ford-reintroduces-the-1965-mustang

George Bright · **Posted:** Fri Oct 28, 2011 4:08 pm

Art, Dick heads up.
http://autos.yahoo.com/news/ford-reintroduces-the-1965-mustang.html

KendtEklund · **Joined:** Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:29 pm **Posts:** 1204

Punctuation Fail...

Donnie Barnes · **Posted:** Fri Oct 28, 2011 4:16 pm

That article only mentions (and shows) the convertible. Anyone seen anything else anywhere that shows if they're doing coupes or fastbacks? If there's a fastback, well, I'll be building myself a "new" GT350 clone, only with modern AC and a fuel injected 302.

--Donnie

KendtEklund · **Joined:** Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:29 pm **Posts:** 1204

Did you say Fastback?

George Bright · **Posted:** Fri Oct 28, 2011 4:24 pm

Dynacorn offers the 67 fastback body.

http://www.dynacornclassicbodies.com/images/67MustFB.pdf

So you can build a 67 Bullitt fastback.

BTW here is a link to the chase scene.
http://thethrottle.thechive.com/2011/01/11/daily-afternoon-randomness-bullitt-best-chase-scene-ever-the-chase-video-and-22-photos/

TomFreeman · **Posted:** Fri Oct 28, 2011 4:32 pm

Yeah, I have a feeling Donnie is looking for the 64.5-66 fastback body. I immediately thought of the Dynacorn stuff myself. I personally have a weakness for an Eleanor clone (Nick Cage vintage).

Donnie Barnes · **Posted:** Fri Oct 28, 2011 5:41 pm

Yeah, uh, this post was about the 1965 model, and that's what I'm talking about. I just don't care for any of the later models (until VERY recently, anyway) of that car, period.

--Donnie

Ryan Holton · **Posted:** Fri Oct 28, 2011 7:46 pm

Donnie Barnes wrote:

Yeah, uh, this post was about the 1965 model, and that's what I'm talking about. I just don't care for any of the later models (until VERY recently, anyway) of that car, period.

--Donnie

Couldn't agree more. 65 is where its at.

DickRasmussen · **Posted:** Fri Oct 28, 2011 9:01 pm

Donnie Barnes wrote:

That article only mentions (and shows) the convertible. Anyone seen anything else anywhere that shows if they're doing coupes or fastbacks? If there's a fastback, well, I'll be building myself a "new" GT350 clone, only with modern AC and a fuel injected 302.
--Donnie

Convertible only . . . but couldn't you just graft a roof on the new shell. Chose between 64 1/2, 65, or 66.

FYI I test drove a used GT 350 (but don't know if it was "real") in 1974. It was kept in a shed near Monterrey, CA. Compared to my recently sold 69 Mustang GT I hated it so I either missed a really good deal or avoided a scam . . . depending on whether it was real or not. :oops:

Long press release here:

http://media.ford.com/article_display.c ... e_id=35487

Lead summary:

The original Mustang – America’s favorite classic convertible – can now be assembled complete with all-new Ford-approved restoration parts
New first-generation Mustang body shells can be made into ’64½, ’65 or ’66 models, depending on the trim and powertrain that is installed during the rebuild
New ’65 Mustang body shells are made with stronger steel and use modern welding techniques, making them better than the original

Donnie Barnes · **Posted:** Fri Oct 28, 2011 10:28 pm

Looks like I'll have to wait and hope they do a fastback in the early body style. *sigh*

--Donnie

Steven Carter · **Posted:** Fri Oct 28, 2011 10:49 pm

Why wait? There are a bunch of true 64-66 fastbacks available. Here's one, that is complete and runs, for $15k
http://www.autotraderclassics.com/classic-car/1965-Ford-Mustang-475100.xhtml?conversationId=52434

What am I missing? No need to wait for a faux fastback from Ford. Plenty of good chassis out there already. Since originality is not a requirement, a non-matching or non K-code fastback would be the best choice for a great resto-mod. Do it Donnie....you know you want to..... :wink:

Donnie Barnes · **Posted:** Fri Oct 28, 2011 10:57 pm

Steven Carter wrote:

Why wait? There are a bunch of true 64-66 fastbacks available. Here's one, that is complete and runs, for $15k
http://www.autotraderclassics.com/classic-car/1965-Ford-Mustang-475100.xhtml?conversationId=52434

What am I missing? No need to wait for a faux fastback from Ford. Plenty of good chassis out there already. Since originality is not a requirement, a non-matching or non K-code fastback would be the best choice for a great resto-mod. Do it Donnie....you know you want to..... :wink:

I do, and I have for a long time. The thought of a new much more rust-free chassis was what would have pushed me over the edge to start the project.

But if I can't do it that way, then I'd just continue to sit back and wait for that to materialize -or- run across that perfect deal on an already done resto-mod.

--Donnie

Arthur McDonald · **Joined:** Fri Aug 29, 2003 1:54 am **Posts:** 2052

Ryan Holton wrote:

Donnie Barnes wrote:

Yeah, uh, this post was about the 1965 model, and that's what I'm talking about. I just don't care for any of the later models (until VERY recently, anyway) of that car, period.

--Donnie

Couldn't agree more. 65 is where its at.

65's are nice, but 67 is where it's at. At least, it would be if your mother had put this magazine in your Easter basket when you were 7.

Ignore the photo of the 1st-gen gasser - the banner at the top is for the road test of a lime-green 390 Mustang GT fastback. That pretty much explains everything else.

Donnie Barnes · **Posted:** Wed Nov 02, 2011 2:20 pm

When that magazine was printed, I was negative-five-and-a-half years old.

--Donnie

clinehall · **Posted:** Fri Nov 04, 2011 6:13 am

on the subject of mustangs, is this vincent's heritage.

oh, and to you dirty old farts, I'm talking about the car

THSCC Forums

ford-reintroduces-the-1965-mustang

Who is online