1965/66 vs 1967/68

Mustang Australia

Author Topic: 1965/66 vs 1967/68  (Read 8816 times)

Offline 1965 R

  • Stallion
  • **
  • Posts: 71
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« on: February 18, 2010, 01:28:19 pm »
This will be a hard question to answer as there are many variables but

How does the price of a 65/66 fastback compare to a 67/68 fastback here in Aust. I thought the 65/66 would be worth a little more but looking at cars for sale it seems the 67 are much less common and there is a lot of 66's for sale.

Also I didnt look at coupes just fastbacks

 It might just be the day and place I looked but what are your thoughts???????;w

Offline soc123_au

  • Blue Printed
  • ****
  • Posts: 1498
  • Location: Penrith
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #1 on: February 18, 2010, 01:41:52 pm »
My opinion based on what I see offered for sale is that a 65/66FB in mint original condition is worth more than an equivelent 67/68. But a dunger 67/68 pulls more than a dunger 65/66. Start doing mods & the value of the mods skew the value depending on what & how well it has been done. This is for a garden variety C code, start talking K codes, S codes etc & its harder as a 67/68 S code is a different animal to a 65/66 K code & so on. Also most of the good cars arent for sale, the vast majority of the market are polished turds so that also makes hard to get a good handle on values.

Offline Foresight

  • Blue Printed
  • ****
  • Posts: 1763
  • Captain Crash
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #2 on: February 18, 2010, 01:53:00 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by soc123_au
My opinion based on what I see offered for sale is that a 65/66FB in mint original condition is worth more than an equivelent 67/68. But a dunger 67/68 pulls more than a dunger 65/66. Start doing mods & the value of the mods skew the value depending on what & how well it has been done.  


agree on that

The dunger difference is probably due to the cheapy 67s being grabbed for eleanor/shelby clones.

Offline rickchampion

  • Blue Printed
  • ****
  • Posts: 1021
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #3 on: February 18, 2010, 02:26:35 pm »
67s look better heheheh

Offline hybrid

  • Blue Printed
  • ****
  • Posts: 1234
  • Account Suspended By Owners Request
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #4 on: February 18, 2010, 02:37:17 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by rickchampion
67s look better heheheh


Where's that can of worms?
- Stupid questions are better than stupid mistakes.
- Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away, barefoot, and you've got his shoes.

Offline Shermatt

  • Top Streeter
  • ******
  • Posts: 3529
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #5 on: February 18, 2010, 02:42:06 pm »
67 68 fastbacks will win hands down in resale in the USA.. I cant find enough of them and when you do...Bend over

If you own one and your trying to sell it here...expect a 10000 emails by lunch and a flat battery by 11am

I like the shape of the 65 66 better but the 67 68 brings the dollars quick....very good investment in my opinion

Im pretty sure that the 65 66 was the biggest year for FORD so the numbers of fastbacks are a plenty compared to 67 68...dont hold me to that but Im pretty certain without grabbing a book

Offline Foresight

  • Blue Printed
  • ****
  • Posts: 1763
  • Captain Crash
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #6 on: February 18, 2010, 02:42:33 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by rickchampion
67s look better heheheh


Have to disagree rick
each era has its own visual appeal

65-66 class
66-67 style
69-70 muscle

There is obviously different models within those years that overlap but generally thats how i personally see it

Offline tim_morrison82

  • Blue Printed
  • ****
  • Posts: 1434
    • http://s806.photobucket.com/home/tim_morrison82/allalbums
  • Location: Perth
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #7 on: February 18, 2010, 02:44:51 pm »
have we completely forgotten the 68 here?

i do like the earlier mustangs for their vintage look.

 but i love the 67/68 lines... i much prefer the curve up in the trim on the fastback, to the curve down in the other shapes.

you can feel there is much more going on visually in the 7/8's over the 5/6's. its all just fine tuning their original design. but then again the original design was simple, and eye catching none the less!

i think that the smooth channel on the sides of the 68 is more apealing that the 'gills' of the 67... gives it a more classic feel.

there are loads of 67's around, but not many 68's. i think a 68 would be a more unique buy. also, as far as safety goes, the newer the car, the better safety features. 68 definately outshines the earlier cars in this department, but retains everything in looks to the 67.

i took on my 68 project cause it was the right price at the right time. i wasn't fussy. i just wanted a mustang. but after hearing of some safety benifits with these cars, i feel i made a great choice.

Offline hybrid

  • Blue Printed
  • ****
  • Posts: 1234
  • Account Suspended By Owners Request
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #8 on: February 18, 2010, 02:52:43 pm »
I just prefer the rear lights of the 64-66 over all the others.
- Stupid questions are better than stupid mistakes.
- Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away, barefoot, and you've got his shoes.

Offline Foresight

  • Blue Printed
  • ****
  • Posts: 1763
  • Captain Crash
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #9 on: February 18, 2010, 02:53:04 pm »
Yep they got better with safety every year the 69s had collapsible steering columns etc

funny about the rear lights hybrid thats what i think about my year haha

Offline rickchampion

  • Blue Printed
  • ****
  • Posts: 1021
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #10 on: February 18, 2010, 03:13:45 pm »
i must admit i think a 69 shape looks tough. Very strong look

Offline hybrid

  • Blue Printed
  • ****
  • Posts: 1234
  • Account Suspended By Owners Request
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #11 on: February 18, 2010, 03:26:16 pm »
They are all pretty similar really... its just the rear lights that I notice the most.

Sorry to all the ellynor owners, but they are the worst rear lights of the lot in my opinion. A good looking car ruined by those lights.
- Stupid questions are better than stupid mistakes.
- Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away, barefoot, and you've got his shoes.

Offline A67PNY

  • Worked
  • ***
  • Posts: 512
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #12 on: February 18, 2010, 04:02:26 pm »
Settle down boys. They are all good.........:(

Offline non member

  • Top Streeter
  • ******
  • Posts: 3053
  • Account Closed
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #13 on: February 18, 2010, 04:06:40 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by hybrid
They are all pretty similar really... its just the rear lights that I notice the most.

Sorry to all the ellynor owners, but they are the worst rear lights of the lot in my opinion. A good looking car ruined by those lights.


Yes agree with that comment, the 68-9-70 Shelby had the best tail lamps, 65 T'Bird over the 67's Cougar units. The T'Bird lamps fitted the lines of the car. The Cougar lights on the 67 has that point at the end that just does not go with the body lines.

67 Shelby front is the best looking though in my opinion, tough hood scoop.

Offline non member

  • Top Streeter
  • ******
  • Posts: 3053
  • Account Closed
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #14 on: February 18, 2010, 04:10:51 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by tim_morrison82
have we completely forgotten the 68 here?

i do like the earlier mustangs for their vintage look.

 but i love the 67/68 lines... i much prefer the curve up in the trim on the fastback, to the curve down in the other shapes.

you can feel there is much more going on visually in the 7/8's over the 5/6's. its all just fine tuning their original design. but then again the original design was simple, and eye catching none the less!

i think that the smooth channel on the sides of the 68 is more apealing that the 'gills' of the 67... gives it a more classic feel.

there are loads of 67's around, but not many 68's. i think a 68 would be a more unique buy. also, as far as safety goes, the newer the car, the better safety features. 68 definately outshines the earlier cars in this department, but retains everything in looks to the 67.

i took on my 68 project cause it was the right price at the right time. i wasn't fussy. i just wanted a mustang. but after hearing of some safety benifits with these cars, i feel i made a great choice.


68's get forgotten because the strike hurt production so much. Not as many around as 67's. I like them because they were a strong car that had good safety features.

The 67-70 is far easier to work on though. Dash unbolts for starters.

However the 65 fastback will always be the favourite as it was the first. You find a good one & it will bring the bucks.

Offline soc123_au

  • Blue Printed
  • ****
  • Posts: 1498
  • Location: Penrith
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #15 on: February 18, 2010, 04:34:28 pm »
The most important thing to consider is which one is going to give you a stiffy when you sit behind the wheel.

Offline non member

  • Top Streeter
  • ******
  • Posts: 3053
  • Account Closed
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #16 on: February 18, 2010, 04:43:30 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by soc123_au
The most important thing to consider is which one is going to give you a stiffy when you sit behind the wheel.


Thats easy, all of 'em.. :(

But maybe it is the thought of Angelina J.... ::

Offline hybrid

  • Blue Printed
  • ****
  • Posts: 1234
  • Account Suspended By Owners Request
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #17 on: February 18, 2010, 04:47:53 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by soc123_au
The most important thing to consider is which one is going to give you a stiffy when you sit behind the wheel.


:+:+:+

I can't believe we have all forgotten the most important thing.
- Stupid questions are better than stupid mistakes.
- Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away, barefoot, and you've got his shoes.

Offline Foresight

  • Blue Printed
  • ****
  • Posts: 1763
  • Captain Crash
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #18 on: February 18, 2010, 04:57:07 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by hybrid
Quote
Originally posted by soc123_au
The most important thing to consider is which one is going to give you a stiffy when you sit behind the wheel.


:+:+:+

I can't believe we have all forgotten the most important thing.


:w

Offline non member

  • Top Streeter
  • ******
  • Posts: 3053
  • Account Closed
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #19 on: February 18, 2010, 05:14:35 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by Foresight
Quote
Originally posted by hybrid
Quote
Originally posted by soc123_au
The most important thing to consider is which one is going to give you a stiffy when you sit behind the wheel.


:+:+:+

I can't believe we have all forgotten the most important thing.


:w


What was the question again?

Offline IGALOP

  • Pegasus
  • *******
  • Posts: 4611
  • I have "CRAFT" Can't remember any F'n thing.
  • Location: Gippsland , VIC
  • Car: 2017 GT
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #20 on: February 18, 2010, 05:18:46 pm »
What is your favorite Hev?;2:(
Johnno;
 
Proud Vic MOCA member # 1569

I know it seems like I am in denial.........but I am absolutely not !!

Offline stangLover

  • Blue Printed
  • ****
  • Posts: 1339
    • http://www.eleanorforhire.com.au
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #21 on: February 18, 2010, 05:22:39 pm »
Go Eleanor ;4

Offline BLKPNY

  • Pegasus
  • *******
  • Posts: 4733
  • Forum Sponsor
    • www.CustomMustangs.com.au
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #22 on: February 18, 2010, 06:32:07 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by SUSPECT
Its wholey and soley a personal preference thing..
mine is..
65/6 FB has the best 'sporty' feel
67/8 Coupe has more muscle look to it..
69/70 Mach has the best of both worlds

As much as this may cause me grief.. Im not a fan of the 67/8 FB's at all.. nevermind the horrible rear end on Shelbys and Eleanors.. the lines are just all worng.
Agree with Kerry, the Shelby scoop is nice, but I dont like the long nose that goes with it.

67 has the best dash.

70 has the best front end

69 has the best rear 1/4's

65/6 has the best tail end

Short version is.. They're all good.

But back to the question... umm what was it again ??


Wow, it's almost like you're a carbon copy of me!

I think the best thing to happen to the 67/68 fastback is the shelby clone/eleanor craze! Anything to hide that rear end!

Although, I like both the 65/6 coupe & fastback, it's coupe only for the 67/8 and sportsroof only for the 69/70.
I also don't mind the 71 onwards sportsroof, and all the verts look good.
Custom Mustangs
0438 351 400 or 03 9782 8850
For Email CLICK HERE
2/14 Lakewood Blvd Carrum Downs Victoria
Signature Sponsor

Offline Cage

  • Worked
  • ***
  • Posts: 752
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #23 on: February 18, 2010, 09:32:07 pm »

I think the best thing to happen to the 67/68 fastback is the shelby clone/eleanor craze! Anything to hide that rear end!



;w I take it you are not a connoisseur of fine rear ends Steph. The rear end on the 67/68 fastbacks are absolutely gorgeous. None better in my opinion.

68 fastback all the way. The lines are smooth and long.
69 are tough. 70 are tough also.

Offline BLKPNY

  • Pegasus
  • *******
  • Posts: 4733
  • Forum Sponsor
    • www.CustomMustangs.com.au
1965/66 vs 1967/68
« Reply #24 on: February 18, 2010, 10:23:47 pm »
Haha!! Good to see that we all don't share opinions!! Or we'd all be chasing the same cars!

69/70 are the meanest/tuffest shape, in sportsroof shape. 69-70 coupes look awkward, as do the 71-73 coupes.

Custom Mustangs
0438 351 400 or 03 9782 8850
For Email CLICK HERE
2/14 Lakewood Blvd Carrum Downs Victoria
Signature Sponsor