Call it the CC Correlation Effect. Having just decided to honor the Barracudas giant fastback, I paid the Cohort a visit, and what is there to greet me? A 1965 Mustang Fastback 2+2, posted by our ace Cohort William Rubano. It’s 1964 all over again: the Barracuda beat the Mustang notchback coupe to the market by 16 days, but the Mustang then utterly creamed it in sales. But as if that wasn’t enough, by the fall of 1964, Ford saw fit to throw a fastback Mustang into the corral. Take that, Barracuda!
Unlike the giant fish-bowl on the Barracuda, Ford went about it quite differently. Inspired by the Ford GT-40, the Mustang’s fastback wasn’t just crudely grafted on like the Barracuda, Marlin and Charger, but had a distinct roof line that started heading downhill even before the end of the single side window. It really transformed the Mustang, making the 2+2 look dramatically more like a genuine sports car than the formal coupe. The fastback also ended early, leaving room for a decent trunk opening.
But the close-coupled roof did reduce rear seat headroom, and the 2+2 was aptly named. The result was that it was much less likely to be bought by suburban Moms and such. The 2+2 exuded manly vibes, and from my recollection, was much less likely to be powered by the Falcon six, which found its way into a very large percentage of coupes.
And all of this macho-ness was of course greatly enhanced by the legendary Shelby GT-350.
From what little I can see from this one’s engine compartment, it appears to have been modified and updated some. Most likely it had the 200 or 225 hp 289 originally. Seeing the distinctive “High Performance 289” badge on the front fender of a Mustang back than was not common, but the distinctive rumble of that solid-lifter K-Code motor, rated at 271 (gross) hp, was music to the ears.
The excessive commonness of the Mustang coupe really dulled my youthful interest within a short time of its arrival, but the 2+2 was another matter. I lusted for a K-Code Fastback 2+2 then, and I could still get those same juices flowing again today, if I heard its stallion call now.
Unlike the Barracuda the Mustang looked equally good as a coupe,fastback or convertible.Good looking as the Barracuda was I’d have a Mustang instead.The Mustang didn’t show it’s Falcon ancestry but the Barracuda looked like a Valiant in drag.
My Dad always wanted a fastback as a companion to his convertible. He was going to restore the convertible to concurs quality and hot rod the fastback.
I personally have wondered if anyone has taken the time to prove whether the fastback versions of popular coupes were actually slipperier from an aerodynamic standpoint.
A couple of fastback coupes ply the roads here, I like em, I see far more early Mustangs than early Falcons here now than when they were current mostly recent imports,
JPC Flashback. When these were new, the son of the guy who owned the company my Dad worked for owned a dark green one of these. Every now and then, he would need to borrow the company station wagon that Dad drove, and Dad would come home with a Mustang 2+2 for the weekend.
It was funny watching my father in that car, as I was convinced that he could not possibly be cool enough to drive this car with the 4 speed. Of course, he managed it quite fine. Even at the age of 6 or 7, that back seat felt claustrophobic (the black interior didn’t help here), but it was still cool as Hell, and I couldn’t get enough of it.
Agreed, that 289 had a sweet, sweet exhaust note. I also agree that you didn’t see many women or older folks driving the 2+2. It is funny that by 1969-70, the Mustang finally reached Barracuda-land where the fastback was the only really attractive car in the line, and the coupe and convertible were OK but not fabulous.
Its all about the styling. This car just looks cool… no doubt. The ‘Cuda was just more awkward. The later Barracuda was much better styled but still has kind of a wimpy “face”, the Mustangs just got more aggressive as they aged, well until 1970 anyways and the dark ages set in.
I just love this car, love everything about it. I don’t even want the GT350, just the plain black one is perfect. Someday I will have one parked next to a classic 911 in my garage, which is another ageless classic to me.
Wonder how this Mustang got here all the way from New York?
A nice Mustang for sure, but it can do without the hood scoop. The Magnum 500 wheels (and radial tires) are a nice addition to early mustangs for a late 60’s period correct modification. I personally think that the 289 hi po is one of the better sounding engines made. And its not hard to get up over the one horsepower per cubic inch in any ford small block if you swap out the restrictive ford cylinder heads for some aftermarket racing heads.
Such a beautiful machine. Not a Shelby fan, a Vintage Burgundy console-equipped 289 fastback with the full wheelcovers would be euphoric.
Can I just say it? I’ve never liked these. The original notchback was king to me, and these were just too oddly styled.
I prefer the coupe and convertible from the 1st generation but the fastback was the best looker of the next generation Mustangs.I could very easily put up with the feature car though
You know, I am a Mustang fan, and I think I’m with you. I have owned a couple of 65’s and a 67 at different times. I still own a 65. All have been coupes, and I think I have grown to like the lines of the coupe better, at least up to 69. It may be that because I haven’t had a fastback that my opinion has changed, but I think the coupe/notchback look is cleaner on the early Mustangs.
Now if someone gave me this fastback, I wouldn’t refuse it. 🙂
The fastback roofline is just beautiful.