ConcoursMustang Forums
1st Generation 1964 1/2 - 1973 - Questions & general discussions that apply to a specific year => 1964 1/2 - 1965 => Topic started by: slipkid on May 25, 2010, 07:34:27 AM
-
I have recently purchased a rotissiere restored 65 Mustang. VIN 5T07A133430. The car is set up as a GT. Key characteristics - it has the factory half moon in the dash for the 5 dial cluster. It has the factory spot welded sheet metal reinforcement under the backseat. What it doesn't have is the dual exhaust hangar setup in the rear frame rails - it is a single bolt transverse mount system. I've attached pics of the half moon, reinforcement and the car itself. It's got all the usual GT stuff - fogs, discs, etc. The build date is important - it is a Metuchen car dated February 8th. Metuchen began production of Mustangs on February 1st. I'm looking for help/advice to determine what this car really is....thanks
-
You will have to do a complete examination of the unibody and document all the sheet metal date codes. This will help give you a better idea of when the car was actually produced.
One thing I noticed in the rear floor picture is that the seam sealer over the hump does not extend onto the reinforcement plates. Of course, we have seen some weird things on early Metuchen GT's before. Although, I don't believe that a transverse dual exhaust system was ever used at Metuchen as it would have been phased out around October/November of '64 at San Jose and Dearborn. The earliest K codes and/or A code GT's may have had Arvinode systems installed for a very short period in initial Metuchen production. The hi-po registry may help in determining the earliest known K code at Metuchen to possibly help answer this question. If your car did indeed have an Arvinode system, this would explain the absence of the rear frame rail reinforcements as they were not installed with that system. If you have pictures of the rear frame rails, that would help answer that question.
Does the car have a buck tag? Did you find a build sheet taped to the main wiring harness? Have a picture of the original door data plate?
-
Charles - thanks for the informative reply. Here's the door data plate and a pic of the rear frame rails - there's a dual exhaust setup using only a single bolt because that's all that is there.... There is no buck tag nor any hole nor dimple for the buck tag screw. VIN's match in ll 3 locations. I'll look for the build sheet but the restorer said he found nothing but thanks for the wiring harness tip
-
The bolt going through the rear frame rail for the exhaust bracket in your pic is actually mounted through the hole that would be used to attach the rear tie down plates. The Arvinode hanger would have attached a little further up the frame rail. If you could get a picture of that area, would help better. One of the other side would also be helpful. I suppose your car does have the square corner snubber plate that is most commonly known for being on K codes (but actually used on A code GT's too.)
The absence of the buck tag is good as it wasn't used until later in Metuchen production. Your door plate looks legit.
-
Charles,
What is that little G in the lower right hand corner of the dataplate? I've seen that before on another car...
-
Charles,
What is that little G in the lower right hand corner of the dataplate? I've seen that before on another car...
It's just one of several varieties of original door plates that we see.
-
i would recommend getting a copy of the 'tagbook' by kevin marti. it explains a lot. http://www.martiauto.com
-
Charles - here are some more pics - I had to look pretty far forward down the rail to see anything - there are 2 bolt holes on the inside face of each rail - the driver side is in a horizontal arrangement and the passenger side is vertical. Thanks for your informed responses. Rob
-
Here are some more pics - backside of instrument cluster and the fog switch. Thanks, Rob
-
Those rear frame rail holes/sleeves are not consistent with the original Arvin locations I was referring to. They actually look like single exhaust locations. Your snubber plate is also the single exhaust style. Here's a pic of where the rear hanger should be located for an Arvin system: http://www.early-mustang.com/charles/K_vert/7_13/7_13_05%20019.jpg
I still would not completely discount your car not being a GT, but things are starting to look a little suspicious.
On the dash, keep in mind that it wouldn't be completely unheard of for the entire piece to be replaced. There is usually a date stamp on the bottom edge that is most times reasonably close to the scheduled build date. You could also make sure that it isn't a '66 dash as there would be tell-tale signs of the dash mounting holes welded up to make it correct for a '65.
One other thing I happened to notice was the placement of the GT badge on the LH fender. Hard to tell from the picture, but it appears the badge is located a little too far back.
-
Charles - it feels food, real good, to finally get some clarity on this. One more thing regarding your link to the Arvin mounting location - my car does have a bolt hole location there (it can be seen in the j-peg titled "rearframe". Mine is a single hole only, on both sides. What's that for? Thanks much - I bought this car as an A code 4 speed and this GT stuff has been lingering around.....now it finally goes away!
-
As I said, I wouldn't completely rule it out just yet, but things are not stacking favorably for the car being a real GT at this point. I guess I should also point out, though, that the fog light switch on the early GT cars was typically located on the bottom edge of the dash.
That extra hole in the rear is the 2nd attachment for the rear tie down plates. Should be there on all models.
So long as you didn't pay a premium for the car being a GT, sounds like you can still be satisfied with what you have.
-
I paid 15k for it - it's new from bottom to top. Engine rebuild, toploader (close ratio) rebuild, new clutch, sandblasted, repainted, new interior, new brakes, brake lines, shocks, weatherstripping, heater core, etc, right down to Autolite BF-42 spark plugs. Car is impressive underneath as well as the engine bay and the interior. I only looked at the price in terms of what 15k was buying me. It was never advertised as a GT - only as an A code 4 speed. The only thing the restorer said was that the fog light wiring looked original....I felt that 15k was a fair price for what I was getting. Half the fun of owning the car is stuff like this. Thanks again Charles for wrapping this up quickly nad clearly.
-
....I was fairly confident that the back end exhaust did not jive with a GT but the half moon and the underseat reinforcement just kept throwing me for a loop.....
-
Charles - I looked under the dash for markings. At the bottom section of the dash, below the ashtray is 3-24-C3. Not sure of the last 2 (C3) - stamping is tough to make out. A liitle past that number, towards the glovebox, are two numbers - 36.
Can you tell me what these mean? Thanks, Rob
-
3 24 C3 is the sheet metal stamping date for the dash section. It decodes to March 24th, 3rd shift at Cleveland stamping plant. Quite a span between a February 8th scheduled build date.
-
Thanks Charles, you are helping me in understanding these codes. All sheet metal in the engine compartment is coming up 3-27-2 and 3-27-3d.
-
Well, those range of sheet metal codes would be more believable for a factory GT in '65.
-
single exhaust car per our dialogue. Plus, even though there is the correct bracket in the correct location for the correct routing of the brake line at the rear of the car, the single exhaust bracket location is rough - evidence that something was there at some point in time. The half moon and the sheet metal reinforcement shall remain unexplained.
-
With the early February scheduled build date, it was pretty clear it could not have been a GT. But, at this point, I would not rule it out. I have seen some weird stuff on early Metuchen GT's. Inspect the complete metal dash area and rule out the possibility that it came out of another car. Look where it would be spot welded to the unibody all around the perimeter of the piece. Any signs of drilled out spot welds or raw/ground edges might indicate some previous work.
Additionally, spend some time looking over the car and write down whatever sheet metal date stamps you see. Engine bay, trunk, etc... There are other areas that could help date the car also, which would be things like glass date codes, wiper motor ink-stamp, etc...
The longer I'm in this hobby, the more I am inclined to "never say never"!
-
Charles - good afternoon. Here are some date code pics, engine bay and trunk. I am posting again with more pics. thanks, Rob
-
Charles - the propotioing valve has been replaced with an adjustable unit - here's a pic of the mounting bracket - this is wheer the original valve was. Also there is a pic of some holes under the dash, below where the fog light switch is mounted. Thanks, Rob
-
Lastly, close ups of the reinforcement. Looks to me like the seam seal runs under the plate on the drivers side. I visited a local salvage yard - the yard has a number of first gen mustangs, mostly 66 T codes. All of the cars I looked at had the single exhaust transverse mount setup and the bolt hole arrangement in these cars is identical to my car. i have looked and looked for a build sheet.....I have also asked the restorer (Perogie Enterprises) if the could come u with the name of the person they bought the car from. Maybe I get lucky that way. I thank you very much for taking an interest in this, I'm sure there are easier, more satisfying, things for you to do.
-
Charles - the propotioing valve has been replaced with an adjustable unit - here's a pic of the mounting bracket - this is wheer the original valve was. Also there is a pic of some holes under the dash, below where the fog light switch is mounted. Thanks, Rob
That pic you are describing as showing the proportioning valve is only showing the distribution block. The original 65-66 disc brake proportioning valve would have been cylindrical with in/out connections and an adjustment stud with a large lock nut. On an original disc brake car, there should be 2 holes for the proportioning valve. One for the mount tab(cylindrical) and the other for the attaching bolt. Also, the distribution block for a disc brake car should have 3 ports, drum brakes has 4.
This shows the holes:
http://www.early-mustang.com/charles/vert/3_19/3_19_05%20027.jpg
Original style valve with correct 3 port distribution block:
http://www.early-mustang.com/charles/vert/3_20/3_20_05%20025.jpg
-
The restorer replaced the original valve and block. It is now adjustable. I've tried to get a pic of the mounting holes where the original was (and the new block is now mounted to). Here's another shot. there are holes - one for the bolt and one for the mounting tab.
-
That's the distribution block. The mounting holes are the same for all models.
Further down the inner fender is where the original proportioning valve would have been mounted. If you look at the pic I provided above of the outside shot of the LH inner fender area, you'll see 2 holes, placed diagonal to each other, about 6-8" below the distribution block mounting area.
-
Charles - best pics I could get. the Wilwood proportioning valve blocks alot from the inside but good pic from inside the wheel well. The sway bar is 13/16, much too easy to fake or would some pics of the sway bar mounting brackest help? Thanks much, Rob
-
Holes look ok for the prop valve.
-
Charles - thank you again. You have responded to everyone of my posts and it is much appreciated. I have enjoyed every minute of this learning curve that I am on. In looking at the bigger picture I cannot see someone painstakingly fabricate the reinforcement sheetmetal (which is identical in shape and attachment to every picture of true reinforcement that I have seen), create the half moon (it is smooth, no cuts or rough edges and no indication that this is not the dash that came with the car), find the correct instrument cluster including the ammeter wire through the sensor, and take the time to create everything else - proportioning valve holes, fog light wiring (including backup light function and wiring holes), sway bar (although painted the bar is pitted and looks old), etc and not finish the effort by changing the glove box door and the exhaust hangars? Why take the time to do all that and then not finish the job?
Fred Glazier and Dan Nolan are about 90 minutes away. I'll head up there sometime this summer. Put it on the lift and have them comb through it. See what they can say/explain about this car. Thanks again, Rob
-
If I hadn't seen other early Metuchen GT's with some unique features, I wouldn't have led you on this path. A thorough inspection of the underside might help answer some additional questions. While I have been objective so far, I think it is best for you continue to approach this with some skepticism and try to avoid drawing any conclusions.
-
Charles - good afternoon. I inspected the wiring harness (3rd time) but no build sheet. The underdash wiring harness has a FoMoCo paper label wrapped around it - part number C5Z8144016. I researched but found no info. Does this part number help me in any way to determine if the car came with or without fogs?
Unfortunately for you, I may ping you again.........
Thank you, Rob
-
I think I have a spare fog light harness somewhere, will check if it has a engineering number tag. Believe you are missing a trailing letter though, like a -B or -C.
-
The only other marking are the letters "SX" under the part number.
-
Charles, I'm baaaaack. Pretty much forgot about this whole GT thing, enjoying driving the car. But perusing Ebay I find this[/http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1965-GT-FASTBACK-CA-CAR-BLK-PLT-43YRS-1-FAMILY-A-CODE-/270608069343?cmd=ViewItem&pt=US_Cars_Trucks&hash=item3f017f72dfurl]
65 GT fastback. Spoke with the owner - he has not yet located the build sheet. Look at the rear frame rail exhaust hangers. Single bolt? If he can find that build sheet that would be helpful - I povided him with info as where to look.
Thanks
-
He won't find a build sheet in a San Jose car. Hard to tell anything from the pics of the rear frame rails. The one bolt that is showing looks newer than the surrounding area. Would have to see more clear/larger pics before coming to any conclusions. Also, the owner has fudged the warranty plate information. Can probably figure out the approximate scheduled build date based on the unit number though. Would have to wait until later today to do that.
-
The VIN is about 7400 after my SJ GT fastback and mine was scheduled for 14S.
Steve
-
So probably an 05T or something like that... based on the mix-up of the warranty plate info given in the auction.
I would not consider it an early GT by any means. Most likely has undercoat covering the areas in question or rust?
-
It looks like the owner put the 6 from the trim code as part of the date. He says the interior is black so the trim code should be 26 not 2. That would make the scheduled build date 5T not 65T. Does 5T sound like a reasonable build date Charles for a difference of 7400 units from 14S?
Steve
-
Looking to verify which dual exhaust my K had from the rear frame rail hanger locations. The JPEG images on this thread come up as corrupted, and the pic Charles posted a location below is no longer there. Are these images available anywhere else, or is there a better resource? Searched through multiple threads on "dual exhaust" and not finding anything better.
http://www.early-mustang.com/charles/K_vert/7_13/7_13_05%20019.jpg
Thanks,
Rich
-
Add ''ct" to any of those links, changed provider, sorry:
http://www.ct.early-mustang.com/charles/K_vert/7_13/7_13_05%20019.jpg
-
Thanks Charles. Excellent pics.