After we said goodbye to the ’65 Ranchero when it crossed the auction block in Palm Springs, there was an obvious empty space in our Riverside County, California garage. What to fill it with? Unlike most of my fellow CC contributors, whose automotive interests and hobby-car purchases are varied and eclectic, making for often-unexpected subject material, my classic-car tastes are quite predictable.
As a first step in the process, I usually turned to the “Ford 1954-Up” section of my print issue of Hemmings Motor News, or to narrow the search down even further, the “Mustang” pages. In the early “aughts” a reader could spend hours perusing those pages in search of one’s next perfect classic. Sometimes I’d find myself paging through the Mercurys offered for sale, to relive history with my first car, the ’66 Caliente convertible memorialized in one of my earliest CC posts.
Back in the day, Hemmings was literally “the bible of the old-car hobby.” Like the real thing, reading it could bring enlightenment. (Source: www.ebay.com)
I supplemented that Hemmings research with frequent visits to a major online auction site (which, for purposes of this post, will remain nameless). The ability to scroll through tens, if not hundreds of classic-car candidates proved intoxicating back then, to say the least. The search eventually led to a potentially desirable purchase, a ’67 Mustang fastback (a model year and body style I had always admired) finished in Vintage Burgundy, one of my preferred classic-Mustang exterior colors.
Not mine, but the same color. This view really shows off the near-perfect execution of the ’67s fastback bodystyle. (Source: www.kuyothkustoms.com)
Additionally, the 390 V8 in this Mustang had been treated to a tri-power setup. The under-hood views posted by the seller only hinted at the complexity of the triple carburetors and the difficulty in keeping them finely tuned (the latter of which I was blissfully unaware as I scanned the photos in the listing). The breathed-on 390 sent its power to the rear wheels via a C6 Cruise-o-Matic transmission but lacked Ford’s Traction-Lok (positraction) rear end.
Its black bucket-seat interior included optional décor group items, such as bright-finished instrument panel and door trim panel accents, and it also featured relatively rare options: the overhead console with map lights and the “Convenience Group,” telltales which informed the driver of low fuel, door ajar, parking brake, and seat belt status.
The main elements of the Interior Decor Group are seen here. My ’67 added the Convenience Control Panel warning tell-tales just above the center console. (Source: www.pinterest.com)
The seller lived in Kansas, so after a few detailed phone conversations, I flew out to inspect the Mustang, armed with a cashier’s check for slightly less than the “buy it now” amount shown in his ad. After a closer look, the car seemed and sounded as described. As Vintage Burgundy mist briefly clouded my vision, the cashier’s check changed hands, and I arranged for the Mustang’s enclosed transport back to California.
After the car arrived, I addressed a few minor fixes and began to accustom myself to its quirks, one of which was the starting procedure. The tri-power carbs were notoriously cold-blooded. Its manual choke administered an appropriately rich initial mixture, but the Mustang required a good five minutes of warm-up time before smooth take-off acceleration could be achieved.
Ford’s complex Tri-Power carburetion setup. (Source: www.jalopyjournal.com/triggerman)
In addition, the Mustang’s woolly and uncommunicative power steering contrasted sharply with the pedal effort required for its non-boosted power brakes. The Toploader’s shifter was noticeably notchier than the one in the Tiger, even after adjusting the shift rods and making other tweaks. I lived with those quirks for a while, taking the car on the occasional weekday commute and attending local car shows. Brief weekend ice cream runs sufficed when there were no other events on the calendar.
The ’67 occupied its garage space for about eighteen months until one day I received a surprise unsolicited offer for slightly more than I had paid for it. Flying in the face of my usual “buy high, sell low” classic-car ownership modus operandi, I accepted, and the car went on its way to a new owner.
Its replacement was, unsurprisingly, another Mustang, this time a ’66 GT hardtop equipped with a 2xx-HP “A-code” 289 V8, the requisite four-speed stick, and no power assists whatsoever. Found in a local “cars-for-sale” publication at our local supermarket, its owner lived just a few miles away from us. This time, an extended test drive on surface streets as well as a brief freeway run, showed the car to be tight and responsive. As the seller’s asking price was well below what I received for the ’67, making the deal was comparatively painless, and soon the Ivy Green ’66 GT joined the Tiger in our garage.
The ’66 GT at Ford Motor Company’s Premier Automotive Group (PAG) HQ in Irvine, California.
As it happened, one of my Volvo colleagues had just taken delivery of a 2008 Bullitt Mustang, so we naturally set up a series of comparison shots on the top level of the Premier Automotive Group parking garage in Irvine. The ’66 also made periodic appearances at the Saturday-morning Cars and Coffee events then held on the PAG campus, where it elicited its share of approving comments, despite being parked in the vicinity of numerous hot rods, customs, and hypercars of various descriptions.
Side by side in Irvine. The ’08 Bullitt’s base MSRP was $34,860, a far cry from my ’66 GT, which cost about $3K when new.
Strangely enough, I enjoyed driving the ’66 GT much more than the fastback that had preceded it. It was tighter and quieter on the road, and its hard-top styling provided much better outward visibility than the ’67, also making each drive more pleasant. As a result, we held onto it for several years. Aside from normal maintenance items, its only unscheduled repair was the replacement of a piece of windshield trim which separated itself from the car at freeway speed one day, after having been poorly installed.
In our SoCal driveway. I’m nonchalantly trying to hold the errant windshield trim in place for the photo.
While one of these cars qualify as a COAL due to its comparatively short tenure with us in Southern California, both vehicles kept the Mustang flame alive and burning, especially in the case of the ’66 GT. That’s certainly one I’d like to have back today.
These two cars may be my favorite colors on vintage Mustangs. Although there is much to love about that 67, I think the 66 would be my choice too, if only because of the lighter engine. Very nice!
Lovely ponies! Something so right and pure about the 1st ’64-66 iteration. We almost bought a flame red ’65 2+2 as our first car in Dec of 1970, but opted instead for a ’67 Volvo 122s, which we subsequently drove for the following 10 years, ultimately vindicating that choice. However in my heart-of-hearts I really had wanted the red ‘stang fastback coupe but in the end I was rightly over-ruled. However when the retro Mustang came out in ’05, SWMBO decided it was time for a red convertible, which she got 2 years later and still has. It turns out she was right both times… HWHL!
Nice rigs! I too love the colors. I would have pulled the 6V setup(correct terminology in Ford speak) put it on the shelf, a put a single 4bbl on it just before selling it.
I’ll echo some of the other’s sentiments here… both of these colors are fantastic for vintage Mustangs.
While the ‘67 is one of my favorites, I can see how that ‘66 would be easier to live with than its finicky stablemate.
One thing I like about the ‘67 is its dashboard. This is clearly the inspiration for the dashboard of my 2007 Mustang, right down to the font on the guages…
Rick,
I have to admit that I’ve been idly looking at the S197-generation Mustangs, in particular the ’05-’09 model years. I think they’re the most enduring example of the retro styling that was so much in vogue for awhile in the “aughts”.
My Dad had a 2014, and you could already see them moving away from the retro styling by then. The 2010-2012 departed from the retro styling also, but this whole generation did retro right, in my humble, and likely somewhat biased, opinion.
One thing I thought was cool and showed this attention to the retro details was what they did with the Boss Mustangs. In 1969 and 1970, Ford went with the c-stripe on the side in ‘69 to going up and over the hood with the stripe on the ‘70. And while that “sub-generation” of the first generation Mustangs was basically the same, they were rather different looking.
Ford did the same thing with the Boss Mustangs bridging 2012 and 2013, with the c-stripe on the ‘12, and going up and over the hood on the ‘13. Again, same car, but a noticeably different look between the two model years.
The 2008 Shelby GT-500KR comes to mind as well… wasn’t the original exactly 40 years prior (1968)?
I could go on, but you get the idea. I’ll leave you with this image, a close-up of my speedometer/odometer when I reached the milestone of 1 light second last February. That font is a dead ringer for the 1967’s speedometer font. (Sorry for the sideways image… if you click on it, it goes portrait.)
What is the fastest you drove each of these? Would they have gone faster or did you run them as fast as they would go?
Given the SoCal traffic, I never got anywhere close to their top speed potential. I will only admit to 90-MPH or so, since I think the statute of limitations expired long ago.
Great looking cars, Stephen! I now feel much better about your decision to sell the Swedish Mustang. 😉
I’m a bit confused.
In your pre-purchase description of the burgundy Fastback you said; “The breathed-on 390 sent its power to the rear wheels via a C6 Cruise-o-Matic transmission”.
Post purchase. “The Toploader’s shifter was noticeably notchier than the one in the Tiger, even after adjusting the shift rods and making other tweaks.”
Ford made a top loader C6?
Beautiful car, that was probably my all-time favorite Mustang body.
Of course, Ford’s Toploaders were all manual transmissions. The 390 was equipped with a C6 automatic. My editing error. (I was thinking of yet another Mustang which never made it into one of my CC posts.) Good eye, thanks!
a ’66 GT hardtop equipped with a 2xx-HP “A-code” 289 V8,
That would be 225 hp.
Very sweet ’66. Like the styling of the ’67 but not with the heavy 390.
Two great classic Mustangs, my first car was a ’66 V8 coupe with four speed. The 67’s were very sharp looking, but even road testers of the day complained about the poor outward vision. I imagine that modern day fans of multi carb set ups have never driven them, I suspect that they would be a bit disappointed by the reality of their quirks. Early Mustangs make great collector cars, but I’m happy with my retro styled ’06.
Nice, dark green is a great Mustang color.
Lovely interior on the ’67 ! .
I’ve yet to won a Mustang, I like the earlier notch back coupes the best .
-Nate
By the way ;
Carburetors _do_not_ ‘go out of adjustment ! .
Once properly set up and adjusted / dialed in they only need clean filters .
Sadly the popping they do when there’s an _ignition_ fault means most folks immediately begin fooling with them and screw up the balancing making things worse .
-Nate
+1 exactly
Much more a fan of European cars than domestic, but there’s just something about early Mustangs. Just this writeup almost has me looking at Craigslist. Yeah I know, it’s just a Falcon under the skin, but turned into a bombshell with a pretty dress on.
289s and even 302s didn’t really compare to Chevy 327s, but with all the crate motors available these days you can pretty much buy as much HP as you want.