Topic: Hello & opinions sought.

[sed6]

Hi all-
My exhaustive and ongoing search for my first Mustang lead me here a week or two back and since then I am getting kinda hooked!  I'm really impressed with the knowledge and dedication I read from many many members on this forum.  Until now I had little clue as to the extent Mustang fans go to preserve and restore their cars.

In truth I never thought my search for a '66 fastback, a desire of mine for more than 20 years, would lead me to consider some of the cars I might now consider.

Case in point, this '66 FB GT K CODE. I'd love this car, it looks nearly perfect to me, but how about to you guys and gals? http://www.carrollstauto.com/site/Inventory/ford/66_ford_mustFB_kcode_red/66_ford_mustFB_kcode_red.htm

If you have some input or opinion on this car I'd love to hear it!  Specifically I'm curious as to how close to concours condition it might be. What do you think about the price?  Know anything about this particular car? See anything you really like?

I know there's only a few pics on which to render an opinion, but there is also a brief description to go by. I know not everyone will weigh in, but I appreciate anyone who does!

-Scott
OKC, OK

[C5ZZKGT]

Hi, & Welcome to Concours Mustang!!!!
The '66 K GT fastback doesn't look too bad from what I'm seeing-just a couple of observations:
-Its a '66-the engine block should be Ford Blue, Not black-that was 1965.
-Its a Metuchen, NJ plant car by the "Buck tag" on the RH inner fender apron-Check to see if it has "PIO" somewhere on it-THAT itself will tell you IF the car is a factory GT or not-also make sure the VIN on it matches the one on the drivers door data plate and LF inner fender apron-the buck tag may also give some details on other options....
-Also, the fact that its an automatic is a bit rare IF its THE original HIPO spec C-4 unit, and original to the car.
-some small stuff I'm seeing are the decals on the valve covers-these ARE NOT used on Hipo Mustangs, some strange-non-original RED wireing on engine tells me that someone didn't use a correct/original engine wireing harness.
-You need to check the BLOCK just above where the ground for the alternator and battery hook up for the car's VIN
-I'm not sure IF Hipo C-4 transmissions have the car's VIN or not-the 4speeds DO have the car's VIN.
-I'm sure Charles, Jeff and the rest of our gang will chime in on this and render opinions, but I thought I'd start since I'm up super early this morning.
I'm a little hesitant right now to recommend you to the Hipo Mustang site as many months ago it was shut down on us w/o notice and now is back online, I have re-registered with reservations over there and it just doesn't seem the same.....I personally believe the site was sold. BTW I own a 1965 K code GT Convertible. Good Luck!! Please keep us posted!-Rick

[aaatp]

All K code cars had 9 inch rear ends.
The pinion snubber bracket welded to the bottom of the car, above the rear end, has a rubber bumper attached to it rather than the
flat plate, that would bump up against the rubber bumper that is  mounted at the front of a 9 inch rear end. The differential does not
appear to have the classic hump on the back identifying it as a 9 inch rear end.

So I don't believe that if this is a rear K code car that it has it's original differential.

John

[C5ZZKGT]

I didn't look real close at the rear end.....the 1965 and 1966 9" rears are different in appearance though but this is a valid point to check, lots of made up stuff out there.....

[jwc66k]

Welcome to the forum, and buy the car -
Jim

[cobraboy]

All K code cars had 9 inch rear ends.
The pinion snubber bracket welded to the bottom of the car, above the rear end, has a rubber bumper attached to it rather than the
flat plate, that would bump up against the rubber bumper that is  mounted at the front of a 9 inch rear end. The differential does not
appear to have the classic hump on the back identifying it as a 9 inch rear end.

So I don't believe that if this is a rear K code car that it has it's original differential.

John

My car does not have the rubber bumper on the floorpan, it has it on the plate on the 3rd member. The car in question does have the correct square corner style of snubber plate on the floorpan.
I dont see any problem with the rear, although it is more common not to have the rubber bumper on the floor, and to have it on the 3rd member.
The smooth axle casing was used in '65, and it is possible that it they were using them up in Oct '65. someone may know a changeover point.
If you are considering a K code you must join here http://www.hipomustang.com/hpmx/ all the old gang are back, and from my standpoint it is the members who make a site, not who owns it.
Mark

[Jack65K]

It appears to be a nice car but, form personal experience, pictures sometimes don't tell the real story.  If you are close enough I would certainly go look at it closely and drive it to see that it runs and shifts as it should.  If you are not close to the car, then you might try to find someone who is close and would look it over for you and the HIPO site mentioned by Mark above could be a good source for trying to find someone olocal to the car to look at it for you.
Good luck in your search!
Jack

[C5ZZKGT]

My car does not have the rubber bumper on the floorpan, it has it on the plate on the 3rd member. The car in question does have the correct square corner style of snubber plate on the floorpan.
I dont see any problem with the rear, although it is more common not to have the rubber bumper on the floor, and to have it on the 3rd member.
The smooth axle casing was used in '65, and it is possible that it they were using them up in Oct '65. someone may know a changeover point.
If you are considering a K code you must join here http://www.hipomustang.com/hpmx/ all the old gang are back, and from my standpoint it is the members who make a site, not who owns it.
Mark

Mark, I'm kinda scared to ask if its possible that your car was re-bodied before you got it? I'm sure all 1965-66 K codes were set up the same way with the bracket and snubber on the floorpan.........do you have a copy of Tony Gregory's HIPO book?

[aaatp]

Just a little more fuel for the fire. It appears that the rear brake distribution block is of the single exhaust type not the dual exhaust type.
After looking again at the differential housing, it just looks like an 8 inch rear in the picture, not a 9 inch, but that could be due to the angle
the photo was taken from.

John

[cobraboy]

Mark, I'm kinda scared to ask if its possible that your car was re-bodied before you got it? I'm sure all 1965-66 K codes were set up the same way with the bracket and snubber on the floorpan.........do you have a copy of Tony Gregory's HIPO book?

Ha Ha Dont be afraid to ask. I wont be afraid to tell you that with ALL  the VINS in place and no extra joins in the sheetmetal it is not a rebody.
That coupled with the fact that the pics in the 4th edition show both HiPo floor plates with no snubber. And the pic with a snubber on the floor is from a car with an 8" rear.
And it is common knowledge that the pyramid shaped rubber snubber lives on the plate on the 3rd member.
Perhaps you have a rebody ?
Edit
This pic is of a rear from a K code produced at the same plant as mine within days. Mine is identical. No snubber on the floor.

[Bob Gaines]

Hi all-
My exhaustive and ongoing search for my first Mustang lead me here a week or two back and since then I am getting kinda hooked!  I'm really impressed with the knowledge and dedication I read from many many members on this forum.  Until now I had little clue as to the extent Mustang fans go to preserve and restore their cars.

In truth I never thought my search for a '66 fastback, a desire of mine for more than 20 years, would lead me to consider some of the cars I might now consider.

Case in point, this '66 FB GT K CODE. I'd love this car, it looks nearly perfect to me, but how about to you guys and gals? http://www.carrollstauto.com/site/Inventory/ford/66_ford_mustFB_kcode_red/66_ford_mustFB_kcode_red.htm

If you have some input or opinion on this car I'd love to hear it!  Specifically I'm curious as to how close to concours condition it might be. What do you think about the price?  Know anything about this particular car? See anything you really like?

I know there's only a few pics on which to render an opinion, but there is also a brief description to go by. I know not everyone will weigh in, but I appreciate anyone who does!

-Scott
OKC, OK

The 8 inch rebound bumper is enough to cause a big red flag in my book. A dealer car I hate to say it , is typically suspect to begin with and is the place to find a hot potato car. Where there is smoke there is fire. I would proceed with caution. There are a number of ways to determine if a K car . First it has to pass the duel exhaust test. pull the carpets check for the plates in back,check for the duel exhaust brake line bracket ,check the frame rail for the duel exhaust brace inside the frame rail. Only then can you proceed with the K code verification. I don't believe any 66 K Mustangs came with black blocks but that would be restorers error. It may be a early car which would explain the early style rear end housing that some early 66's got. The best of luck with the inspection. It is better to find out now then after you get the car home and the money has left your hands. just my opinion.Bob

[Bob Gaines]

Something else odd that i see in one of the other pictures that makes me doubt if this is a legit K code. I hesitate to elaborate on a public forum for fear of giving  the unscrupulous the information to fix. I warn others not to do the same if they see what I see.   I would strongly suggest getting someone who knows Kcodes to examine this car first hand before purchasing. The seller is wanting strong money IMO so I don't think anyone is going to jump on it and if someone did there are enough issues IMO disregarding the pedigree questions that are yet to be answered you shouldn't feel too bad.  Bob

[sed6]

Something else odd that i see in one of the other pictures that makes me doubt if this is a legit K code. I hesitate to elaborate on a public forum for fear of giving  the unscrupulous the information to fix. I warn others not to do the same if they see what I see.   I would strongly suggest getting someone who knows Kcodes to examine this car first hand before purchasing. The seller is wanting strong money IMO so I don't think anyone is going to jump on it and if someone did there are enough issues IMO disregarding the pedigree questions that are yet to be answered you shouldn't feel too bad.  Bob

Even being a noob, I have to agree with Bob's statement. Which leads me to ask, how do I approach that guy?  I'll find an MCA judge close by and give him a call, and of course take suggestions from anyone here.  But I don't want to waste a guys time if it turns out lame. I'd not want to accompany that person if a car was any significant distance from my home, unless it's worth a second trip for him (a car he's excited about), and first inspection for me (with the intent to buy). So really I'm asking a distant stranger for a pretty big favor.

I appreciate all the input thus far, thanks all!

-Scott
OKC, OK

[jwc66k]

Gaines hit on most of the key spots (oh, don't buy the car - yet), dual exhaust ("duel" is a fight, "dual" is two) without a "H" pipe, rear axle bumper, etc, but there is one thing omitted so far - what's the VIN? And as long as we are at it, the info on the door data plate too. If you are interested, ask the seller for a picture of the VIN on the LH fender apron and for both "hidden" VINs under the fenders near the RH and LH hinges, and the buck tag, and the door data tag, and then post them here where they can be investigated. There is no VIN on the C4. Nobody commented on the "blue underspray" on the engine's oil pan, the use of resonators for mufflers and the missing resonators at the rear (all easily replaced), the apparently clean new fuel and brake lines, and the hastily painted leaf springs, and finally - Jasper Engineering. Contact them at http://www.jasperengines.com/contact.php to see if the did in fact rebuild the engine as claimed.
Jim

[Bob Gaines]

Gaines hit on most of the key spots (oh, don't buy the car - yet), dual exhaust ("duel" is a fight, "dual" is two) without a "H" pipe, rear axle bumper, etc, but there is one thing omitted so far - what's the VIN? And as long as we are at it, the info on the door data plate too. If you are interested, ask the seller for a picture of the VIN on the LH fender apron and for both "hidden" VINs under the fenders near the RH and LH hinges, and the buck tag, and the door data tag, and then post them here where they can be investigated. There is no VIN on the C4. Nobody commented on the "blue underspray" on the engine's oil pan, the use of resonators for mufflers and the missing resonators at the rear (all easily replaced), the apparently clean new fuel and brake lines, and the hastily painted leaf springs, and finally - Jasper Engineering. Contact them at http://www.jasperengines.com/contact.php to see if the did in fact rebuild the engine as claimed.
Jim

I would want to have a duel with someone who told me to buy a expensive car that may be bogus    VIN's are not a absolute . Obviously it needs to have a "K" engine code in the VIN however what if a VIN has been grafted onto another ANOTHER body !    That can be done very convincingly. I have seen it many times. Then the VIN isn't as important as the other defining factors of the car. It doesn't help a lot if you have a correct K code VIN on a incorrect non K code body. There are other clues that bear closer examination on this particular car as implied before. You have to look at the big picture before making a determination. From the circumstantial evidence in the pictures it is difficult to make a determination one way or the other but there are more inconsistances then you can shake a stick at. As I said before where there is smoke there is usually fire. This car is not priced modestly and isn't especially rare or special (relatively speaking) and given the red flags it wouldn't be prudent to spend a lot of time or money investigating IMHO. The odds are rapidly adding up against that. There is enough suspicious red flags to proceed very carefully.