Tuesday, January 13, 2015

10k: Gold Fever: 1964 Ford Mustang

The first generation Ford Mustang notchback (coupe) has never been an expensive car to own.  When new, it was a sporty alternative to the boring economy cars from GM/Chrysler and offered optional V8 power, disc brakes, and a chance to have fun on your daily drive...and 50 years later...it is still a cheap way to have fun.  Find this 1964 Ford Mustang coupe offered here on craigslist for $12,000 in Sunnyvale, CA. Tip from Kaibeezy.

This 64 and 1/2 coupe is one of the 92,000 units built in the first few months of 1964 Mustang production (sold as 1965 model year cars).  It was assembled at the San Jose plant, sold in Palo Alto and has lived in California for its entire life.  The black plates are not original black plates, but the 2HVS prefix indicates 1987 era white plates that have been painted black or replaced from various "plate" sellers -- not entirely legal per the CA DMV, but most Cali 5-0 don't know or don't care.

The door tag indicates that this Mustang left the factory on Nov 25, 1964 with a C-code 289 2-bbl V8 with code I Champagne Beige Metallic paint over Black Crinkle Vinyl interior with a C4 automatic and 2.80:1 open rear axle.  The C-code V8 was rated from the factory at 200 horsepower andt should last another 50 years if properly maintained. 

The interior carpet is ghastly -- not sure if that is an artifact of the photograph, faded, or just plain nasty.  A set of black carpets would do a lot of make the inside look nice.  

The only problem with this car is the fresh paint...but if the job was done correctly, it doesn't look like a bad deal.  See a better way to have a nice classic? tips@dailyturismo.com


  1. That front end shot looks seriously crooked.

  2. It's technically a '65 model year mustang, but often called a 64 1/2 due to early production. There was no 64 Mustang.

    The November '64 build would not qualify as 64 1/2, in any case, so this is a regular '65. Note that it has an alternator, as opposed to a generator - that's one way to tell. Anyone thinking about a classic Ford of any type should get a Marti report to confirm the precise build, date, etc.

    1. I do not believe Marti reports cover anything before 1967.

    2. Doh! I think you're right. Still, there are plenty of VIN and door plate decoders to get at the basics.

  3. They weren't - aren't - particularly nice cars to drive, the seats suck, the steering sucks, if drum brakes they suck too. This one's a V8 so it'll get out of its own way, but the sixes won't outrun that Subaru 360 that got the Where's Waldo treatment in one of the earlier listings.

    All those things can be fixed, but you'll sacrifice some originality doing so.

    1. I actually have a 65 mustang with a 6 (and what used to be a 3spd, now a T5). It doesnt haul ass but definitely keeps up with traffic and gets ~23mpg freeway when I'm not being an idiot.


Commenting Commandments:
I. Thou Shalt Not write anything your mother would not appreciate reading.
II. Thou Shalt Not post as anonymous unless you are posting from mobile and have technical issues. Use name/url when posting and pick something Urazmus B Jokin, Ben Dover. Sir Edmund Hillary Clint Eastwood...it don't matter. Just pick a nom de plume and stick with it.
III. Honor thy own links by using <a href ="http://www.linkgoeshere"> description of your link </a>
IV. Remember the formatting tricks <i>italics</i> and <b> bold </b>
V. Thou Shalt Not commit spam.
VI. To embed images: use [image src="http://www.IMAGE_LINK.com" width="400px"/]. Limit images to no wider than 400 pixels in width. No more than one image per comment please.