Convertible Week wouldn’t be complete without at least a quick look at the Mustang, and this very fine example posted at the Cohort by LeSabertooth Tiger shows it off very well. It’s easy to see why America fell in love with the original Mustang; with its long hood, short rear deck and nicely chiseled lines it just made every other car look…ordinary. Yes, my headline is gratuitous, but it does underscore what the rest of the industry had to grapple with after the runaway success of the Mustang.
This ’66 Convertible is exceptionally well optioned. Whether that was all original, or someone restored it that way is of course unknown. But let’s just say it was not common to see one this loaded up, especially a convertible with air conditioning.
On the other hand, the original Mustang was such a huge hit, that affluent folks bought them too. It’s appeal crossed all socio-economic lines, something that would rarely if ever happen again to an American car.
As a quick comparison, consider that a ’67 Rambler Rogue convertible cost $2611, only $87 less than a Mustang convertible. The Mustang was one of the very few game changers.
Very nice indeed.
As an AMC fan I completely agree. If there was only $87 difference I would choose the Mustang.
These days with the market value of a Mustang being ten times the value of the Rambler I’d be more likely to go with the American in spite of the poor ROI.
Me 2, I’d rather have a car I can use and enjoy,rather than a “trailer queen” Too many have used the old car hobby as an “investment”. If i was more interested in ROI I’d play the stock market Cars are made for driving! Let the stocks sit around gathering dust an maybe value.
My first car was a somewhat scruffy ’65 Mustang convertible which was handed down to me in 1974. Maroon with a tan interior and white top, the car had the 200 six and three-on-the-floor stick with non-synchro first gear. It served me well for over four years, including a three-month jaunt all over the US and Mexico. The nice-looking featured Mustang has all the accessories that were missing from my car, with the exception of the (presumably) AM radio.
That’s an FM unit, quite likely a repro, since originals are rare as rare as lizard feathers. If you look closely, you can see the slide bar.
The repops are better anyway, as they use Pioneer Supertuners, are stereo, and the latest ones have Aux-in jacks.
Here’s a Ford Parts bulletin for an original.
Beautiful example–love the black over red with redlines. As to its appeal across socioeconomic lines, the closest analogue I can think of from modern times is the Prius. but that’s due more to the statement it makes than to the car’s inherent attributes.
You could also make a case for the F150 or Silverado/Sierra, but given the discrepancy between a V6 shortbed single cab base trim level and a full-dress crew cab 4×4 diesel cruiser, I don’t see it as really the same thing.
As good as the Mustang looked as a hardtop, it looked even better as a convertible with the top lowered.
A Gen I Mustang is at the top of my “Powerball” list. I have owned several later Mustangs (have a 2011 coupe now), and have driven and/or ridden in numerous 1965-66 Mustangs but have never owned one. Management and I have discussed purchasing one on several occasions but have never pulled the trigger. The cars we looked at were either restored to concours condition and thus unusable for street duty, or they needed more restoration work than I wanted to do. We’re still sort of looking and hope to run across “our car” one of these days. For those of us who were at or near driving age when the first Mustangs came out, these cars were like manna from heaven. The very idea of a small, fun to drive car, available at a reasonable price, was music to our ears.
Hang in there. I bought my first Mustang , a ’67 in 1971 as a well cared for used car. I owned it until 1994 when I sold it to finance a street rod project. That car and I went though a lot together. We did the street rod thing for a number of years but got tired of working on it. We drove it on some long trips and a lot of car shows, but it wasn’t much for running around town since it sat so low in the front and didn’t have any bumpers. We sold it and bought a much modified ’73 Challenger. It was fun for awhile but was a little twitchey to drive around town. We sold that one and found my dream car, the ’66 Mustang coupe that we now have. I like to drive my cars and not just look at them. I used the ’67 for everything from daily driver to drag racing, road rallys and car shows. The ’66 is a real fun car to have. I drive it probably 5 days a week in spring, summer and fall . I am also not afraid to get caught in the rain or haul things in the trunk. I would rate its condition as a nice driver. I occasionally even get a trophy at one of the few car shows I attend, but that is not why I bought it. The fact that it has factory air helps me drive it more, too.
I have loved Mustangs since I saw my first one as a 16 year old kid the day they came out. The first one I ever drove was a ’66 GT convertible with the Hi Po 289 that belonged to a friend of my brother. Altogether I have owned 6 Mustangs of various years and my daily driver is a 2009 coupe.
I noticed that the featured car has aftermarket gauges, which makes me wonder what really lurks under the hood.
As I said, hang in there. The right one will come along.
The rambler american is one of my all time favorites. The runaway success of the mustang does not change that.
I’ll take mine (probably not a convert in spite of the week) with a 258 and a floor shift please.
Why The Rambler American Rogue Didn’t Sell Well: it looked like a Rambler.
Why the Mustang did: It DIDN’T look like a Falcon.
Perfect summation.
I’d prefer the Coupe but it’s easy to see why these hit the bullseye .
My buddy mustered out of the Army in 1965 and bought a new Mustang flop top , his finances dictated he could have either the V-8 or a flop top so he drove home in a white / red 6 cylinder no frills one , he just sold it a couple years ago .
-Nate
Black with red interior, loaded up with everything. Perfect. The convertible would be a great car, but if it was a fastback version equipped like this one, that would be my favorite Mustang to own.
Not quite everything. It’s missing a Rally-Pac and disc brakes. I know if it was mine it would have those 2 things.
+1 on at least the disc brakes.
So good-looking, it defies its own ubiquity.
My first car was a 66 coupe, 289 and four speed bought in 1974 for 300 bucks. I probably could have bought a fastback or convert for a couple of hundred bucks more. Didn’t own another Mustang until 2007 when i bought a new one. Nice to look at but not as comfortable or convenient as we remember. I think that the current Miatas would kind of replicate the Mustang experience for younger folks. Still I drove my 70 w/o A/C in the 95 degree heat we had yesterday- And I liked it!
I see there are a few other old buggers here who, like I, remember when a first gen Mustang was a cheap old car. They were just as comfortable as any other small car of the time, with the looks quotent dialed up to 10.
Some others remember the “Night Stalker” TV series of 73-74? The main character had looser written all over him: rumpled bad suit, bad hat, and a 66 ragtop Mustang 6 with a manual tranny.
Yup, when I was looking for a car in 1977, beater Mustangs were everywhere. My third car was a high mile (103K was high miles for the day) 68 hardtop, 6/3 speed. A very presentable car that cost me $800. The real beaters were more like $400.
A very presentable car that cost me $800.
To put that in perspective, I gave $1,395 for a 67 Thunderbird with about 70K on it in 72. In 74, I gave a smidge under $2,000 for a 70 Cougar with only 24K on it I earned $1.75/hr working in a bowling alley.