Not all the things you marked with an asterisc are indications of a 64.5 ... many of them carried on into the regular '65 production year.

The things you didn't mention are the VIN code, the build date and wether or not it has a generator. Those 3 things right there (particularly VIN and build date) is what makes the determination.

The radiator support mounted horns, though, is the first indication that it is probably an early '65, but not what is considered a 64.5.

 

I'm pretty sure it's not a 64 1/2. It does seem to have a lot of the items of a 65 1/2 though. Engine has an alternator. VIN is 5R07C143962. Don't know what the build date is.

 

VIN is 5R07C143962

Definately not a 64.5 with a C code. It is a fairly early production car, however, but not like REAL early, since it was number 43,962 out of the one production plant. If we assume all 3 plants were producing at the same rate, your's would be roughly the 131,866th car produced.

 

According to Mustang Production Guide, 143962 sequence number puts its build date around October 2, 1964. C-code engine and alternator charging system make it a definite '65 model, not '64.5. Any San Jose car with sequence number above 125001 is a '65 model.

 

As mentioned, you can tell a 64.5 from a 65 strictly by the VIN, with no exceptions..............

Dearborn 2nd letter of VIN = F
100001 thru approx 230000 = 64.5
250000 & up = 65

San Jose 2nd letter of VIN = R
100001 thru approx 105000 = 64.5
125000 & up = 65

Metuchen 2nd letter of VIN = T
65-only, no 64.5's. They started Feb 1, 1965 with 130001.

 

Be careful about stating that anything above a certain VIN is a 65. I have one w/ 5F08C258XXX that is an Aug. 13th car and makes the cut-off by one day. Aug. 14, Friday, was the last day of 64 production @ Dearborn. The car has all the 64 parts, manual w/ GEN, but has the alt, and is a C code. Since Ford did running changes, I've never seen dates as to when certain changes were made, just examples that Ford did whatever when the mood struck. I also met another car made the same day with a few numbers off from mine that was similar in these changes. Haven't found any Aug. 14 cars yet, but am still looking!

 

There is no such thing legally as a 64.5, all of the Mustangs produced prior to the 1966 model year are 1965 cars.

As mentioned the engine code in the VIN is usually indicative of whether it is an early 65 (i.e., what gets called a 64.5) or a regular 65 - with the exception of the "K" code cars. For the others Ford tweaked the engines a bit and changed the engine codes as a result. If you've got a "C" or a "A" in the VIN it is a regular 1965 car.

For any engine code the early 65 cars will have a generator rather than an alternator, that is another easy thing to check an unmolested car.

John Harvey

 

Be careful about stating that anything above a certain VIN is a 65. I have one w/ 5F08C258XXX that is an Aug. 13th car and makes the cut-off by one day. Aug. 14, Friday, was the last day of 64 production @ Dearborn. The car has all the 64 parts, manual w/ GEN, but has the alt, and is a C code. Since Ford did running changes, I've never seen dates as to when certain changes were made, just examples that Ford did whatever when the mood struck. I also met another car made the same day with a few numbers off from mine that was similar in these changes. Haven't found any Aug. 14 cars yet, but am still looking!

Are you the original owner of this car? How do you know for sure the car originally came with a generator? The last generator cars were scheduled to be built on the 31st of July '64.

From the In Search of Mustangs data, these Mustangs were scheduled to be built on August 14th(Nothing special about that date)
5F07C260747
5F07C261348
5F07C261361
5F07K261914
5F07C262308
5F08K262800

 

Yeah I'de have to go with 65 to, especiallly if it didn'y come a generator, and the alternator is stock.

 

I could be wrong about this? Because 64.5 cars had generators and the batteries got hot didnt they have slotted cooling fins in the radiator support in front of the battery to help cool it? My jan,7 1965 coupe doesnt have them but i have seen them somewhere on this site before.And i always thought that was one sure fire way to tell a 64.5 car?...Marc

 

The 64.5 identification has always bothered me. Especially since there is no such thing as a true 64.5.

-Deric

 

manual w/ GEN, but has the alt, and is a C code.

HUH? ???
The car is above 250001 (dearborn), so I would assume you mean it has the alternator, and the owner's manual calls it a generator?

I'll stand by the VIN # ID system until someone can prove it wrong. I haven't found an exception after 5+ years of watching. I agree that MANY other items were running changeovers, but the VIN and alternator are the only foolproof, true identifiers... and VIN's can't be (legally) changed, although it's very common to change a generator car to an alternator....
:crazy:

 

The 64.5 identification has always bothered me. Especially since there is no such thing as a true 64.5.

-Deric

There is according to the "Liscensed Ford Product" t-shirt that was given to me as a present last year. Lol.

 

Deric - I think Rick covered this best:
64 1/2's NEED to be called 64 1/2's not for reasons of greed or value, but for PRACTICAL reasons to differentiate them due to the true differences they contain.

They have parts and colors and component finishes and details that are unique to their 6-plus month production-run, and if you don't IDENTIFY them with some distinctive and official name (I don't care what it would be, 64 1/2, early-bird, sub-65, whatever...), then the cars are not recognized and identified as what they are, and it would be CHAOS determining what parts to order or obtain or should be there when evaluating or restoring a '65 VIN'd car. The 64 1/2 moniker acts as a wake-up-slap to less-knowledgeable hobbyists to tune them into the fact that their car is unique compared to later-production '65's, and that they need to pay attention to that fact. Early bright-white interiors would unknowingly get replaced with off-white, carpets get replaced with the carpets that go under the sill plates, hoods get replaced with the wrong hood, incorrect electrical items would get ordered, and so-on and so-on.

I truly believe that the 64 1/2 moniker was invented by Ford dealer service and parts departments, and independent repair shops and parts houses, as an easy way to avoid the confusion, and appropriately identify the cars so they could make sure the right parts got ordered in for servicing and repairing (think about what a pain in the ass it is dealing with the 5/1/67 and 11/4/68 engineering changes). "It's a 64 1/2" was something that a service tech could holler across a shop to the parts guy, and the parts guy would immediately know that he was ordering a headlamp switch w/generator, rather than w/alternator, for the '65 sitting out there in the bay.

It's not a status thing, it's a practical thing. The increases value is simply a by-product of the perceived rarity, uniqueness, and being the "first" of the Mustangs....

 

I've also heard '65 owners saying that they have the ones with the problems sorted out...

I call ours either an Early '65 or a 64 1/2 depending on what I feel like. It has a 260 V8, a generator, and the horns in front out of the radiator...

Z.

 

I've also heard '65 owners saying that they have the ones with the problems sorted out...

Hehe, ain't that the truth! If you've ever seen all the TSB's released for Mustangs you'd wonder how Ford sold so many of them. It seems that by around April of '65, the problems started leveling off. A May/June/July '65 is a pretty good car with little issues from new, especially with deluxe interior and GT package.

 

I've also heard '65 owners saying that they have the ones with the problems sorted out...

Hehe, ain't that the truth! If you've ever seen all the TSB's released for Mustangs you'd wonder how Ford sold so many of them. It seems that by around April of '65, the problems started leveling off. A May/June/July '65 is a pretty good car with little issues from new, especially with deluxe interior and GT package.

Is there anywhere online you can read the old TSB's ? I'd like to look them over , I like reading stuff like that and recalls and such .

 

Not aware of any source online. You can probably acquire copies or originals.

 

The 64.5 identification has always bothered me. Especially since there is no such thing as a true 64.5.

-Deric

I completely agree. While it's useful for identification purposes, just try to find me a title with 64 1/2 on it, or a vin starting with "4 1/2"

 

I like the response, and agree with the reasoning. What bugs me is when people insist NO, in actuality the model year IS '64 1/2, or worse yet, '64. I saw a t-shirt of a Mustang 5.0 owner who worked at a parts store with me that said, "1964-1989, 25 years of the Mustang". She insisted that her '89 GT was a 25th anniversary year car. Her husband owned a garage. Me with my '67, what do I know about vintage Mustangs, he owns a shop and you cain't tell me nuthin. The t-shirt's mere existence was offered as "proof". I guess idiots are everywhere, but this was an argument of FACT that I just could not win.

 

But the first mustangs were released in 1964... so 1989 was 25 years after the first release...

The 2004 model year came with a 40th anniversary logo on it...

I know it doesn't make sense as the first model year was the '65... But Ford hasn't helped to clear the waters.

Still, if it has a generator instead of an alternator and was made in 1964 then what would YOU call it. I use 64 1/2 or Early 65 or even Early 65 with a generator to make the distinction clear. My wife says '64 1/2.

Z.

 

The 64.5 identification has always bothered me. Especially since there is no such thing as a true 64.5.

-Deric

I completely agree. While it's useful for identification purposes, just try to find me a title with 64 1/2 on it, or a vin starting with "4 1/2"

no - they just used a smaller font

 

She insisted that her '89 GT was a 25th anniversary year car. The t-shirt's mere existence was offered as "proof". I guess idiots are everywhere, but this was an argument of FACT that I just could not win.

How about my 1989 Mustang straight from Ford that has a 25th anniversary badge on its dash then?

Not everyone is an idiot. 1964 to 1989 is 25 years

 

Charles;
I'm the 2nd owner and have seen a number of these change-over cars. Since most upgrades were running changes, there isn't any info left as to when certain changes were scheduled. The car had a LOT of original parts- 25 spline drive shaft, correct switch position on the heater control, "A" on the air vent, correct beveled edges on the headlights (back of these still has the "Paint OK" stamps), turned down lip on a correctly dated hood, etc. BTW- It's from your area- Greensboro! It also has the rad support mounted horns. As I mentioned, it has the orig Owner's manual and it refers to a GEN, not ALT. I refer to it as a 64 9/10's, as it is such a collection of multiple upgrades. Even the A/C box is stamped July 64 on the back of the case. It had the orig paint until 1999.

 

Charles;
I'm the 2nd owner and have seen a number of these change-over cars. Since most upgrades were running changes, there isn't any info left as to when certain changes were scheduled. The car had a LOT of original parts- 25 spline drive shaft, correct switch position on the heater control, "A" on the air vent, correct beveled edges on the headlights (back of these still has the "Paint OK" stamps), turned down lip on a correctly dated hood, etc. BTW- It's from your area- Greensboro! It also has the rad support mounted horns. As I mentioned, it has the orig Owner's manual and it refers to a GEN, not ALT. I refer to it as a 64 9/10's, as it is such a collection of multiple upgrades. Even the A/C box is stamped July 64 on the back of the case. It had the orig paint until 1999.

All of those are very common "run-over" parts.

I misunderstood your original post, I thought you were saying your 'C' code came with a generator. The distinction between 64.5 and 65 has to do with the generator vs. alternator systems. Ford recognized this by jumping the consecutive unit numbers up to 250001 at Dearborn and 125001 at San Jose once they began producing the alternator cars. The change actually happened after the plants were shut down for re-tooling which was the end of July '64.