headlights and the scooped out rear panel with the inset taillights. It just looks great! I'm a big convertible fan, and would love to have a '67 GT convertible with a 4speed. Probably pretty rare. Seems that most of the early 289 Mustangs were mated to automatics. I like the '69 and '70 cars as well, but not as much as the first two series body styles. My thoughts on the matter!
  • pure911pure911 Posts: 40
    i came really close to buying one (a '66 289 coupe) but I then came across the information on the exploding gas tank. I rather not die a fiery death in an old american car. Although every once and awhile I get a strong desire to go out and buy one...

    hey maybe I will someday; if they fix the gas tank problem...
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 45,261
    Oh, just buy it...you probably have a much greater chance of being run over by an SUV driver with a dog on his lap talking on a cell phone.

    MODERATOR --Need help with anything? Click on my name!

  • stickguystickguy Posts: 14,948
    If the gas tank is the only reason you're not buying, there is a fix (as reported on the TV expose). You can weld a panel (sort of like a bulkhead) behind the back seat, creating a sort of fire wall (doesn't stop the tank from going, but keeps the fire from crispy crittering the back seat passengers).

    Doesn't do much for authenticity, but it's better than keeping both eyes glued to the rear view mirror and ramming a truck (in which case the non collapsing steering column impales you). Oops, sorry about that..

    2013 Acura RDX (wife's) and 2007 Volvo S40 (mine)

  • Interesting opinions of the first and classiest of the "pony cars". My 1st was a new Ivy Green 6cyl. fastback purchased in my 20s', traded two years later for a '67 GTA fastback, one super good looker. Sold the '67 outright which was later
    totaled by the buyer. Finally in Jan. of '70 I bought a new '69 Mach 1, burgundy, 351 Windsor, gears,gold stripes with the black [Ditzler] hood.
    I still have the car today. Its an unrestored original, garaged and covered from Dec. through March. Paint and interior are in excellent original condition and its insured with classic QQ
    plates. For many years I was involved in rallyes, trials and gymkhanas with various sports car clubs and Mustang clubs. My '69 is an absolute blast to drive; with half the fun being the thumbs up from other drivers . The various comments made in this topic are benefical to all lovers of these classic pony muscle cars. From the
    64 1/2 thru the '73, they can all be appreciated.
    I'm an original member of Fords "National Council Of Mustang Clubs"; as Ford was a prime backer of
    Mustang Clubs. I can ramble on and on if your interested.
  • I've been restoring my 66 coupe. On Sat, I was driving to get it painted and was sandwiched. The body shop estimates $4K in repairs. Does anybody have any hints on how to deal with the insurance company and get my car fixed or a decent value if they want to total it? Any help is appreciated.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 45,261
    Hi hhinojosa!

    VEry sorry to hear of your accident.

    You need a professional appraisal ASAP, and you sumbit this as evidence of value to your insurance company. It should cost about $150. If you are in the SF BAy Area I can refer you, e-mail me.

    First, however, wait and see what the insurance company will do. Sometimes their offer is okay.

    MODERATOR --Need help with anything? Click on my name!

  • kinleykinley Posts: 854
    are you willing to travel for the 390 Stang? Would you consider a 68 390 FB? If your travel is only Indiana, then I'll stop looking for you.
  • brucec35brucec35 Posts: 246
    I'm curious. Why would someone consider the old model Mustang superior to the new ones? It's slower, inferior in braking and handling, less sophisticated, much less safe in a crash, and less comfortable inside.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 45,261
    I don't think any old car is superior to a new one, in terms of safety and reliability. The only real virtues of the older cars is their distinctive and original styling and their simplicity when it comes to repairing them...also, a 60s car can still be used in everyday driving, whereas it's a bit of a strain for the older cars.
    A 60s Mustang is still a pleasant ride.

    MODERATOR --Need help with anything? Click on my name!

  • I agree with the first love comments and that this is always a subjective thing.

    That being said, my 65 coup is the only car I miss.(wrecked by a truck, no one in either vehicle at the time). Its true that any new car has better handling, safty, systems etc. But it is the style that is the draw. With all the aftermarket tools available a very nice modern driver can be built up from a classic body. Don't do this to a show car, but if you find an old driver around that needs some work you can make a real nice ride out of it.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 45,261
    Actually, if you keep the old parts and don't do any cutting or welding, I see no problem with upgrading an old car, even if it's a show car. I'd put a disk brake kit on an old Ford V-8 in a red hot minute, for instance, and you can't beat 12 volt electrical systems and lighting.

    MODERATOR --Need help with anything? Click on my name!

  • kinleykinley Posts: 854
    Try to catch a ride in a 66 289 4V Hi Po, 271 h.p. 4 speed and upon acceleration you will not be able to lean forward to touch the padded dash.The GT has front discs, heavy stableizers (poor spelling) with a very snorted dual exhaust.It doesn't come with a hood ornament, but if you want to see one, just look in the rear view mirror. My 66 GT is only the 289 4V with AT, but is still a hoot & more fun than the wife's 95 4.6L T Bird. I've owned it since new.
  • The reason I ask this is the guy next door to me has a nearly perfect Mustang of this type I have suggested a 427 which is a very powerful engine as you know it was put in the later Shelby's or is a 289 the best answer? They both certainly are better the the six he has in there now. I know from reading websites that most people opt for the 289 but the HP figures seem to be around 300.
    Which doesn't seem enough for the the only stng worth a damn!
  • kinleykinley Posts: 854
    A purist will keep his Stang "factory". A racist will shoe in the biggest block he can. If your neighbor wants more performance than originality, he might look into the 4.6 DOHC engine. Again the engine area isn't suited for just any big block. One is limited by the thickness of one's wallet though. A Cleveland 351 IMO is the most economical bang for the buck. Even a Windsor 351 is an improvement. Techies seem to do almost anything. Feb issue of Mustang Monthly shows the AOD tranny in place of the original C4 on a 67.
  • wilcoxwilcox Posts: 581
    dangerous in the 65 & 66 models. It's whiplash city. Be sure to upgrade seating if you seriously plan to drive these automobilies. For Safety Sake!
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 45,261
    Hey, face it, ALL old cars are dangerous for some reason or other...if it's not the seats, it's the dash or whatever. Best thing you can do is get some modern seatbelts in there.

    I think a 427 would effectively ruin the car as an everyday driver...it would then be a track car, and have value for that but no longer as a collectible, since it would have been bastardized.

    MODERATOR --Need help with anything? Click on my name!

  • Here is one of my dream cars. A '67 289 GT convertible with a 4 speed tranny, triple black color scheme...... Sure would love to have one!
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 45,261
    Ah, but would you like to pay for it? That one should set you back a cool $15K or more, no problem.

    MODERATOR --Need help with anything? Click on my name!

  • LOOKING FOR A 1965-66 MUSTANG CONV.
    I HAVE A 66 HARD TOP W/PONY INT.
    FOR DOWN PYMT.
  • kinleykinley Posts: 854
    I admire your quest. I too, would like a 66 ragtop and have a 66 Hdtp, but having had it for over 33 years I just can't part with it. Would you like a Rangoon Red, white top, red/white pony interior, V 8 4V, Cruisomatic, A/C, wire wheel covers, Michelin WSW and while we're at it make it a Factory GT with Power Steering. Well, so would I, but they are out there. Be patient, attend the Mustang Roundups and you'll find it. Good Luck
  • Shifty, saw a 1967 GTA just as I described in Hemmings recently asking about $22k! Sounded like a totaly pristine car too, but as a GTA it has the auto tranny which isn't much fun, at least for me anyway.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 45,261
    Geez, that had better be one helluva spectacular GTA for $22K...that's about $5,000 over a #2 car price....perhaps it's a never-driven showcar?

    MODERATOR --Need help with anything? Click on my name!

  • To Kinley
    I've had my '69 Mach1 for 30 years and am the same way, just cant part with it. The car just before it was a '67 GTA Mustang. I had told my son I would give him the '69 after high school graduation in '84, but I couldnt part with it when the time came. Found him another '69 Mach1 and had it restored. Since you've had yours for 33 years, do you remember "RALLYE DAY USA"
  • I talked to my neighbor today and it turned out that his father who origanally owned the car swapped a 289 for the Six awhile back and he would if he put in the 289 bring it back up to stock. I also found a great page for 'stang enthusiests by Tom Schmidt.
    Also if any of you are active in "Trucks". I've set up a great disscusion called Chevrolet C/K vs Silverado its number 1484 and is on the last page near the bottom.
  • I like the looks of the older Mustangs too. I wanted one, but found their interior space to be too cramped for my frame.

    I have had my '73 Mach 1 CCJ 4spd for 14 years now. It is fast. I will be replacing the tires this year (they have been on since '86). One of my brothers owns a '68 fastback with a 351C.
  • modvptnlmodvptnl Posts: 1,352
    Unless he put the 351 in later, a '68 had neither a Cleveland or Windsor 351. Which brings us back to originality and value. I know this is almost 3 weeks late but I'm trying to start it up again.
«134567
This discussion has been closed.