LOL public outcrys for bannings...

 

Right there.....

 

Mustang came before the Camaro by a couple of years.

 

what i dont understand is why they chose to make the two new retro styled cars like this so much bigger than the original cars. i think it would be interesting to see them closer to their original dimensions, but thats just me.

 

Stupid safety laws make them heavy. But I agree, a base model Mustang at 2500lbs would be sweet. A fully loaded GT at 3000lbs w/ 300hp = who needs a fox?

 

Dumba$$, the Mustang was introduced in '65, the Camaro was introduced in '67. It was Chevy that was making a Mustang knock-off because the sales were so good. IMO Chevy did it better but the Camaro has never sold as well as the Mustang unfortunately. I blame it on the chick factor, the mustang is more of a chick's car than the Camaro is.

Oh yeah, and someone please ban that jacka$$.

 

Buuuuut if the Chevy Corvair hadn't been doing so well we might never have gotten the Mustang, which was a cheaper to produce car because most of the pieces were off the Falcon chassis.

 

LMAO

 

 

+1

 

isn't there a '64 1/2 mustang?

 

STFU you ****. Get off this board.

 

AFAIK there is no MY64 1/2 but that's about when they came out, but they were sold as '65 models. I'm not a Mustang History buff though so I'm just going by memory, and I have a bad memory.

 

I wasn't sure either, I had to look it up:

We’re amazed at the misconceptions ahoof about those early classic Mustangs; those classified ads worded "For Sale--1964 Mustang. . ." or enthusiasts boasting about their super-rare ’64-1/2. Truth is, there has never been a ’64 Mustang, ever. And honestly, whom are you kidding? The ’64-1/2 Mustang isn’t any more rare than one of its ’65 counterparts. In fact, there are no ’64-1/2 Mustangs at all; that title was coined by enthusiasts. The ’64-1/2 Mustang is simply an early-production unit without the refinements that came later. And another thing, Ford never built a production ’64-1/2 Mustang fastback.

Truth is, the ’64-1/2 Mustang lacks some of the nice engineering refinements and features those post-July ’64 steeds have, such as an alternator charging system, a better engine-to-bellhousing marriage, an adjustable passenger seat, and a host of other items.


A World of Difference

So what’s the difference between a ’64-1/2 and a ’65 Mustang? Not much and yet everything. From 50 feet away, they look the same; close up, they host quite a number of differences. The ’64-1/2 Mustangs have always been ’65 Mustangs--always. As enthusiasts, we call them "’64-1/2" because it’s easier to say, but it’s also a cult thing. Early ’65 Mustangs have the distinction of being the first block of Ponies ever produced. They were an integral part of the Mustang madness that swept the world in 1964. And if you have a "’64-1/2" built at Dearborn, that makes it even more significant in the relative scheme of things, because it was born in the motherland.

When the Mustang entered production early in March 1964, it didn’t have many of the refinements it would have later on; call it a reskinned Falcon with bucket seats. To be a ’64-1/2 at all, a Mustang has to be factory-equipped with a generator charging system, a 170ci six (U-code), a 260 2V (F-code), or a 289 4V (D-code) low-compression, large horns mounted down on the frame behind the radiator, a brake light pressure switch on the master cylinder, a center "off" heater fan switch, and a generator charge light, just to name the basics. These are features exclusive to Mustangs built between early March and July 31, 1964 (scheduled build date code only).

so basically, march thru july built are called "64 1/2" by enthusiasts, but nothing official.