40th anniversary

S

StangCrazy302Gt

Founding Member

Apr 25, 2002

282

0

0

New Jerzy

Dec 10, 2004

#1

• Dec 10, 2004

• #1

the first stang was 1964 1/2....i own a 1990gt and i have the 25th anniversary badge on the dash...so 15 years after that is 2005 so wouldnt the 2005 be the 40th????

 

Motorhead6T5

New Member

Oct 21, 2004

215

0

0

Marysville,CA

Dec 10, 2004

#2

• Dec 10, 2004

• #2

yes

 

S

StangCrazy302Gt

Founding Member

Apr 25, 2002

282

0

0

New Jerzy

Dec 10, 2004

#3

• Dec 10, 2004

• #3

ok thats what i thought...but if im not mistaken the 2004 was said 2 be the 40th?? didnt that car get the 40th badges??? and if not why dont the 05 get the badges??

 

BlackArtemis

Dated 4 Amandas. Nothing special. Got the job done

Founding Member

Sep 23, 2002

0

3

49

West Chester, PA

Dec 10, 2004

#4

• Dec 10, 2004

• #4

because most people would not understand 1/2 years and simple addition makes 40yrs in 2004

 

S

StangCrazy302Gt

Founding Member

Apr 25, 2002

282

0

0

New Jerzy

Dec 10, 2004

#5

• Dec 10, 2004

• #5

so what ur sayn is what we allready kno is the 05 is teh tru 40th... and is ford putting the 40th badges on this year car?? if not why

 

Mr_dcj2001

Member

Sep 8, 2004

355

0

16

California

Dec 10, 2004

#6

• Dec 10, 2004

• #6

BlackArtemis said:

because most people would not understand 1/2 years and simple addition makes 40yrs in 2004

Click to expand...

Exactly.

 

BlackArtemis

Dated 4 Amandas. Nothing special. Got the job done

Founding Member

Sep 23, 2002

0

3

49

West Chester, PA

Dec 10, 2004

#7

• Dec 10, 2004

• #7

yay, i get the gold sticker now everyone join www.insaneindustry.com!

 

Mr_dcj2001

Member

Sep 8, 2004

355

0

16

California

Dec 10, 2004

#8

• Dec 10, 2004

• #8

Wait a second. The 1964 1/2 Mustang officially went on sale on 4/17/1964. Thus it was still considered a 1964MY. It came out late in the 64 MY however instead of coming out in late 63, hence the 1/2. Therefore the 04's are really the 40th anniversary, with cars born in April of this year being exactly 40 years of Mustang. The new model year begins in the last quarter of the previous year right? Am I correct? I don't know whats up with the 90GT and 25th plaques though. Anyways Ford does celebrate both models in thier 40th anniversary merchandise. Didn't the 99's have 35th badges, which would be correct?

 

one2gamble

Founding Member

Feb 27, 2001

902

1

0

Monterey

Dec 10, 2004

#9

• Dec 10, 2004

• #9

the 05s came out to late to be the 40th anniversay. The car was supposed to be due out in early 2004 as a "2004.5" but Ford failed...hence the 04 40th

 

VOORHEES

Stangnet's "35th Limited Edition" VIN Guy

15 Year Member

Nov 9, 1999

3,046

36

119

LaGrange, GA

Dec 10, 2004

#10

• Dec 10, 2004

• #10

Mr_dcj2001 said:

Didn't the 99's have 35th badges, which would be correct?

Click to expand...

Yes, they did. All 1999 Mustangs(except Cobras) have the 35th emblem. However, Ford did make a "Limited Anniversary Edition" for 1999. Only in GT guise and only 4628 were made.
-Jason

 

DLFD911

New Member

Nov 1, 2004

2

0

0

Fort Wayne, Indiana

Dec 10, 2004

#11

• Dec 10, 2004

• #11

4/17/1964, wouldn't that make it a '64 1/3 mustang???

 

T

TomServo92

New Member

Dec 22, 2003

517

0

0

Texas

Dec 10, 2004

#12

• Dec 10, 2004

• #12

If I'm not mistaken, all the 1964 1/2 Mustangs actually have VINs that show them as 1965 MY. So, going by VINs, there aren't any 1964 model Mustangs.

 

Mr_dcj2001

Member

Sep 8, 2004

355

0

16

California

Dec 10, 2004

#13

• Dec 10, 2004

• #13

This is confusing.

 

96ninjaman

Member

Jun 3, 2003

205

0

16

Maryland

Dec 10, 2004

#14

• Dec 10, 2004

• #14

Confusing, but correct. There was no such thing as a 1964 1/2 Mustang, they were 1965s.

 

BlueMonster65

Founding Member

Feb 24, 2001

385

0

16

Connecticut

Dec 10, 2004

#15

• Dec 10, 2004

• #15

its simple really.
2005 should be the 40th aniversary model because all 64's were considered 65's. however ford needed a way to sell all the leftover 2004 mustangs so they made them the aniversary model. its all a marketing scheme.

 

E

essveetee

New Member

Dec 10, 2004

2

0

0

Dec 10, 2004

#16

• Dec 10, 2004

• #16

here ya go

0-9 is 10 numbers not 9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94

31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04

41
05


there is no such thing as a 1964 1/2 model year

 

JonJon

Founding Member

Aug 16, 2002

4,801

1

68

back in Marylands

Dec 10, 2004

#17

• Dec 10, 2004

• #17

99 was 35th anniversary.

 

S

StangCrazy302Gt

Founding Member

Apr 25, 2002

282

0

0

New Jerzy

Dec 10, 2004

#18

• Dec 10, 2004

• #18

if there is no 64 1/2 why does every 1 even my self consider the first year a 64 1/2?? and wouldnt the 2004 1/2 and 2005 1/2 really be the 40th ?? and i really think the 05 should get the badging ... oldschool style designed after the old stang makes sence 2 me in more then 1 way

 

0

05PhillyStang

Member

Oct 28, 2004

120

0

16

Dec 10, 2004

#19

• Dec 10, 2004

• #19

essveetee said:

0-9 is 10 numbers not 9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94

31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04

41
05


there is no such thing as a 1964 1/2 model year

Click to expand...

You're correct, but forget about the whole thing about no such thing 1964 1/2 for a minute. If you get married in 1964, you're 1st anniv would be in 1965. If you were born in 64, you turn 1 in 65.

Back to the car: It all depends on how you interpret it. On April 17, 1965, the Mustang had it's first anniversary and turned 40 on April 17, 2004, smack dab in the middle of 2004 and 2005 production. However, if there is no such thing as a 64 1/2 and the car is simply a 65, then the first anniversary would be 1966, turning 40 as a 2005 model.

I was born in 1981. 1981 to 2004 is 23 years right? But I'm only 22. I'll be 23 at the end of the month.

 

Mr_dcj2001

Member

Sep 8, 2004

355

0

16

California

Dec 11, 2004

#20

• Dec 11, 2004

• #20

Math sucks and fractions suck. The car came out about halfway through the 64 model year and was technically a 64 1/2. Maybe they just labeled them 65's to not piss off the prospective customers they did not even have yet(see beginning sentence). Not a good way to put a brand new model of car out to the public. This thread has confused me enough. Imagine if they had pulled a 64 1/2 stunt. Anyways, 04's are still the 40th(technically).