Steve Magnante's 1001 Mustang Facts: Covers All Mustangs 1964-1/2 to Present

INTRODUCTION

As with my first CarTech trivia book, Steve Magnante’s 1001 Muscle Car Facts, this work is meant to trigger conversation and a hunger for evermore knowledge about the subject. Readers will note that the facts presented cover many areas and are presented in five basic subgroups. The Legend and Lore sections are meant to address myths, misconceptions, bizarre events, brushes with fame, and other compelling bits of information that don’t easily fall under other labels or categories.

The Body and Interior sections cover just that, as do the Engine and Driveline and Suspension and Brakes sections. In each, pertinent and informative data is presented for your education and enjoyment. The final subgroup, Number Crunching and Press Commentary, addresses the dual realms of statistics and what magazine road testers and other critics said about Mustangs past and present.

One realization that became obvious during the creation of this book was how far Mustang (and the domestic auto industry overall) has come since 1964. The level of technology and quality baked into every new Mustang is astonishing and proves that the American auto industry has recovered from the complacency and self-confident arrogance that allowed foreign makes to invade unopposed during the 1970s and 1980s. The industry’s future success seems secure if they keep this up.

Chapter 1

1964½–1966 Falcon Births a Pony

LEGEND AND LORE

1There is no such thing as a 1964½ Mustang. Every one of the 680,989 first-year Mustangs built carries a Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) formally designating it as a 1965 model year product (5 stamped into the first position of the VIN sequence). The 1964½ myth stems from the fact that Ford (wisely) began building ’65 Mustangs in March 1964 to get a running start and ensure availability on the official April 17, 1964, launch date. Better informed Mustang enthusiasts refer to these cars as early 1965s instead of 1964½s, something I’ll do throughout this book. So what’s up with the cover of this book (Covers All Mustangs 1964½ to Present)? Er, well, if you leave the 1964½ off the cover, many people who have not learned this fact yet will think I have omitted the early 1965s. So, it’s there, just this once. I promise.

2Ford product planners expected to sell 100,000 1965 Mustangs. The number was surpassed a mere three months after introduction. By the end of the 1965 model run, the sales target had been exceeded nearly sevenfold (680,989). For some perspective, Ford’s iconic 1955–1957 two-seat Thunderbird (Mustang’s thematic precursor) only sold 53,166 units (16,155 in 1955, 15,631 in 1956, and 21,380 in 1957) over its three-year model run. That Ford was able to expand Mustang output to meet demand without curbing production of Falcon, Fairlane, Galaxie, Thunderbird, and truck models speaks to the expertise of its plant managers.

3Where is the very first Mustang? Did it survive? Sold new to a Canadian airline pilot named Stanley Tucker by George Parsons Ford of St. John’s, Newfoundland, the world’s first privately-owned pony car is a Wimbledon White 260 V-8 convertible bearing VIN 5F08F1000001. Fortunately, it is alive and well and currently on display at the Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn, Michigan. Tucker bought the car on April 14, three days before official introduction, and put around 10,000 miles on the car before trading it back to Ford on March 2, 1966. It seems that Ford president Lee Iacocca wanted Number One back and actively sought out Mr. Tucker. So, what did the owner of the world’s first retail Mustang take in trade? He took the one millionth Mustang, a loaded Silver Frost 1966 V-8 convertible.

4With the understanding that all first-year Mustangs bear a 1965 VIN tag, cars built before July 31, 1964, have a large number of unique features that differ from cars built on August 1, 1964 and later. This is where the 1964½ mythos arises. Although functionally similar, early-build 1965 cars (March 9 to July 31, 1964) were assembled with unique parts in the braking system, electrical system, horns, interior, and engine. The differences are highlighted throughout this chapter.

5Before settling on the Mustang name, the Ford marketing group responsible for naming the car initially considered numerous alternates. Among them were Allegro, Torino, Turino, T-5, Thunderbird II, T-Bird II, Colt, Bronco, Maverick, Pinto, and even Cougar. One initial name that saw limited use in production was T-5. Mustangs sold in Germany were badged T-5s from 1965 through 1979 because Krupp Heavy Industries owned the rights to the Mustang name in that country.

6The only retail-available Mustang two-seaters built by Ford (so far) were the 1965 Shelby GT350s. But did you know that early plans considered the possibility of making all Mustangs two-seaters? After watching imports of post–World War II British sports cars mushroom, Ford product planners constructed the 1962 Mustang I, a potential vision of mass-produced future offerings. With its Targa band half roof, mid-mounted V-4 engine, and two-seat layout, the Mustang I was Ford’s first true sports car. Decision makers deemed the experimental prototype too exotic for the huge sales numbers they demanded. A running Mustang I is on display at the Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn, Michigan.

7Because the Sports Car Club of America (SCCA) initially rejected Ford’s request to declare the new 1965 Mustang 2+2 a sports car (crucial for competition eligibility), Ford turned to popular SCCA Cobra racer Carroll Shelby to serve as a negotiator and messenger. Stepping back, Ford let Shelby work with SCCA to determine the steps needed to get the Mustang accepted for sanctioned SCCA race events. One sticking point was its back seat. Proper sports cars simply didn’t have them. As plans for the 1965 GT350 solidified, the elimination of the back seat was a primary detail. Thus, each of the 562 1965 Mustang GT350s was delivered to the retail customer as a two-seater with a textured black plastic package shelf replacing the stock 2+2 folding rear seat. For 1966, the SCCA loosened its standards and approved Ford’s desire to offer an optional back seat in ’66 GT350 Mustangs. As a result, approximately 100 ’66 GT350s were built as two-seaters. The remaining 2,274 had normal Mustang back seats.

This floor panel helped overcome SCCA concerns about Mustang’s status as a sports car.

8Before that Mustang II (Ford’s controversial Pinto-based 1974 model), the name was used a decade earlier on an experimental show car that debuted in October 1963. Although it featured an exaggerated sloping nose, extended rear quarter panels, and other never-made-it-to-production touches, the Mustang II served to fan the flames of public anticipation for the real Mustang during the six months before its first public showing on April 17, 1964. IMC released a highly detailed 1/25-scale plastic model kit of the 1963 Mustang II show car was shortly after. The kit is still available today from Lindberg.

9Did Ford really hang a new Mustang from the Empire State Building? Yes, but unlike the famed 1933 movie primate clutching a Fay Wray doll, the car wasn’t clinging to the spire, but was instead carefully positioned atop the outdoor observation deck, 1,472 feet above the sidewalk. Most folks today assume the stunt was part of the initial 1965 Mustang launch, but it happened on October 20, 1965, as part of the hoopla surrounding the 1966 model rollout, Mustang’s second year of production.

10The October 1966 Empire State Building Mustang publicity stunt centered on a new 1966 convertible. Rather than attempt a lift using a helicopter, Ford’s Experimental Garage took a stock vehicle, removed the engine and transmission, and then sliced it into four sections. The stunt car was shipped to NYC and unloaded on the street in front of the Empire State Building at 10:30 p.m. Then the car was disassembled for loading into passenger elevators to the observation deck. By 4:30 a.m., the car was reassembled and ready to be photographed by waiting news helicopters. At 11:00 a.m. the car was disassembled and brought inside the observation tower, where it remained to greet more than 14,000 visitors in the months that followed.

11Timed and priced perfectly to appeal to baby boomers, Mustang’s success was so newsworthy it caught the attention of the traditionally non-automotive press. Time, and Newsweek ran simultaneous cover stories on the Mustang phenomenon. It was not the last time Iacocca appeared on Time’s cover. Two decades later, the March 21, 1983, issue featured Lee’s illustrated mug sprouting from the grille of a Chrysler Town & Country convertible. The headline read Detroit’s Comeback Kid. By then, Iacocca was Chrysler’s chairman and savior.

12Wilson Pickett’s 1966 hit R&B single Mustang Sally isn’t one of the great car guy songs (packed with meaningful gearhead tech lyrics), but its infectious backbeat and stylized keyboards more than make up for it. But did you know Pickett’s version was actually a cover of a song originally written and performed by Mack Rice in 1965? According to music historian Tom Shannon, the song was initially titled Mustang Mama, but Aretha Franklin suggested the name change. Although Pickett seemed fine singing the lyric, I bought you a brand-new Mustang, a 1965 h’uh! when the subject car would have been last year’s edition, the Young Rascals updated the model year to 1966 in their same-year cover of the tune. Years before Mack Rice wrote and sang the first version of Mustang Sally, he was part of an R&B group called The Falcons (1957–1960). That’s ironic when you remember the fact that Ford based the Mustang on its compact Falcon economy car platform.

13The Kingston Trio’s Bob Shane may be well known for his role in re-popularizing folk music, but he also holds a very special place in Mustang history. In 1966, Carroll Shelby wanted to evaluate what a GT350 convertible might be like, so his company built four of them, an Ivy Green car with an automatic transmission (6S2375), a Spring Yellow 4-speed (6S2376), a Candy Apple Red 4-speed (6S2377), and a Sapphire Blue automatic (6S2378). They were used for testing and PR duties in Los Angeles and Detroit. Eventually, the quartet broke up and the Candy Apple Red 4-speed was sold to Bob Shane. Today the car exists in pristine, restored condition (see Fact No. 125).

14The Falcon (Mustang’s platform donor) was Ford’s answer to growing public demand for compact cars in the late 1950s. Spurred by successful imports such as the VW Beetle and Renault Dauphine as well as existing domestics including the Rambler American and Studebaker Lark, the Falcon joined the Plymouth Valiant and Chevrolet Corvair for a 1960 model year rollout. Falcon’s most popular 1960 models were the two-door sedan (193,470 built) and four-door sedan (167,896 built), followed by station wagons with two doors (27,552 built) and four doors (46,758 built). So, with the Falcon platform’s ability to accept a station wagon body, did Ford ever make a Mustang station wagon? Yes and no. Although Ford stylists rendered numerous long-roof design proposals in-house, each was quickly shot down by Ford styling chief Eugene Bordinat, who saw Mustang as a sporty personal car and nothing else. By the way, Falcon convertibles were not offered until the 1963 model year.

15Car and Driver magazine started the Mustang station wagon rumor mill churning with its October 1966 cover shot depicting a dark green Mustang station wagon. Looking very much like a teaser for the real thing, the car was actually built in Italy by Intermeccanica, a Turin-based custom vehicle outfit. A collaboration between automotive journalist Barney Clark, Detroit stylist Robert Cumberford, and car enthusiast Jim Licata, the wagon began life as an early 1965 coupe (289/C4 automatic) to which a steel roof extension was added. Looking very stock and fully detailed, the carpeted cargo space measured 44 inches wide and 36 inches deep with the rear seat folded down.

16Sadly, Clark and Cumberford were rebuffed by Ford, which turned a blind eye to their Mustang station wagon project. Undeterred, the Car and Driver story published Cumberford’s mailing address, should interested parties elect to have Intermeccanica build one for them. It is not known whether any orders were taken. Today, Robert Cumberford’s written design critiques can be seen every month in Automobile magazine. The informative column is called Cumberford by Design.

17Were any four-door Mustangs built by Ford? The idea was certainly tossed around, and a photo of a full-size styling buck, dated January 7, 1963, depicts the passenger’s side of a very austere-looking Mustang coupe with four doors, 13-inch whitewall tires, base Falcon hubcaps, and a front license plate marked Falcon SP 9C 03. A look through the clear windows reveals that the driver’s side of the body has the standard Mustang two-door configuration. Likely built to allow decision makers to easily see how two- and four-door treatments worked on the same model, the four-door was probably nixed for fear it would cannibalize Falcon sales.

18The secrecy surrounding Mustang’s launch was so tight, even Motor Trend magazine wasn’t given the whole story when it awarded its coveted 1964 Car of the Year trophy to the entire Ford lineup. That’s why the cover image on the February 1964 issue of MT depicts a Galaxie, a Falcon, a Fairlane, a Thunderbird, and no Mustang. In those pre-Internet days, as many as three months passed between the words on the reporter’s typewriter and their arrival at the local magazine stand. When editor Charles Nerpel visited Ford to photograph and write the Car of the Year story, he did so in November 1963, nearly a half-year before Mustang’s Friday, April 17, 1964, launch date.

19It very likely pained Ford’s PR team deeply to have to keep quiet about Mustang as Motor Trend’s Nerpel conducted his many interviews with Ford design and engineering staffers while writing the 1964 Car of the Year story. But they did throw him a bone in the form of a two-page story (pages 34 and 35) titled Future Total Performance. The story correctly predicts an April launch at the 1964 New York World’s Fair and that the offering was a four-seater priced below $3,000. That much he got right. In hindsight, the misinformation Ford allowed the magazine to publish was stunning.

20Among the many incorrect predictions found in Nerpel’s Motor Trend story are that the new Ford personal sporty car would be called Turino and that it would have a Corvette-like fiberglass body riding on a separate steel frame. The story made numerous references to Ford precursor show cars including the Allegro, Cougar II, Mustang I, and Mustang II but remained steadfast in its assertion that the car was going to be called the Turino. In the auto industry, misinformation can be a vital tool in spurring public interest (and throwing off the competition), even if it does cause temporary embarrassment for journalists.

21Was the Fairlane Group responsible for the Mustang? Yes, but I must explain. I’m not referring to the design and engineering team behind Ford’s various Fairlane-badged production cars, but rather a group of 8 to 10 executives who met weekly at the Fairlane Inn Motel, located on Michigan Avenue in Dearborn, Michigan. Formed in 1960, the Fairlane Group (a.k.a., the Fairlane Committee) met off-campus and was thus free to brainstorm fresh, new ideas, such as Mustang, in secret. This was only five years after the Edsel fiasco, a car with unprecedented levels of think tank. Iacocca was wise to do his free-thinking away from the risk-averse, conservative post-Edsel atmosphere taking hold in Dearborn.

22The Fairlane Group included Ford vice president Lee Iacocca, product planning manager Donald Frey, special projects manager Hal Sperlich, marketing manager Frank Zimmerman, public relations manager Walter Murphy, market research manager Robert Eggert, and executives from J. Walter Thompson, Ford’s advertising agency. With powerful representatives from every facet of the automaking and marketing process in one room, the stage was set to answer Iacocca’s 1960 query, There must be a market out there looking for a car.

23Is it true that one of the Fairlane Group’s dead-end ideas was a revival of the two-seat Thunderbird? Yes, indeed. The project was called the Falcon XT-Bird and was supported by the Budd Body Co., one of Ford’s major body suppliers. The idea was to revive the 1957 baby ’Bird’s external appearance but trim it to fit atop the Falcon’s suspension and floorpan. Conceived before the tube-framed, mid-engine Mustang I, the Falcon XT-Bird went no further than the drawing board. The Fairlane Group agreed that mass market success would only come from a car capable of seating four. This same edict killed the two-seat Mustang I’s chances of becoming reality.

24Fairlane Committee member Hal Sperlich came up with the idea of using the Falcon chassis underneath the Mustang. Without this cost-saving idea, historians agree that there was no way Mustang could have come to fruition with the meager $75 million budget allotted by Henry Ford II. A decade later, Sperlich approached Henry Ford II with the idea of a compact, front-wheel-drive family van, but overly conservative decision makers snuffed the project. By 1977, Sperlich was working at Chrysler, where his minivan idea was approved. Production started in 1983 and multiple millions have been built since. Historians agree, had Henry Ford II accepted Sperlich’s front-drive Ford minivan, Chrysler wouldn’t have survived the 1980s.

25Although Mustang’s official public debut was set for Friday, April 17, 1964, more than a month earlier, on March 11, Henry Ford II’s nephew Walter Buehl Ford drove an undisguised convertible to a downtown Detroit restaurant and parked it outside in full public view. As young Walt enjoyed his meal, a photographer from the Detroit Free Press snapped away and published the pictures the very next day. So, did heads roll? Not exactly, it was just one of the many well-orchestrated publicity stunts in what is still one of motor history’s most successful new-car launches.

BODY AND INTERIOR

26To restore torsional rigidity, Mustang convertibles were built on fortified floor pans with flat steel plates to bolster the connections between the front subframe stubs and lower rocker boxes. A second reinforcement plate connected the floor under the front bucket seat mounts. Because the second plate trapped the driveshaft and exhaust head pipe(s), Ford designed it to be removable via six bolts to ease service. The other plating was welded in place permanently.

Simple yet effective, these under-car reinforcement plates restored torsional rigidity on convertible models.

27The decision to eliminate the Mustang’s standard rectangular horse-in-corral grille emblem from the 1965 Shelby GT350 revealed an unsightly gap at the bottom-center of the stock grille surround trim. To avoid an Alfred E. Neuman-esque gap-tooth blemish (MAD magazine’s long-serving mascot), Shelby whipped up a polished cast aluminum filler button. Every one of the 561 1965 Mustangs Shelby’s shop transformed wore this little bit of unique trim.

28Shelby’s grille plug was no longer needed in 1966, thanks to Ford’s grille redesign. The rectangular horse-in-corral central grille emblem was retained, but the quartet of stylized outriggers was eliminated to give the corral a floating effect. Because Ford retained the same 1965-spec chrome trim surrounding the sunken grille, it plugged the gap (at the six o’clock position) with a pressed aluminum filler plate of a flatter design than the peaked item used by Shelby in 1966. The now-standard plug suited Shelby’s corral-less grille treatment just fine; it allowed him to retire the 1965-only peaked plug and save a few bucks per car at the same time.

Inspired by Shelby’s 1965 stop-gap filler plug, all 1966 Mustang grille surrounds received this filler plug. Fact No. 28 tells why.

29If your early 1965 Mustang’s horns malfunction, you must remember that late 1965 and 1966 steering wheels, horn rings, and horn switches are not interchangeable with the parts installed in cars built before August 18, 1964. You’ll need to find the correct early 1965 parts to make the repair. That’s because the early horn actuator plate has a single post; the later (alternator style) plate was changed to two posts. The related parts must be used together. Happily, the aftermarket restoration industry has parts for both applications.

30When you remove the steering wheel center cap (it’s marked Ford Mustang), don’t be surprised when you see the Falcon Sprint lettering cast into the tri-bar horn ring. Yep, the parts were shared between both models to control costs. Later 1965-up horn bars lack the Falcon Sprint nomenclature.

31While many areas of the 1966 GT350 Mustang were somewhat stripped down compared to the 1965 version, the addition of functional rear brake cooling scoops was not one of them. Bolted atop the sculpted bodyside coves, flexible hoses routed air from inside each scoop to openings cut into the wheelhouses and then toward the rear brakes. The only non-functional examples were installed on the four experimental 1966 GT350 convertibles. Their folding top mechanisms prevented fitment of the brake cooling system.

The first of many scoops were added to Mustangs through the years. Were the 1966 GT350’s side scoops functional? See Fact No. 31 for the answer.

32Mustangs built after August 17, 1964, have a different charging system warning lamp lens than earlier cars. If the battery is discharging or nearly dead, the lamps on early cars display the illuminated signal GEN to indicate possible problems with the generator. Later cars were equipped with more modern alternators. Their charging system warning lamp lenses read ALT. Alternators keep the battery charging even at low engine speeds. By contrast, a generator’s more limited charging ability can lead to a dead battery after prolonged periods of idling with the lights, heater blower motor, radio, and windshield wipers operating simultaneously.

33The nifty gas cap used on early 1965 Mustangs was a big hit with the scoundrels at Midnight Auto Supply. To prevent pilferage, a rugged braided steel tether cable was introduced as a no-cost running change.

Why did Ford add a tough braided steel retaining ring to Mustang’s sculpted gas cap? Fact No. 33 reveals the klepto-thwarting reason.

34Standard front bucket seats were a core ingredient in bolstering Mustang’s sporty image. But knowing that a certain segment of the market would balk at the reduced passenger capacity, Ford offered an optional front bench seat on convertibles and coupes. Priced at $24.42, the bench featured an uninterrupted bottom cushion and a fold-down center armrest. Roughly 2 percent of customers went for the bench.

What’s different about this 1965 Mustang’s front seat? See Fact No. 34 or get benched!

35The driver-side front bucket seat of early 1965 Mustangs mounted to a sliding track with 4½ inches of travel. Unfortunately, the passenger-side bucket seat simply bolted to the floor in a fixed best average location. Lanky rear seat passengers were relieved when Ford added the adjustable seat track to the shotgun seat for cars built after August 18, 1964.

36When Mustang was introduced, a certain percentage of the population hadn’t yet been sold on the desirability of seat belts. These diehards (perhaps not the best choice of wording) were offered a seatbelt delete credit of $10.76. Although the lap-only belts of the day could cause spinal cord separation, the greater issue of vehicle ejection was reduced by their presence.

37Early 1965 Mustangs used simple eyebolts and hinged clasps to anchor the seat belts to the floor. Similar to the Life Guard (the two-point, quick release seat belt option first seen in 1956 Ford), the anchors were designed for easy installation with a drill. Knowing that federally mandated seat belt laws were coming into play for 1966, Ford standardized the Mustang’s seat belt anchor points to accept stronger hex-head machine bolts. Safer three-point shoulder harnesses weren’t available until the 1968 model year.

38Carroll Shelby knew buyers of his GT350 Mustangs needed better protection than the stock 2-inch-wide seatbelts could provide. Thus, each of the 561 fastbacks shipped from Ford’s San Jose plant to Shelby’s Venice modification center were ordered with the seatbelt delete credit. Shelby used the Mustang’s federally mandated anchor points to install 3-inch racing belts made by Ray Brown Automotive (RBA). Late in the 1966 GT350 production run (2,378 built), Shelby switched from RBA belts to similar 3-inch units made by Impact. Each supplier stitched specific manufacturer identification labels into the webbing. Impact metal attachment hooks are slightly longer than those provided by RBA.

39Early 1965 Mustang hoods differ from later 1965 and 1966 stampings. They have a sharp flange near the headlamp edge that could cut skin if fingers groped for the latch release mechanism. Adding a small amount of metal to the pre-stamped hood skin so the area could be rolled under during manufacture eliminated this hazard.

40The special scooped hood used on the 1965 and 1966 GT350 was a constant headache for Shelby’s conversion team. The earliest hoods were all fiberglass with an 8-inch-diameter circular air-inlet hole that trapped pebbles precariously close to the carburetor inlet area. Within months, the air passage hole was enlarged to match the footprint of the centrally located scoop to eliminate the debris trap. Both of these fiberglass hoods were prone to warping. So, a third hood design replaced the fiberglass underhood brace with a standard Mustang steel brace. Fiberglass mat and resin held the dissimilar materials together. These hoods cost Shelby a hefty $65 each.

This fiberglass-on-steel GT350 hood was one of several configurations Shelby used as he battled quality control problems. Fact No. 40 has the full scoop.

41Another move intended to prevent warped hood skins was the elimination of the hood hinge lift-assist springs on the later 1965 and most 1966 GT350s. A simple metal prop rod held the hood open for service. Ironically, the kinder, gentler 1966 models were the largest recipients of this decidedly race-only touch.

42The first Mustang’s compact and sporty automatic transmission floor shift unit enjoyed a production run that lasted well into the 1980s aboard such varied Blue Oval machinery as the Pinto, Fairmont, Granada, and Bronco. Although Ford shuffled the material and color, the same basic ratchet mechanism and button-release T-handle has become a common sight atop the transmission tunnel. Precise and efficient, early Ford Mustang Funny Car drivers even used the unit to control their C6 automatics at race speeds nearing 200 mph.

43Ford took some lumps from magazine critics who noticed the poor fitment of Mustang’s grille and headlamp components. Exposed screw heads, misaligned panel intersections, and uneven gaps were the result of cost-cutting measures. Ford solved the issue by making the headlamp surround a simpler, one-piece item starting in 1967.

44As a mass-produced car, Mustang factory paint jobs often contained some runs, surface grit, and other blemishes. Sure, quality control inspectors did their best to sidetrack glaring offenses, but it’s a fact that a trained eye could pick out a flaw within a minute of looking. To get an idea of the conditions in the Ford spray booths that churned out nearly 700,000 1965 ’Stangs, Google the Martha Reeves and the Vandellas’ Nowhere to Run music video. Watch (stunned) as the trio dances through an active spray booth. The stunning detail is that none of the workers wears any sort of breathing protection whatsoever.

45Ford came very close to reviving the 1957–1959 retractable hardtop roof as a Mustang option for 1966. Styling studio archive photos depict a fully functional prototype built with company resources by Ford’s Ben Smith (the man behind the original Fairlane 500/Galaxie 500 Skyliner program). A disagreement between Smith and Ford terminated the project. Smith wanted the articulated steel roof panels and trunk cover to be manually operated while the Ford marketing team demanded a more elaborate electro-hydraulic lift apparatus. A total