I've got an allready done Mustang except for respray for $75,000.00.

I never said it was hard to swap the tranny and rear in addition to the engine I just said it had to be done, the entire drivetrain needs to be swapped, especially since you would want to go with a 4 speed and loose the 3 speed as well and that was in addition to the front springs having to be changed.

Then you will most likely want to do the front spindles since you will have 5 lugs in the rear.

This is all assuming he will get the HP bug and tweek the V8 some.

My buddy had a 6 cyl Mustang when I had my 68. I had a 302, long tube headers, Holly 4bbl, and a mild/medium cam, I would d-e-s-t-r-o-y my friends Mustang. I cannot imagine your car would keep up either. Maybe a bone stock 289 with an Auto tranny, maybe.

I am just offering an opinion based on what I see, not much has changed in the last 40 years, to this day the 6cyl models are not as popular as the GT models.

Oh I agree, the K code GT cars as about the best you can get for reasonable money from that era.

The spindle swap has become a lot easier lately, due to the readily available parts to mate the V8 tie rods to the 6 cyl ones.

All in all, the easier option is of course to just get the V8 to begin with, but sometimes, due to the unpopularity of the 6 cyl, you can find a nice body for a lot less $$ up front than a comparable V8 car.

Az911, your post shows ignorance. What makes you think I spent a bunch of money?

The frame rails on the early cars were to narrow to accomodate anything larger than the 302, so your upgrade choices were limited.

If there was ZERO rust, I might consider it as a daily driver. But its not worth upgrading.

I disagree hardDrive, you can fit a 351W in there, but nothing bigger.

The limitation is Windsor. You can but a 427 stroker but you cant use canted valve heads.

Just wait a few months when CA kills the pre-1974 smog exemption for older cars. People will be dumping those things left and right and prices will drop through the floor.

I'd hate to see what you guys think of a lowly 70T.:D

My first car was a 64 1/2 with the 260 V8. Guy lied, said it just needed valves, in the end the motor would had to have been sleeved and rebuilt from the ground up. Even though I had the money (worked 40 hour weeks during high school) my dad said to get rid of it. I lived and breathed Mustangs for 3 months while we were sorting this out. What a tragedy now that I look back at it, probably a $50K car today that I got for $500. Just needed carpets, and of course the motor.

Anyway, on this car, who cares if it's a lowly 6. if it's relatively rust-free, it will never lose it's value, and very easy/cheap to upgrade. and it's a very cool little car.

Have not heard this prior to here (also do not live in/near Calif.). Can you provide any details or fruition odds on this?

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/400235-another-california-senate-bill-repeal-emissions-exemption.html


Apparently the bill in question has been amended as of 4/9/08, but I haven't read the full text to see if it still contains an attempt to undermine the current, pre-1975 exemption or not (I'd be surprised if that was taken out).

Even if this bill doesn't repeal it, I sadly think it's only a matter of time before Kalifornia's fascist, citizen-hating legislature does so. It's just one more way to try and force people to keep spending, spending, spending that dollar to their buddies in the auto and insurance industries. . .

http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_1549&sess=CUR&house=B&sit e=sen

Some of you guys are approaching this all wrong. A '65 Mustang won't ever give most 911s a scare at the track, and most are not fast by modern standards. They're a car to cruise in, nothing more. They're not about canyon runs and track days. Granted, I wouldn't buy a muscle car without a V8, but a 6-cylinder Mustang would still be adequate for a cruise night or Sunday drive.

God points Matt, and they are super basic, and really easy to tinker with. I learned a lot with mine.

I had a 65 with a 260 V8 and later a 65 with the 200 I6. The smaller 6 was slow, but the 200 was pretty quick and handled like a dream. 120 brake HP and less than 2500 lbs stock is not too bad...and with a few cheap mods (a few hundred bucks)...respectable.

When I was 17, in 1971, my mom bought my two triplet sisters and me a 65 Mustang hardtop with a six and a three speed. It wasn't fast and would wheel hop like the dickens when you tried to drag race it (hah!). My two triplet sisters and my younger brother drove me to Knoxville, TN from Oak Ridge to get on a bus to go to Perris Island to join the USMC. They were driving back to Gatlinburg, TN where we had all worked for the summer. My sister Elizabeth's boyfriend was driving, probably too fast, and it was raining and he slid on a curve in Severville, TN and the left side of the car hit a bridge abutment (this was before they had guard rails to soften the blow, and guide the car off of the bridge abutment). The car broke in half at the "B" pillar on the driver's side and killed my sister Victoria instantly. Remarkably, my other triplet sister, my younger brother and the boy friend survived. The car was ripped in half with only the right side frame rail holding the front and rear of the car together.

Fun car, sorry, but it brought up an old memory.

My dad held the track record in his 289 1967 Coupe. Bone Stock.


http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y219/Jims5543/dads.jpg