“Right on the edge” would be a fair description of this barn find 1965 Mustang Fastback put on our radar by tipster TJ. The car is available here on craigslist for an asking price of $29,999, and can be collected in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho. From there, it’s going to be up to the new owner whether the rust and paint deterioration, plus interior needs, are enough to put it in a restoration shop, or whether it can be driven as is.
The first-generation Mustang Fastback is undoubtedly one of the best-looking cars ever produced. The body style debuted in fall of 1964 to mark the start of the first full year of Mustang production, after the car (as coupe and convertible) was launched on April 17, 1964. This one has the D-code engine, which is a low-compression version of the 289. That power plant is said to have been rebuilt, and to run “amazing,” though it looks like someone with a Summit Racing catalogue spent a bunch of gift cards fancying it up, something the new owner might want undone. And that leads to the larger question of whether to restore or drive this car.
In the “driven as is” camp are facts like that the rust, which has been previously “repaired” (using that word generously), is mostly contained to smaller areas, particularly behind the rear wheels and also the fronts, though one photo casts doubt on the integrity of the rear wheel lip on the passenger’s side. The photos are not entirely revealing, though, and with a long-used-up repaint, this one could be hiding rot at the leading edge of the doors and elsewhere (the floors come to mind). Then there’s the possibility of problems in the trunk, with the integrated frame rails. One photo, which as is so often the case, doesn’t show far enough back towards the bumper to really get the story, makes it look like someone has done a patch job or at least slathered on the undercoating in the trunk floor (gas tank and frame rail) area. Was that preventative, or an attempt to stop the tin worm, who was already making a home?
That leads us to the “needs a resto” camp, which must account for the fact that the paint is shot, as seen on all top surfaces. You’d also want to excise the rust, and while you’re at it, do something with the interior. “Extremely rare color combination” (per the ad) this might be, but do you want this pairing of what looks like one of four versions of green or turquoise available in 1964-65 and the Palomino interior? If you’re going to paint the car, you can get the color exact, and since the driver’s seat needs a refit of foam and seat skin, maybe an interior color change would be in order? Too bad the dash would have to sprayed as part of that refit. In any case, your choices are going to partly be driven by budget. If the car goes for near its $30K asking price, you’re going to be upside down—even though this is a Fastback—if the bodywork is any more extensive than simple small patches for the obviously perished areas of sheet metal. But compared to some, this car looks decently whole and might be a value-adding proposition if your body shop is out behind your house and you’ve got welding and paint-spraying skills.
Was this a cheap respray in teal over white? That would explain the interior color compatibility – if that is even the original factory color.
The D code 289 is not a bad engine. A factory 4bbl designed for ‘regular’ gas
of the day. Lower production numbers than the A code 289 4bbl.
This reminds me of a scenario that went like this: the family says “let’s fix up the old Mustang!” They didn’t care about the long term – they went with a body shop that said they would fix the rust and paint it in a modern color (for cheap). After five or six years, the kids went to college, and the Mustang wasn’t a priority anymore – and it went into (improper) storage – a spare garage or shed. The body filler reared it’s ugly head during this time. Maybe that is why the engine has been rebuilt.
The fiberglass or tape on the right rear quarter is an interesting feature. Might be an indication of the rest of the car. Maybe the seller didn’t want folks to see the underside for a reason. Two much money, too little good information.
To me it looks like the left rear quarter, you can always ask high and never get it.
Doesn’t look like a respray of a modern shade. The color is Twilight Turquoise (code 12893) which is a nice combo with Palomino (parchment is more to my taste). Unfortunately, the hidden corrosion isn’t a simple fix like the rear quarters are… it’s the cowl drains. Not a DIY repair for most people. Car is priced a bit optimistically, but it’s a fastback… and you’d think by now most sellers would know to post the door tag which has all the info a buyer needs.
If it’s numbers matching, worth a visit with an envelope of Benjamins to negotiate down a bit.
30k??? Someone needs to go to sleep before they dream…
Another rustang. Looks like a mud queen, and the aluminum tape is the icing on the cake. You can be that the undercoat is attempting to hide mucho sin. They have it gussied up. And as bullethead says, all bets are off if the cowl plenum is shot. Good luck and know what you are getting into.
Cheers
GPC