Ford Mustang Forum - View Single Post - Rare 64.5 pony.
Thread: Rare 64.5 pony.
View Single Post
post #4 of (permalink) Old 11-05-2018
BOSS Member
Beechkid's Avatar
Joined: Apr 2013
Location: SoCal
Posts: 4,447
I'll have a difference of opinion with travis….. and will apologize for the length....

Although the pony cars were dime-a-dozen for many, many years and many have taken them to a new level including coyote engines, etc..... the tide is turning. Original converts have been worth a fortune dating back to the mid 1980's (SoCal) when I did a ground up rebuild on our coupe. A nearby gent purchase a 6 cylinder convertible which was a basket case...but all the parts were there and paid $6k for the time I almost crapped in my britches when he told me.... but with all the critical parts in hand, he probably would have spent $3k on just trying to find good ones of those....and mind you, Ford was still building 99% of the parts! Today, there is even a movement for people who drive their cars to replace the oem bumpers with the aftermarket ones so the oem's units don't get damaged....

While it varies by region, a showroom condition car...all original, with what you have (spec) would readily sell for $75k..... at auction such as BJ in Az..... they have gone for well over $100k!

So now for your question.....

I’m the kind of guy that changes things on cars/ trucks to make them better. Better brakes, steering, engine mods. Would changing parts to newer tech really take away it’s rare side and lower the value? Is this car better for someone who wants to restore to original?

In short, yes... the value would not grow nearly at the rate it would if maintained to oem. But let me say this.....

With regards to these cars in general...…….

Up through the 60's & early70's, vehicles were not ordered as they are today. Yes, if you ordered package"X" it would come with 1, 2, 3.....but, you could also deletespecific items within the package. As an example, our mustang (which has beenin the family since it was new), when ordered as a GT, my parents really didn'tlike "trumpet tips" through the rear pan so the dual exhaust was a"delete" (as shown on the original order papers which we still have)and upon delivery, it was off to the muffler shop for a set of pipes.......avery common practice- which because of this it is not impossible, but I willsay it is much more "challenging" to not so much verify something isa factory GT by having all of the items listed, but more difficult to verify itis not..and Ford was not the only one doing this either, a very common practiceby the Big 3.

Dealers also dealt with qualitycontrol issues....and had a pre-approved budget by the mfg's to effectrepairs....there are documented stories and pics where mustangs were deliveredto the dealers with the trunk lids wrapped and sitting in the backseat....Customers could also pay an additional fee (typically $300) for thedealer to "special prep" the car prior to customer delivery...whileeach had a different name they called it...basically the dealer had the mech'sgo through the cars from nose to tail checking every single part, fit &finish...making it right. These cars typically looked, ran like fine tunedmachines as a could see, feel the difference.

My neighbor worked for GM inLong Beach, Ca back in the 70's, and clearly recalls special order deletes,hand carried orders to install "X" cylinder head on a particular car-he also recalls there was seldom more than a week went by that the cylinderheads didn't change (as far as port matching/sizing/shape)- as it was alldependent on the supplier and that varied by each shipment….or someone wantedtheir pickup painted the color that was offered on a particular car…..not aproblem as long as it was built at the same plant (for an extra charge ofcourse)- which also explains a few very, very ID pates.

While it is a wonderful thing to have a variety of people who have done suchexhaustive research on these and other vehicles, we must also remember that thecustomer service and deliverables of the time were much, much different thantoday and paperwork, was, well, not the focus. This has lead to benefit us(especially in Calif) who became exempted from smog testing/cert because of theabsence (disposal/non-retention) of documentation of our cars, but in allreality, even if all the paperwork did exist, it wouldn't do little to validatemuch more than is known today about the cars- because the paperwork was not apriority, delivering what the customer wanted was.

There were also 4 HiPo 289’s….the common (HiPo) 271 hp, and the 306 hp availableonly in the GT350R, producing 350 horsepower, weighed 75 fewer pounds, andfeatured an enlarged fuel tank (34 gallon vs. 18) for racing. With “specialheads”, a super-duty suspension, racing tires and more, it was offered in 1965only

With regards to the steering/handling.....

Havingroad-raced the pony cars (mustang specific) in the late 70's in SoCal, I cansuggest this.......IMHO I preferred the oem style suspension to the Mustang IIconversions....much more stable, responsive & consistant. there is a slightdifferent in the alignment specs for a street use versus track use car, but thestreet specs (which for the 60's cars are is the same as for the 70's mustangs-which had radial tires- otherwise the spec's are for bias ply and I guaranteeyou that if the alignment specs were for 1965, that will cause a handling issuewith radials).....will work on the track (not excellent but good).

Now just another IMHO....thesecars because of their basic core design are better muscled through a cornerthan driven.......let me explain a little better- hopefully.....with my unclesporsche, he had to drive the car through the corner because of the light frontend....he could very/more easily slide if he throttled it through where withthe mustang, the lighter rear end was the long as we/I kept therear aligned within 6" of the front through the corner, while the tires& rear end was "barking" a tad, when exiting the turn, just pastthe apex of the corner, full throttle (rolled on), traction/stablity was nevera issue....and 300+ hp & 350+ lbs torque at 70+ mph in a corner can makefor a lot of tire/chassis "barking"!

With todays tire/suspension technology, you can definitely make the stangsdrive more like a porsche...but, just need toremember the basics......and controlling weight transfer & getting the besttraction within the tires (road) contact patch is always what is the goal inroad racing (and general handling). I would keep the suspension, just add a rear sway bar...then have thealigment spec's verified and evaluate 1 step at a time.
The oem system "drove" everything from 180+ mphrace cars to dump trucks for decades........nothing built in the past 20 yearshas come close to the quality & longetivity that these systems provded, andto quote IVY66GT & ZRAY……
“Bump steer (which many complain about) is caused by incorrect suspension geometry.Unless someone has modified your steering setup what you have is somethingelse; excess looseness more than likely. I was driving my factory stock '66 at80 just days ago and there was nothing scary at all about the steering."
Your originalsteering system should have zero slop with the wheels straight ahead. If itdoes have slop there then you just found your problem and it is fixablealthough, as DC hinted, it may take some steering gearbox work.
The cheapest and most bang for the buck solution is to haveyour existing steering box restored. It won't cost an arm and a leg, and theresult will amaze you. These cars have great steering when the components arenot worn out by decades of use and lack of scheduled maintenance .” Adjsutment is simple but there is a very specific procedure to do this...and MUST be followed!
This is an excellent assessmentof oem vs aftermarket suspension for the mustang…

01-20-2013, 03:19 PM by dav65mus
I had a MII kit in a 65 fastback I built. Unless you are doing a big block/modmotor/ls swap and need the shock towers removed any MII kit is a mistake. I havebeen experimenting with different suspension setups along with frame connectorsduring the last 15 years on 3 different 65 mustangs. The MII in a fastback, ronmorris complete coilover conversion in another and stock suspension in another.After driving all 3 my conclusion is stock suspension with poly bushings,roller perches, progressive rate coil springs, and good shocks will handle aswell as any other aftermarket system at a fraction of the cost. As far assteering, the borgenson conversion feels very "rack & pinion"like without the high cost, turning radius issues, and exhaust clearanceproblems that rack & pinion retrofit kits suffer from. You can improve thehandling of your classic but you will never get the feeling of a modern car likeyour focus without building an entire streetrod type rolling chassis andfitting your body to it. I have been there and tried that and kept my bankaccount emptied trying to get modern car handing and feel.... wish I would havespent less money trying.


Poste by 22GT

There is no inherent handlingadvantage to the Mustang II front suspension. It's main advantage in 64-73Mustangs is it allows the use of really large engines, such as the 4.6 DOHC. Aproperly set-up stock suspension can easily out-handle the MII setup. Simply doing these items from TXMAG's listwould be superior to typical MII.
Arning/Shelby Drop
Roller Idler arms
Good rebuild or new steering box
Performance alignment
Roller UCA/LCA
Front sway bar around 1" in size
Monte Carlo Bar
Export Brace
Eliminating the shock towers also often eliminates a lot of triangulationbracing. Haven't seen your car, but I've seen a lot of MII conversion cars atshows that had less front end rigidity than a stock six-cylinder coupe.Sometimes people use fancy-looking cross-bracing with Heim joints to make upfor it. Excuse me for pointing out the obvious, but a Heim joint is a pivot, designedto flex. Kinda the opposite of what you'd want in a chassis brace.

This is also a more recentdiscussion started as a rant by a suspension engineer.

Brakes..... although you didn't mention if you had disc/drum or drum/drum, here's a little fyi...…

The issue with drum brakes (ingeneral) is start with, the replacement linings at most parts houses have a brakingco-efficient of around .25, that is about 50% less than what the oem called forin the 60's (which was .32 or better, most offered .38 replacement linings).Going back to the 70's and through today, linings rated at .49 or better arecommon and typically sell for around $200-$240 a set. longevity, typically 50kto 100k (miles) depends on your foot.

Second issue...most people have never been taught how to drive with drumbrakes...yes the techniques, there are specific ones, such as applying pressureto the brakes when driving through water to keep the linings dry, etc.

3rd issue, 99% of today’s mechanics have never been taught the techniques ofinstalling drum brakes...such as, cutting the linings to channel water outtowards the backing plates (there are a few requirements on specifically how todo that).Granted, disc do provided a lot of advantages, but that does not, nor shouldimply that a proper set of drums/linings, installed correctly should be anyless safe.

It really all boils down to thefriction co-efficient....anything greater than .49 will be better than oem interms of its ability to bite. I would avoid Wagner, Raybestos & any rotorfrom the chain they are all made at the same foundry in China(rotors/drums)

With regards to brake linings in general,
Wagner & Raybestos: aline of products that is 100% marketing and mfg from very lowquality/inexpensive and/or imported products with the mfg's not providing anyback-up or support on product failures (and I mean real ugly spontaneous,catestropihic failures)

VelveTouch lining- Used for manydecades and was the original lining used in all Shelby Mustangs in the 60’s (Ipersonally have used the Velvetouch lining since 1960’s until brake liningproduction ceased in 1986), then switched to Carbo.

Bendix- TitaniuMetallic™ II, a newer lining (semi-metallic) and although I havenot personally used this, I have always been impressed with Bendix brakelinings and this particular lining IIMHO would be a low dust, excellent oem upgrade/mildperformance type brake lining.

CarboTech Engineering lining, which I have usedfor about 30+ years and been very happy on multiple full size (V8) cars and trucks. This particular lining has a high frictionco-efficient, excellent pedal feel, wears (typically 50,000 to 75,000 milesbefore replacement is required) and produces less dust than OEM linings.

I highly recommend speaking to them by phone for linings that would be best foryour application. Again, braking co-efficient is what identifies the bite ratingof the linings- you want the CE to be no less than that of the OEM.....thiswill drive most e-base distributors & big box store "experts"right out of their mind because they either cannot verify this info or you willfind the spec is less than oem. IMHO, i would look for a CE that is .49 orgreater.

and as far as most of the new tech ignition systems- the conversion type "kits" are junk and sold completely on PR material. As an example...ignition points.....yeah if you buy the Chinese junk it will not stay in adjustment in a few thousand miles or burn out in 5K miles....but a good quality set (like Blue Streak- which has been around for almost 50 years), I have about 12K miles on a set in my mustang which has been in there since I did the rebuild in 1986...… I have never had to readjust them. Good quality and placing 1 tiny drop of silicon lube on the cam is all that is required (a step that used to be in writing but dropped many years ago) and points begin to break down until you get to pushing 5000 rpm or better (well documented) and can easily handle 6k rpm. Points were used in NASCAR up through the late1970's, running speeds of 200mph+......…

IMHO, mods are ok and would not detract from the value as long as they were typical bolt on type items. But honestly, I don't think you may realize just exactly what you have here...……...

Member: Never trust a person over 40 who drives a Chevy club
Flatheads ain't so bad!
Certified backyard mechanic I & II
Beechkid is offline  
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome