Ok, Ok, I know there is technically no such thing as a 1964.5 Ford Mustang – they’re all ’65s. But, there is a delineation between those produced from April to August of ’64 and those assembled during the regular ’65 model year, and today’s New Braunfels, Texas find is of the former group – and it’s reasonably priced too! This sharp and very clean-looking number 14,004 out of 121,000 Ponys assembled in the ’64 model year is available here on craigslist for $22,950. There’s more information here on the Trophy Motors website.
There’s no reason to cover the Ford Mustang history in this review; it has been done to death over the years and by reviewers who know far more about Ford’s fabulous pony car than I do. What I do know is that these early Mustangs were a massive sales success right off the Dearborn assembly line. As mentioned above, 121K were assembled in the ’64 model year, and another 550K followed in the “official” 1965 model year – what an outstanding volume! The seller claims, based on the 114004 sequence number, that this example is the 14,004th Mustang to see the light of day. Furthermore, the trim tag states a build date of April 13, 1964 (13D)! What’s original and what’s been redone (pretty sure it’s a repaint) isn’t disclosed, but this car’s exceedingly clean, understated bearing makes it a standout. The finish, chrome bits, and black vinyl top show like new, while the American Racing wheels and red-stripe tires give it that perfect Day Two look.
Underhood is a 164 gross HP 260 CI V8 engine paired with a three-speed Cruise-O-Matic automatic transmission. Other than the air cleaner, the engine appears to be stock and original. Of note is the generator; I believe it was swapped for an alternator for the official ’65 model-year run. Unfortunately, neither listing details this car’s running or driving characteristics.
Inside, we find a typical black vinyl bucket seat environment, and its condition mirrors that of the exterior. It is absolutely splendid in its simplicity and originality. Again, I’m not certain of its history, but I imagine that it has undergone a complete refurbishment. And, nothing has been missed, door panels, carpet, package shelf, dash, it’s all like new! This is an A/C equipped car and is still in possession of its original underdash unit, though the compressor has been swapped out for a newer design.
I’m lookin’ for some negatives here and not finding any (though I do try to be positive on these reviews). My thought here, considering this car’s early production number, condition, and price, is that it won’t last long; what’s yours?
Two good looking yellow cars in one day. Wow!
Dash instrument gauge cluster looks like a 66.
That it does, which was unique only to the ’66. This car is probably a mish-mash of various early Mustangs.
My dad once owned a ’66 Mustang and I have to say the dash on this car looks quite familiar.
Seems like the earlier Mustangs shared a dash with the ’64 and ’65 Falcons, but the memory may be playing tricks.
Car is missing it’s quarter panel trim.
Just my two cents, but this car has a ’66 dash, and just an FYI, one way to tell a ‘64.5 from a ’65 is, the older has white Falcon knobs for the radio and controls. Anyway this car has had its interior completely redone.
Oh well, I was going to say that this one looks pretty nice, and it does, but you guys know more about Mustangs.
The Gt’s got that dash,otherwise they had the Falcon swept speedometer.By 66′ they all had the 5 pod dash.
The 1965 GT had this style of Dash .In 1966 this 5 Gauge came Standard!
If ordered with a Pony interior, it had to be built after March. The Round gauge pack was available with the Pony interior or GT package, which this does not have. It also looks like a dash hack, because that radio and bezel are aftermarket.
It also drives me crazy when the interior door release handles are clocked incorrectly; they should be pointing forward at about Two ‘o clock.
Paint looks pretty good, but is it obligatory to have a misaligned bumper?
Why are there so many wires on the solenoid? I remember there being maybe 5.
The most glaring issue with this vehicle is the VIN plate. It is not original to the car, or was removed and reattached for some reason. No Mustang ever had rivets that big, that’s a much, much later fastener. The original rivets had hollow centers and never obstructed any number of the VIN.
Caveat Emptor!
Totally agree on the door handles. See this all the time. I’ve never understood why people can’t get it right, even on total restorations. I 2nd the drives me crazy part!
The solenoid situation looks a bit scary. There does seem to be an excessive number of wires connected to it.
Be interesting to know if the A/C is factory or dealer installed. They look pretty much the same, but the data plate on the pax side inner fender will say “Air Cond” on it if it’s factory. My guess is dealer installed since factory P/S pump for A/C car has a slanted filler to clear the compressor. Has a set of headers, side cove trim is missing and air cleaner is after market, but otherwise it looks pretty darn good. I’m generally not a fan of yellow cars, but this one is attractive. Price looks pretty good if everything works
The factory air cond. cars had tinted glass.my 66′ does.
Hadn’t thought of that…mine does too.
When I first saw the awful and UGLY proportions of this car in the spring of 1964, I utterly HATED that “sawed-off rear” look. And time has not made these any more agreeable to my eyes. After that, so many others aped these foul proportions! Guess you can tell that I despise “pony” cars and their styling off-spring.
All that said, the non-original wheels tell the story here. Even if I WANTED one of these, I wouldn’t touch THIS one at ANY PRICE! Once you modify it, you can KEEP it, in my view. I make exception for mechanical safety improvements such as disk brakes and dual master-cylinders. But a different year’s dashboard?? Come ON now! I view calling this a 1964.5 as false advertising!
There’s no such thing as 19641/2 Mustang anyway, so it’s moot.
You know what I mean, DA: an early 1964 production 1965 model: but having 1966 parts, the entire supposed advantage of having an early example is lost.
As always it seems, this car too has the wrong timing cover on the engine. Early production cars had the oil filled through a tube on the passenger side of the timing cover, not via a cap on the valve cover like this one has. Then again the rack and pinion steering gearbox isn’t correct for it either!