Vintage Mustang Forums banner

Looking for 1965 - 1967 Mustang

1K views 17 replies 11 participants last post by  BlakeTX 
#1 ·
Hi,

I am new to the forum and I am interested in looking for a 65-67 Mustang? I would like be interested in a V8-289, manual, coupe or fastback. I would prefer one that has already been either partially or fully restored. Are there known problem areas to be aware of when I start my search?

Any and all feedback would be appreciated.

Thanks

Frank
 
#2 ·
The hardtop will cost you far less in otherwise identical condition.

The most important thing to look for is rust damage. After that, look for more rust damage. Remember, these cars were built 50 years ago with a life expectancy of 5 years.

Why 65-67? No love for the 68? It was virtually identical to the 67, but the 67-68 are very different from the 65-66.
 
#4 ·
Welcome.
Depending on your location, any car show events you can attend to start meeting some car owners. Sometimes folks "know a friend" that may have a car for sale. Find one, have a "car guy" or mechanic go over it depending on your skills.


Ask questions on this forum....
 
#6 ·
Welcome to the forum. Did anyone mention anything about rust? Depending where you are located cars from the "rust belt" usually are suspect. Most other things are easier to fix than major rust damage. They can look like a cream puff until you search closer. Mine came from Florida and had rust in the higher areas, top of fenders and roof. The PO had restored about 20-25 Mustangs previously and put new quarters, fenders and door skins on. He said that the undercarriage was the cleanest, nicest that he had ever encountered. Bring an experienced Mustang enthusiast with you to check them out.
 
#13 ·
Welcome! While I may not be as experienced as a lot here, but I recently purchased a 65 Fastback so I'll share what I did. Found it in Texas and paid a company to go look at it before I wasted my time and they did a great job with a fully detailed report on the cars condition. Though, I will say I find something new every week that makes me turn my head in question and add it to project list. It appears they tried to make a clone so I am reverting it to a quality, genuine driver.

The cowel is known to get rusty in these cars and I suggest checking the floor pans - neither are something I wanted to tackle personally (not saying it cant be done). In my search I found a lot of over priced cars - be patient. As mentioned before, a coupe will hurt your wallet a little less than a fastback.
 
#15 ·
I think a good part of your decision making process is your proposed use of the car and what are the important points, above and beyond the styling. For example...

'65-66's are the "originals", as in the first couple years of the first "pony" car. They are pretty much "no frills" and unsophisticated (IMHO in a GOOD way) but may not be as attractive to prospective owners looking for a few more creature comforts/conveniences and/or safety features.

What '67-'68's will offer over '65-66's is a bit wider engine compartment, capable of housing the larger "FE" engines (390-428) and a few more conveniences and things like a much more refined factory air conditioner (didn't hang off the bottom of the dash like the earlier cars), snazzier trim, available in-dash tachometer, "turn-signal" hood, dual-circuit brake system, power front disc brakes, overhead console, etc. In addition, the '68's had a collapsible steering column, locking seat backs, shoulder belts, side-marker lamps, etc. There were even some '67-68's with factory cruise control, low fuel warning light, and more.

So, for someone who has comfort and safety in mind, a '68 might make more sense than a '65-67. For the "purist", a '65-66 might be the choice.

In terms of affordability, a hardtop will generally be the least expensive to purchase, a 2+2/fastback next and a convertible at the top, all similarly equipped. Conversely, a convertible will suffer the most from structural issues due to rust and maintenance of the soft top and mechanism, the hardtop and fastback having a little more structural integrity due to the metal roof structure.

From a performance vs. economy standpoint you go from the small six (170 in early '65, 200 in later models) to the small V8's (260 in '65, 289 in '65-68 and 302 in '68) to the "big iron" in '67-68 (390). Various configurations abound between the V8 models from 2V to 4V carburetion and "High Performance" in the 289 from '65-67. Generally speaking, the small six and 2V V8's offer better fuel mileage than the 4V engines and manual transmissions give better mileage than automatics.

As all Mustangs are of unitized construction (unibody) where the body and frame are combined in the same unit, corrosion due to rust can be a significant issue. Cars that have been driven in winter road salt or very close to the seacoast are the first to suffer. The cars from the "rust belt" will typically have problems in the subframe rails, floors and floor supports, rocker panels, torque boxes, trunk drop-offs, lower front fenders, lower doors and lower quarter panels and cars around the seacoast, especially HUMID areas will have rust in the cowls, sail panels, rear window filler panel, hood and trunk edges, windshield pillars, roof drip rails, etc.

If you're serious about looking for a vintage Mustang then I'd first get involved with a vintage Mustang club or organization that has a local presence and get to know other owners and get a new friend to go with you to evaluate prospective purchases.

PS: Fill out your bio so we know where you're from so we can offer our help or suggest resources you can use.

Welcome to the addiction and good luck!
 
G
#16 ·
All the hard measurements between a 65/66 and a 67/68 are the same. But subtle changes make the 67/68 a little roomier and appear larger. They have more creature comforts. Rust issues are the same for all of them though.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top