Peculiar VIN - Vintage Mustang Forums
 6Likes
  • 1 Post By Rosalie
  • 2 Post By Woodchuck
  • 1 Post By dzhoser
  • 1 Post By PonyDoc
  • 1 Post By DrHawkeye
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 15 (permalink) Old 09-16-2019, 09:12 AM Thread Starter
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 18
Peculiar VIN

Just agreed to purchase a 65 yesterday. The last 6 digits of the VIN are 761276. I didn't think production numbers went that high? Is there a problem here?
Rosalie is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 15 (permalink) Old 09-16-2019, 09:15 AM
Full gallop this way --->
Supporting Member
 
4ocious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Durham, NC.
Posts: 5,472
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosalie View Post
Just agreed to purchase a 65 yesterday. The last 6 digits of the VIN are 761276. I didn't think production numbers went that high? Is there a problem here?
No. The production #'s started at 100001. And because the '65 model year run started early in '64 there were gobs of 'em.

4ocious is offline  
post #3 of 15 (permalink) Old 09-16-2019, 09:36 AM Thread Starter
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 18
Thanks, 4ocious. When I looked up production numbers, the highest I saw was 559,451... So, when I take the starting number into consideration, the numbers still don't make sense to me. What am I missing? I have a feeling I'm going to feel like a real idiot when I realize what it is... LOL
Rosalie is offline  
 
post #4 of 15 (permalink) Old 09-16-2019, 09:45 AM
Senior Member
 
watto1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Brisbane Australia
Posts: 158
Production #'s for 65 are seen as 'early' and 'late' 65's.
Late 65 numbers were 559451 as you saw, but add in the early 65's and the total is 680989, so max vin # should be 780990..?

https://www.carmemories.com/cgi-bin/...erience_id=374



Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
watto1 is offline  
post #5 of 15 (permalink) Old 09-16-2019, 09:49 AM Thread Starter
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 18
Thanks, watto1!! I was thinking that, but wasn't finding the numbers for the earlys. Thanks so much!
watto1 likes this.
Rosalie is offline  
post #6 of 15 (permalink) Old 09-16-2019, 10:04 AM
Member
 
dzhoser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Occuquan VA
Posts: 99
The good news is that you have one of the newest 65s on the road


-Steven

1966 Coupe "The Blue Falcon"
dzhoser is offline  
post #7 of 15 (permalink) Old 09-16-2019, 10:09 AM Thread Starter
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 18
dzhoser... Yep! LOL When I get her home, I'll try to post a picture.
Rosalie is offline  
post #8 of 15 (permalink) Old 09-16-2019, 10:19 AM
Senior Member
 
Woodchuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Peoples Republic of Vermont
Posts: 33,350
Send a message via Yahoo to Woodchuck
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosalie View Post
Just agreed to purchase a 65 yesterday. The last 6 digits of the VIN are 761276. I didn't think production numbers went that high? Is there a problem here?
Nope, you're fine as long as it's a Dearborn-assembled car (VIN 2nd digit a "F"). My late '65 was "78xxxx".
69DroptopGT and Rosalie like this.

Bart

What, me worry?
- Alfred E. Neuman

Woodchuck is offline  
post #9 of 15 (permalink) Old 09-16-2019, 10:24 AM
Member
 
dzhoser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Occuquan VA
Posts: 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosalie View Post
dzhoser... Yep! LOL When I get her home, I'll try to post a picture.


I look forward to seeing it.


-Steven
Rosalie likes this.

1966 Coupe "The Blue Falcon"
dzhoser is offline  
post #10 of 15 (permalink) Old 09-16-2019, 10:48 AM
Senior Member
 
BigKoppa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Saint Louis
Posts: 263
Didn't other models (made on the same assembly line) use the same block of production numbers? Or am I just making that up?

1966 Sprint 200
Mostly stock

BigKoppa is offline  
post #11 of 15 (permalink) Old 09-16-2019, 10:53 AM
Full gallop this way --->
Supporting Member
 
4ocious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Durham, NC.
Posts: 5,472
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigKoppa View Post
Didn't other models (made on the same assembly line) use the same block of production numbers?
Yes. Each plant had their own total number of vehicles produced in any given year, so any Dearborn built vehicle (for instrance) with a 5F beginning VIN would be included in the production numbers. They weren't all mustangs.


Last edited by 4ocious; 09-16-2019 at 11:05 AM.
4ocious is offline  
post #12 of 15 (permalink) Old 09-16-2019, 10:58 AM
Senior Member
 
Woodchuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Peoples Republic of Vermont
Posts: 33,350
Send a message via Yahoo to Woodchuck
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigKoppa View Post
Didn't other models (made on the same assembly line) use the same block of production numbers? Or am I just making that up?
In the spring of '64, Ford produced both '65 Mustangs and '64 Fairlanes on the Dearborn assembly line, but I believe there was no serialized number conflict as the Mustangs were all "5Fxx", while the Fairlanes were "4Fxx".

Bart

What, me worry?
- Alfred E. Neuman

Woodchuck is offline  
post #13 of 15 (permalink) Old 09-16-2019, 12:06 PM
Senior Member
 
DrHawkeye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Rockford, IL
Posts: 1,640
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigKoppa View Post
Didn't other models (made on the same assembly line) use the same block of production numbers? Or am I just making that up?
A fairly common misconception. VINs were separate on each model.
DrHawkeye is online now  
post #14 of 15 (permalink) Old 09-16-2019, 05:11 PM
Senior Member
 
PonyDoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,577
Garage
Thumbs Up Hign VIN

My 65 K GT convert was a later 65- 5F08K768798. My 65 K GT F is also a later 65- 5F09K765816.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 20160523_234022.jpg (264.6 KB, 4 views)
File Type: jpg DSC03631.JPG (384.9 KB, 3 views)
File Type: jpg new 097.jpg (237.4 KB, 4 views)
Rosalie likes this.

64 9/10 Convertible- 400,000 miles & counting (2nd owner)- Invited by Ford to SEMA-2014 Pony Drive Pace Car
57 Thunderbird- E-Bird 312 w/ 2 4bbl carbs. 3 speed w/ O/D
65 GT Convertible
65 K GT Fastback- 60,000 original miles
Original 65 pedal car
69 GT Convertible- 90,000 miles Invited by Ford to SEMA-2014
69 Grande'- 1 of 11 on colors- 1 of 1 w/ options
2016 GT convertible w/ CDC Outlaw #13 package- delivered 10/27.
08 P-71 Police Intercepter
2000 F-250 Lariat, 2010 F-250 King Ranch
PonyDoc is offline  
post #15 of 15 (permalink) Old 09-17-2019, 11:26 AM
Senior Member
 
DrHawkeye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Rockford, IL
Posts: 1,640
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosalie View Post
Thanks, 4ocious. When I looked up production numbers, the highest I saw was 559,451... So, when I take the starting number into consideration, the numbers still don't make sense to me. What am I missing? I have a feeling I'm going to feel like a real idiot when I realize what it is... LOL
When Ford switched to the '65 production in Aug '64, the VIN started at 250001 in Detroit, 125001 in San Jose, and 130001 in Metuchen (Feb '65 start). So a VIN starting with 8 from Detroit would be easy if that production number is correct.
Rosalie likes this.
DrHawkeye is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Vintage Mustang Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome