So I’m building a car. It’s a 65 mustang that will be modified A LOT. I’ve been planning on going with a 300 straight six, just to be unique, but the thought of passing up a small block V8 makes my spider-sense tingle for some reason. Car guys (and girls!): if you saw my car and asked what I had in it, and I said “a 300 straight six”, would you laugh and ridicule me, or say “wow, that’s cool. You, sir, are truly a trendsetter.”
?
Depends!
How trick is it?
If it were stock, it wouldn’t impress me much. On the other hand if it were a fire-breathing monster of a 300 straight six, that would be righteous.
Is Clifford Research (their motto: “6=8”) still in business? You should give them a buzz; they had gobs of six-cylinder stuff.
Hopefully, you aren’t talking about that loser 6-cyl that Ford had for a while with the intake manifold cast one-piece with the head. Be darned hard to modify that sucker…
One of the guys who used to be in the model car club had a six in his Mustang. He’d taken a foundry course and cast his own valve cover with Cobra lettering and fins. Looked bitchin’.
yes, clifford is still around, I’m sure I’ll be giving them a buzz. I’ll be going with the usual stuff, 4bbl, dual/headers, beyond that I’m undecided. I’m thinking turbo, but that might change. Oh, btw, it will end up looking something like this, more or less.
I seem to recall a pretty hot Pontiac 6-banger (inline-6) setup. It had an overhead cam and came with a 4 bbl carb. The typical six cylinder engine is not thought to have much zip primarily because sixes tend to come stock with very boring lo-perf intake and valve-train setup, and the aftermarket concentrates on the eights.
I know! But the 300 has so much torque that fzzz bbllb lkkkl… uhhhhh <drool>
In the words (I think) of Hunter S. Thompson, “It’s still not wierd enough out there.” If you like it, then build it. If anyone complains, tell them that you were thinking about putting a small block Chevy into a hot rod, but it had been done before, and walk off while they’re thinking that one over.
Also, check out inliners.org.
Personally, I’ve always wanted to put three sidedraft Webers on a six in an IR setup, just because. The car doesn’t matter; I just like the idea (hey, everyone has a dream…)
Go for it. I’m a V8 man myself, but there’s a certain mystique to the I6. The Ford 300 is one of the best sixes out there, according to those in the know.
Useless historical fact: NASCAR was dominated from 1951-1954 by the Hudson Hornet. Hornets won 85 races in 3 seasons. The defining characteristic of the Hornet? A 308 cid flathead inline six.
As a former '65 Mustang GT convertible owner, and member of a family that owned over a dozen Mustangs, yes, I am offended. Go find a standard 289 V8 and bore it out to 302, add a carb upgrade and assorted hi performance mods, and then you’ll have something vaguely resembling a Boss 302. But my GT could still smoke a Boss 302, I could even smoke a 351 Mach 1…
I should also warn you, the early Mustangs are now gaining a reputation somewhat like the Pinto for fire hazards in rear-end crashes. Many Mustang restorers consider it essential to weld a large metal plate inside the trunk behind the rear seat, to prevent fuel from entering the passenger compartment in a collision. For your own safety, you really should consider either sealing off the trunk from the cabin, or else replace the drop-in fuel tank with an explosion-proof tank.
I’ve also got a '69, and the metal cabin sealer offer is on the list for that one, will most likely go on the '65 also.
Thanks people, I’m going for it.
As long as we’re on the subject, I’ve got a similar question.
My long-term goal is a '65 or '66 Mustang fastback generally set up to look bone stock (although I’m not above adding the GT options and such) but modified to give much better performance in nearly every sense of the word.
Now as much as possible I’d like to limit the mods to things that could be relatively easily changed back if I wanted to go back to completely stock. So swapping out heads, for example, is fine, but deciding I want to shorten the whole car 6 inches is not.
The problem is I have two changes I’d like to make that conflict with the goal of easily reversible mods. The first is adding subframe connectors. I think they’re a good idea, but for best results they should be welded in from what I’ve heard. Are you offended by such things?
The second change is perhaps even bigger. A limitation of the 65/66 Mustangs are the relatively small wheel wells. I’m seriously considering tubbing them so I can go with bigger rubber in the back - not outrageous, but more than you can get with the stock setup. How do you feel about this?
If it matters at all I’ll be looking for a pretty thouroughly trashed car to start with - there’s no way I’d start cutting up a pristine factory GT, but I’d feel pretty good about rescuing an early 'stang from gradually rotting into the ground.
And of course I’ll be going with a V8! (Although a built-up 6 sounds interesting)
Venkman, the only difference between a GT and a regular 65/66 is the high-compression 289 engine and manifold. Oh yeah, and the GTs have racing stripes on the sides instead of a chrome trim. So if you are lucky enough to find a working hi-po 289, you’ll basically be taking it out of a GT which is kinda a stupid thing, might as well leave it in the car and restore that one.
The '65 GT convertible I rebuilt came with a jacked up rear end and big tires, it looked so incredibly stupid that it was the first thing I set back to stock.
But… I have the perfect car project for you. I have an old '65 Cuda that I’m dying to sell. It has a 318 V8 and a Torqueflite transmission, both rebuilt, replaced suspension and brakes (with lifetime warranty from Midas), a total of $6500 invested, but I’d sacrifice it for $1500. But the interior is thrashed. I don’t have the money to restore it, the body and mechanicals are all in great shape, it’s a california car so virtually no rust, it just needs someone who loves old Mopars. It was Darryl Shelby’s last project for Mopar, it was the prototype for the Mustang Fastback. Back when I was driving it, I could burn rubber up and down the street, it can drive faster than I can safely control it (I recommend you add an “S-Kit” which is front disc brakes). Now it’s just sitting in my yard, but the last time I fired it up, it started up on the first turn of the key.
Actually there’s a bit more to it than that. In 65/66 Ford offered three varieties of the 289. In order of HP produced they are the C, A, and K-code engines (and there was a D code as well but I think that was only available in the 64-1/2 cars). C-code engines are by far the most common and were the baseline 289. I know you could get an A-code without getting the GT package, and I think (but am not sure) you could get the K-code without the GT package as well. The K-code is the one generally referred to as the “hi-po” engine, rated at 271 hp.
K-codes are rare and highly desirable, and if I did find one that I could afford I’d leave it absolutely as-is or restore it to completely stock condition. In fact, I’d probably leave an A-code alone as well. But I have no qualms about doing some work on a C-code.
And there’s more to the GT package as well. It came with either an A or K-code engine, fog lamps in the front, special gas cap, dual exhaust through the rear valance, front disk brakes, the 5-dial instrument cluster (in '65, all 66’s have that), and an upgraded suspension plus the GT stripe and badge on the side. If I found a true GT I’d probably leave it alone as well, or at least restrict myself to truly bolt-on mods that could be changed back out with an absolute minimum of fuss.
The 'Cuda sounds very cool, and a bargain to boot, but it’s got to be a Mustang. Don’t ask me why, that decision was made long ago by some non-rational part of my brain.
That’s funny, the same part of my brain decided mustang over cuda long ago as well.
Damn brain.
Ah, you’re right Venkman, I forgot about the modified grille package with fog lamps. But the dual exhaust is sorta implied by the modified manifold I mentioned. I forgot about the disc brakes (front only, BTW). Been a long time since my old GT died. But I don’t recall any special suspension components, I spent a lot of time under that car and it was just the same as all the other Mustangs I owned and cannibalized for parts.
But seriously, someone PLEASE buy my cuda. It IS a mustang fastback, it just happens to have been built by Plymouth. And it has a bigger stock engine than any mustang built until years later.
BTW, I noticed the prices on mustangs have been dropping radically. I saw a beautifully restored 68 convertible with a standard 289 on display in a local airport (!!) with a pricetag of a mere $14k. My mom sold her 68 convertible with a 302, not restored but in good shape, for $22k back in the mid 80s, and the prices were going up and up.
Heh, I’m picking up this 65 for 300 bucks. It’s sitting out in a field. It almost runs, too.
The suspension differences on the GT’s aren’t all that obvious - faster steering ratio, larger diameter front stabilizer bar, increased rate front and rear springs, and larger front and rear shocks. So nothing that would stand out if you weren’t really looking for it, and maybe not even then.
And I’m much encouraged by prices coming down. Unless you’re looking for some particular rare combination you can pick up some very nice classic Mustangs for very reasonable prices. Of course the particular combo I lust after is rare - a 65/66 fastback K-code GT with the deluxe “pony” interior. I’ve seen a grand total of ONE of these that was really built that way, and the owner just was not selling. If anybody knows of one of these for a reasonable price, please let me know! Heck, I’m not picky, I’d settle for a convertible if you know of one.
A question for you car guys - do you do your own body work, and if so where did you learn how? Anything I can afford is probably going to need some body work and I’d love to do it myself.
I learned by just trying it with a friend of mine on an 85 ford pickup. It wasn’t a priority, and we weren’t really concerned if we messed it up. That experience will certainly come in handy on this car…
You might want to check community colleges. A lot of them have classes designed just for people who arn’t going to make it a profession. A couple weeks of basic instruction, then drive the car up and start working on it. The classes usually arn’t too expensive, mostly materials that you are going to need anyway. Plus you get the instructor to tell you how to do things the right way, and give advice, and you get to access to proper tools that would cost thousands otherwise.