This Mustang has been in storage for the last 10 years in Albion, Indiana. Sent in by reader Bruce D., this V-8 powered pony car may look sad at first glance, but that ugly paint may be hiding a diamond in the rough. It’s listed for sale here on craigslist for $3,000.
It looks like someone started working on the rear part of the body and then stopped for some reason. Apart from the sad looking paint and the sagging front valence, the body doesn’t look too bad, but as usual with craigslist pictures, there’s not enough detail to tell for sure.
One thing I’m wondering is if the missing tail lights and trim are included. Small items like wheel covers can add up in a hurry if they are gone completely. It doesn’t fill me with optimism that the windows and bumpers weren’t removed when someone started spraying primer everywhere.
We can tell it’s a manual transmission car, but not whether it’s a 3 or 4 speed transmission. The current owner claims to have never tried to start the car. Obviously some interior work will be needed, but as long as you aren’t looking for a brand new appearance, I see plenty of pieces that would work just fine once cleaned up.
The heart of any Mustang is the engine, and this one is no exception. We have no idea from the seller whether it’s a 260, 289, 302 or 351–maybe one of you can tell from this picture? I think it would be a fun car to refurbish, and there’s certainly no difficulty getting parts. What do you folks think?
I believe the subscribers on here know. I’m curious about what they have to say
Im trying to remember some of the details on these very early Mustang’s. They were 260ci V-8’s,they came with generators and NOT alternators. Front edge of hood had a little metal tab towards front grille. I my self do not see why should be priced higher. There was NO fastback,which is the body style I prefer. Fast backs came out later in the model year. Just remember at a car show there’s always a bunch showing up,so you won’t stand out from the crowd.
Pretty sure a “Stang of this vintage would have a 260. And it could have either a 3- or 4-speed. Not much of an issue there, as you could switch to the 4-speed without much problem.
What bugs me is the missing parts. As Jamie says, replacing them could add up fast!
My favorite era Mustang, though. If it was close by, I’d have to go look.
4 speeds had the reverse lock out bars on the shifter, this is a 3 speed.
Its not a 64.5, its a 65. Horns should be inside the engine compartment instead of on radiator support. Serial number is a little higher than I’d like. Has Ford PS pump instead of Eaton. Other features are too hard to see or missing like headlight buckets, hood edge,carpet edge, etc. I’d say this is a fall 64 produced model year 1965 car.
This looks cheap, but for 2 or 3 thousand more you can get a nice running,good looking coup. Could one possibly get this one running and painted for $3000? I guess this is a good deal if you’re looking to restore and create something special. I guess I’m just getting to old and lazy to think like that!
David, is this for sale for $5K?
There’s after market parts galore for these cars but considering the condition of this car you could buy a lot nicer one for a couple grand more and drive it.
More like Rustang!
Johnny show me the rust / I do not se much
Somebody never learned how to use decimal points.
Mustangs built prior to the official 1965 Introduction came in ’64 colors with generators, smaller Cruise-O-Matic shift levers and 260 V8s. They were NEVER called “64 1/2” in any factory literature or reference. Rather, it was a slang term of the day influenced by the 63 1/2 Fords, Falcon and Fairlanes. The proper term for a pre-65 intro Mustang was simply “New Mustang”, and all carried 1965 VINs.
I’m not sure worrying about trim and hubcaps is warranted. If you’ve ever restored a car you can relate to the slippery slope.
Once the paint and body work are done, and your pride and joy sits gleaming in the sun on your driveway awaiting reassembly, suddenly the pitted and fogged glass, faded plastic, scuffed chrome and less than perfect trim bits stand out like a sore thumb.
As it goes they all get replaced. A car in this condition certainly doesn’t have pristine bits set aside.
As for BFs commentary I’m not sure why anyone would remove the glass while doing bodywork unless it was a thorough ‘frame off’ restoration. A little 0000 steel wool will clean over spray off glass and chrome easily.
Well there are no “frame off” restorations on these Mustangs as they are uni-bodies.
I think I’m going to be sick
Cheap V8 Mustangs are getting pretty scarce (all going to Europe as quickly as early Porsches) This may be a great buy if the floors are solid. Engine, if I had to guess is not original to the car, although it hardly matters on these early coupes. Shifter is a 3 speed, so a good candidate for a 5 speed swap and a light custom cruiser. BTW, early Mustangs could be a 260 or 289. I have a April 1964 built convertible with a 289 4 barrel (D Code) 4 speed in the garage. As others have pointed out this is not a 64.5. It is a 65 A code (Factory 4 barrel). Odd that it would have what looks like a 3 speed shifter but it’s possible to have with a A code I guess. If I was close I would have picked it up faster than I typed this…
Not toooooooo bad.. You need more than just a few photos and words to make this car a “must have”.. We all know the common rust areas on them,, regardless of whether it’s from AZ, CA or the Mojave desert..
I had a 65 convertible, 6 cyl, three speed..All black.. Again I say… Wish I still had it..
Not an early model, the vin clearly shows A code for the engine, a 289 4 barrel. 225 hp. Not that it would add any to the price, which would be at the bottom for a project. depending on the amount of rust, between $700 and $1400.
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/classicmustang/info