1965 A code hardtop vs 1966 C code Fastback - which one to buy?

[raymondgho]

Hello,
In the next couple of weeks, I would like to buy either a 1965 A code hardtop (AHT) or a 1966 C code fastback (CFB).
The AHT (is an original manual but no AC) and CFB (was converted to manual with factory AC). They are otherwise similar in condition, colour and both engines, running gear etc. are reasonably stock.
The cost of the FB is 33% higher.
As I like both equally, yet considering, desirability, future resale and driving performance, I am unsure which one to buy?
I'd appreciate it if you have any opinion on this.
Cheers and thanks

[GEOFF289]

If they are mechanically comparable in terms of spec and condition there shouldn't really be any difference in driving performance so you could probably leave that criterion out. The caveat to this is that if the CFB was originally an auto and they left the diff ratio the same (probably 2.80) when converting to manual the original manual AHT is likely to have a lower diff and this combined with the inherent slippage in a C4 auto will make the latter more responsive. A $33K price difference would pay for a lot of diff ratio changes.

FB's are obviously rarer as they made way less of them so the simple supply and demand equation suggest they will command better resale, but I reckon the $33k price difference is pushing the envelope quite a bit. Being a C code and no longer original adds to this view, as does the fact that A codes are also rarer than C codes regardless of body type.

Desirability, while linked to resale value, is really in the eye of the beholder. Do you like the FB $33K more than the HT?

If it was me I'd get the AHT and spend a bit of the price difference improving it with reversible mods. You could take the A code engine out and store it and put a more powerful crate or bespoke engine in it and still have a lot of money left in your pocket.

[gbader]

Its a question that has been asked for over 50 years and only you can answer (and there is no right/wrong answer)

Neither of these are particularly rare/special outside of being the coolest vintage car you can get - personally I would take a FB everyday but nothing wrong with a coupe

Comes down to $ vs what you want - if you are just wanting a cool vintage car, one you can play with (do up, customise, take the fam for a cruise, fit full size humans in the back) then the coupe will tick all those boxes and from a logical point of view is best bang for buck.

If you are specifically after a mustang then you will have other drivers as well - want the car that "changed the world" with 1m sales in the first year or so (then coupe), want the shape that led to the GT350, then FB. For what it’s worth, most people new to Mustang start with a coupe, then work their way up the food chain over time if/when the bug bites

[AussiePhil]

Hey Raymond,
Without a doubt Fastback!

Cheers Phil.

[raymondgho]

Thanks, everyone, for your thoughts. It will help decide which one to get in the next few days/week.
I'm leaning more towards the HT because of its an A code and its originality (trim and engine), and I love how the rear window winds down and gives you that big opening.
But I acknowledge the FB shape is more desirable as you see less of those on the road, and I see it as a more sporty presence.
A good point was made about how much of a "Mustang" enthusiast I am; I don't think I am that much as $$$ is a significant consideration.
I did look at a K code FB, which is currently available in Newcastle (I'm in Brisbane), but there is too much work to do on it for me, yet that seems close to the top of the line and possibly worth it for an enthusiast.
Thanks again.

[GEOFF289]

Short of a Shelby a K code FB is kind of the pinnacle.

[AussiePhil]

Short of a Shelby a K code FB is kind of the pinnacle.

Yes, I’d agree with Geoff.

65 and 66 fastbacks are my preference!

Perfect for cruising around!

Not much good for back seat passengers with the sun?

Cheers Phil.

[pmb0186]

FB is a better investment

[Gallop]

I have a 66 Coupe (c code auto) and a 65 GT Fastback (4sp, pony interior, A/C).

I know you asked about ‘desirability, future resale and driving performance’ but if it was me, I would buy the one that has the least amount of rust, best panel gaps/fitment, best paint. Have you checked the fresh air vents for rust?

If the bodies are equal in their quaility, the choice is difficult. My Fastback is fun to drive, the body shape is great, the interior is cool with the blue/white pony trim and console. However, when I jump into the coupe, it is beautiful in its simplicity - standard black interior, no console, no A/C, no fancy back seat or rear window. The auto is fun also - kick it down, the tail digs in, the exhaust note is loud.

I've owned the coupe for 23 years and the fastaback for 8 - so I worked my way up the food chain.

[raymondgho]

Thanks very much, good advice. I'm flying down to Sydney tomorrow to inspect the AHT and probably next week to Melbourne to check the CFB. So I will make sure I'll do my best to look for those areas.
Cheers

[AussiePhil]

Thanks, everyone, for your thoughts. It will help decide which one to get in the next few days/week.
I'm leaning more towards the HT because of its an A code and its originality (trim and engine), and I love how the rear window winds down and gives you that big opening.
But I acknowledge the FB shape is more desirable as you see less of those on the road, and I see it as a more sporty presence.
A good point was made about how much of a "Mustang" enthusiast I am; I don't think I am that much as $$$ is a significant consideration.
I did look at a K code FB, which is currently available in Newcastle (I'm in Brisbane), but there is too much work to do on it for me, yet that seems close to the top of the line and possibly worth it for an enthusiast.
Thanks again.

Hey, just a YouTube short about the K code.

https://youtube.com/shorts/v5-RoZt5x9Y?si=LWAINj699KIKZfRJ

Cheers Phil.