• Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech

67 Fastback body on 2005+ chassis?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nemesis67
  • Start date Start date Aug 2, 2009
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
N

Nemesis67

New Member
Jul 3, 2006
146
0
0
Las Vegas, NV
Aug 2, 2009
#1
  • Aug 2, 2009
  • #1
Came up with a new idea for my 67 FB. Now don't everyone hate me for this... Put my 67 FB body on an 05 + chassis. I've seen it done, but the difference is that an 03-04 cobra chassis was used. What do ya think about this? Has anyone seen this conversion?
 
2

2+2GT

10 Year Member
Apr 25, 2009
3,333
10
79
Southeastern Pennsylvania
Aug 2, 2009
#2
  • Aug 2, 2009
  • #2
Nemesis67 said:
Came up with a new idea for my 67 FB. Now don't everyone hate me for this... Put my 67 FB body on an 05 + chassis. I've seen it done, but the difference is that an 03-04 cobra chassis was used. What do ya think about this? Has anyone seen this conversion?
Click to expand...

Such conversions can be done, but involve a lot of expensive cutting, welding etc. You see, neither the 67 nor the 05 have a chassis, as such, the structural parts and the body are all one piece. Since the 67 and 05 have absolutely nothing in common, all of the attaching points for the 05 suspension would have to be adapted, modified, fabricated, or purchased from a custom manufacturer.
 
N

Nemesis67

New Member
Jul 3, 2006
146
0
0
Las Vegas, NV
Aug 2, 2009
#3
  • Aug 2, 2009
  • #3
I know that both are unibody's and I would use subframe connectors and more chassis stiffening fabrication before I cut up the newer car. The 67 would have the trunk and interior floors removed along with the rear frame rails and fender wells. As well as the front frame rails and engine bay panels. Yes it would be a lot of work, but that's the fun in trying to do it as well as a challange. And if it doesn't work? Well then I have more work ahead of me and I have a modern driveline to put into the 67 and a whole bunch of scrap metal to take to the salvage yard from the newer stang.
I do know that the newer stangs are less than an inch shorter in wheel base (107.1 -vs- 108). Which isn't a lot. So I can either leave it that way or gain the extra by moving the front suspension. I guess it depends on how froggy I feel about that .9"
 
2

2+2GT

10 Year Member
Apr 25, 2009
3,333
10
79
Southeastern Pennsylvania
Aug 2, 2009
#4
  • Aug 2, 2009
  • #4
Nemesis67 said:
I know that both are unibody's and I would use subframe connectors and more chassis stiffening fabrication before I cut up the newer car. The 67 would have the trunk and interior floors removed along with the rear frame rails and fender wells. As well as the front frame rails and engine bay panels. Yes it would be a lot of work, but that's the fun in trying to do it as well as a challange. And if it doesn't work? Well then I have more work ahead of me and I have a modern driveline to put into the 67 and a whole bunch of scrap metal to take to the salvage yard from the newer stang.
I do know that the newer stangs are less than an inch shorter in wheel base (107.1 -vs- 108). Which isn't a lot. So I can either leave it that way or gain the extra by moving the front suspension. I guess it depends on how froggy I feel about that .9"
Click to expand...

You'll have all sorts of problems if you use the modern wheelbase in the 67, such as the tires not fitting properly in the openings. Just tailor the driveshaft to fit after the engine, trans, and rear axle are installed.
 

latamud

Founding Member
Oct 22, 2002
791
2
19
Tampa, FL
Aug 2, 2009
#5
  • Aug 2, 2009
  • #5
Nemesis67 said:
I know that both are unibody's and I would use subframe connectors and more chassis stiffening fabrication before I cut up the newer car. The 67 would have the trunk and interior floors removed along with the rear frame rails and fender wells. As well as the front frame rails and engine bay panels. Yes it would be a lot of work, but that's the fun in trying to do it as well as a challange. And if it doesn't work? Well then I have more work ahead of me and I have a modern driveline to put into the 67 and a whole bunch of scrap metal to take to the salvage yard from the newer stang.
I do know that the newer stangs are less than an inch shorter in wheel base (107.1 -vs- 108). Which isn't a lot. So I can either leave it that way or gain the extra by moving the front suspension. I guess it depends on how froggy I feel about that .9"
Click to expand...

Yeah, that is going to be my next project, an 05+ with a 65-70 body on it. I too noticed the similar wheelbase recently. The 0.9" difference might not be so noticeable with larger wheels like 18's.
I'm currently building a 66 coupe/96 chassis mod, much more similar to the SN65 project with the 03 Cobra chassis. I didn't plan it to be but the 96 is a convertible which means it already has a reinforced floor, so when I cut the body off I won't have as much flex. also, the Cobra IRS dropout I have will bolt right under the 96. I have already moved the shock towers 6.7" forward and adapted another K member to move the steering and suspension forward. The old K member was reduced to an engine member to keep it close to the firewall. During the build I started researching if it would have been easier to find a production Ford with the same or similar wheel base. Some Lincoln Mark VIIs had 108" wheel base, and of course the 05+ at 107.1". If you choose to stretch the 05+ the extra 0.9" you might run into clearance issues with the oil filter, steering link between the column and rack etc. The 05+ is wider and might require fender flares, if you do not add the 0.9" and cut the fender lips off just add the flares with the wheels centered in the flare. Again, this is such a small length it would probably not be noticeable.

Keep us posted.

Here's my progress:
HubGarage.com - Where Car People Connect
 
N

Nemesis67

New Member
Jul 3, 2006
146
0
0
Las Vegas, NV
Aug 2, 2009
#6
  • Aug 2, 2009
  • #6
Yeah, I planned on finding a convertable as well. Less cutting and already braced up like you said latamud. As for wider, well I would have to find an 05+ and measure from the inside and outside of the rocker panels to be sure. I would want my original rocker panels of my 67 to be on the outside.
But all in all I think this could be done. All the ugly work would be hidden under the car and under the interior. Which I am planning on custom interior anyway so making parts to fit would be the norm.
And no back seat... at least not the old fold down bench from the 67 nor the 05+ seats. Got something else in mind for that, but I'm not telling what just yet.
By the way does anyone know off the top of their heads what the track is on the 67's? the 05+ mustangs have a front track of 62.3" and a rear track of 62.9"
 
S

suki243

Member
Dec 19, 2006
662
0
19
Southern California
Aug 2, 2009
#7
  • Aug 2, 2009
  • #7
Its been done/ going on. This one guy on youtube has been doing it. I believe its an 05 chassis with a 70 body. It is a ridiculous amount of fabrication and work, the guy did a pretty good job telling what was wrong. and stuff it was a link posted on these forums. i haven't been able to locate it fora while but i'll try to search for it again.

Edit: i couldn't find it, maybe someone will find it again, its been a while since i've seen it, but if i remember correctly almost nothing fit; the newer mustangs are a little longer in the back so he had to cut the frame rails and exhaust.
 

wicked93gs

15 Year Member
Sep 30, 2006
1,198
228
93
Nashville TN
Aug 2, 2009
#8
  • Aug 2, 2009
  • #8
seems like a lot of work for little effect to me...seems like it would b easier to stick with the classic chassis and just fabricate and/or adapt whatever suspension components you want for better handling, ride, etc. I can see the appeal of bolt in IRS, modular motors, etc....but the amount of fabrication required to reach that stage is...more insane than I am willing to take on. Also, its worth conidering a couple things...the weight gain...the new mustang is well over 3500lbs...some of that has to be chassis...also, you are contemplating hacking up a fastback, there really arent that many left, it would be a different matter if the fastback had a rusted out frame, etc
 
N

Nemesis67

New Member
Jul 3, 2006
146
0
0
Las Vegas, NV
Aug 2, 2009
#9
  • Aug 2, 2009
  • #9
OK, I found the you tube video that suki243 was talking about... 18 videos so far. If you guys want to look at it its listed as 2006 Mustang GT Re-bodied to 1970 Mach 1 Must see
Wow! A lot of work going on there.
I'm really having second thoughts about doing this. But that's why I'm here. Need to do the recon before I commit to the fight.
Still might get the 05+ mustang though to steal all the goodies off. But now it really doesn't need to be in the best shape... totally undriveable-salvage.
Thanks suki243 for the 411!
 

latamud

Founding Member
Oct 22, 2002
791
2
19
Tampa, FL
Aug 2, 2009
#10
  • Aug 2, 2009
  • #10
Nemesis67 said:
OK, I found the you tube video that suki243 was talking about... 18 videos so far. If you guys want to look at it its listed as 2006 Mustang GT Re-bodied to 1970 Mach 1 Must see
Wow! A lot of work going on there.
I'm really having second thoughts about doing this. But that's why I'm here. Need to do the recon before I commit to the fight.
Still might get the 05+ mustang though to steal all the goodies off. But now it really doesn't need to be in the best shape... totally undriveable-salvage.
Thanks suki243 for the 411!
Click to expand...

The 96 Vert I found, it rear ended a semi and blew the air bags, killed the hood, headlights, AC condenser, radiator, fenders, and fender aprons above the front bumper. The engine turns over fine, picked the lot up for $800 with a clean title. If i had the right mind I could have just fixed the front end and been driving it.
The 66 coupe I picked up has rotten floors, BAD! When I unbolted the shock tower braces they came crashing in on me.
So, considering all that I feel no harm done.
 

Rusty67

20+ Year Stangneter
Dec 3, 2002
3,749
37
109
LA, CA
Aug 3, 2009
#11
  • Aug 3, 2009
  • #11
An 05 chasis ? Who wants a strut suspension setup when you can have shocks ?
 

Bullitt

Packin' Heat
Founding Member
Jan 13, 2000
2,743
0
47
Houston, TX
Aug 3, 2009
#12
  • Aug 3, 2009
  • #12
Rusty67 said:
An 05 chasis ? Who wants a strut suspension setup when you can have shocks ?
Click to expand...

Have you driven an 05+? They (especially the Shelby GT and Bullitt) handle incredible well. That said, I know you can get a classic to handle that well, but it's big $$$.

Nemesis67 - what's the goal? Do you just want your fastback to be different or did you just want the modern driveline, ABS, etc... Just confused since it seems you just want to graft on the front and rear suspension, but retain the 67 interior (which is a different approach than the SN65 car). There are plenty of front frame rail / mustang II suspension kits that will let you put a mod motor into a 67. Rear suspension there are a ton of options too... Just trying to get a picture of what you actually want to do.
 
C

Calponycarsmike

New Member
Jan 22, 2009
71
0
0
Southern California
Aug 3, 2009
#13
  • Aug 3, 2009
  • #13
I don't see why you would not just graft a fiberglass body like this one to the 05 chassis it would work much better, and I know some people hate fiberglass but it would be much easier to work with, modify, and it may even save you some weight.

Fiberglass Reproduction Body Panels
 

jcode68

Active Member
Jul 15, 2003
892
1
29
Massachussetts
Aug 3, 2009
#14
  • Aug 3, 2009
  • #14
Unless the 67 is a total basket case, I would never suggest cutting it up for something like this. Don't get me wrong, I love the restomod scene as much as the next guy, but I think there is a line that shouldn't be crossed. In my mind, cutting the bajesus out of a 67 to make it fit crosses the line. I have followed the 2006/1970 build that Suki posted for the last year. The guy doing the work is extremely talented with fabwork and has had to do a fair bit of engineering as well to make things function. The hood mechanism is a great example. Here's the link to his website where he has pictures and videos posted. So IMHO, if you have a basket case 67 and a wrecked late model and the skills, time and budget to actually complete the project then go for it. Otherwise, as others suggested just perform the upgrades to the existing chassis and perform mod motor swap etc. Would be a hell of alot less work and $$ in the end. Lastly, not that resale is usually a motivator, but at some point you may want or need to seel the car. I personally wouldn't touch the grafted bodies with a 25ft pole.
 
N

Nemesis67

New Member
Jul 3, 2006
146
0
0
Las Vegas, NV
Aug 3, 2009
#15
  • Aug 3, 2009
  • #15
I just wanted to be different, as well as the newer driveline. My 67 isn't a basketcase, I bought it here in north Texas. So it has very little rust. I have already replaced the floors and a rusty area on the firewall that the original windshield washer pump helped create. I haven't stripped the paint yet, but I know that there are other areas that might have some more cancer. The battery tray is one such area, which is typical and obvious.
After looking at the video's and everyone's input, which I appreciate, I'm not going to do this swap. Just too much time and money to even make it feasable. So I'm going to have to settle on buying a wrecked/salvage 05+ GT or even a shelby if it is available at a good price. Then stealing all the goodies and making them work on my 67 fastback. Kind of a tight squeeze to put that wide/tall blown 5.4 shelby engine in a 67. But wouldn't that be too cool!
Hey does anyone have a wrecked Shelby they want to give me? LOL
 

Rusty67

20+ Year Stangneter
Dec 3, 2002
3,749
37
109
LA, CA
Aug 4, 2009
#16
  • Aug 4, 2009
  • #16
I wouldn't bother with the 3 valve motor. I think you will have an easier time finding a wrecked cobra that you can get a 4 valve motor from. That being said, why bother with modular motors ? They suck. Trust me, if I could get a later model SN95 with a pushrod motor, I never would have bought my Mach 1.
 

Loup-garou

Founding Member
Aug 11, 2001
337
0
16
New Orleans, LA
Aug 4, 2009
#17
  • Aug 4, 2009
  • #17
Rusty67 said:
I wouldn't bother with the 3 valve motor. I think you will have an easier time finding a wrecked cobra that you can get a 4 valve motor from. That being said, why bother with modular motors ? They suck. Trust me, if I could get a later model SN95 with a pushrod motor, I never would have bought my Mach 1.
Click to expand...

Yep, I'm more fascinated with the reverse of the "late-model powertrain in the vintage car" project. Something like John Colleti's '94 Mustang that Roush built with the Boss 429 tucked neatly under the hood. IIRC, that car ran an EFI system, too. With the prevalence of big, plastic engine covers and the tendency of many states to totally ignore checking under-the-hood during safety inspections (Texas tends to just plug in the OBD scanner), there's every possibility of pulling off such a swap. Just gotta make the big mill run on the factory ECU. A Boss '9 would look sweet in an '05-'09 model. Bet the big pushrod beast is no wider than a modular.
 
D

D.Hearne

New Member
Sep 29, 2000
11,730
6
0
south louisiana
Aug 4, 2009
#18
  • Aug 4, 2009
  • #18
2+2GT said:
Such conversions can be done, but involve a lot of expensive cutting, welding etc. You see, neither the 67 nor the 05 have a chassis, as such, the structural parts and the body are all one piece. Since the 67 and 05 have absolutely nothing in common, all of the attaching points for the 05 suspension would have to be adapted, modified, fabricated, or purchased from a custom manufacturer.
Click to expand...

The front suspension's not as hard as you'd think. The whole front suspension on the 05-09's is mounted in a cradle with either 4 or 6 attachment points. Mount the whole cradle, then do likewise with a Cobra's earlier independent rear suspension, which is likewise mounted in a cradle. I've seen the Cobra's rear suspension done in a 67, it only required two attachment points welded to fit it. The other two bolted right in.
 

latamud

Founding Member
Oct 22, 2002
791
2
19
Tampa, FL
Aug 4, 2009
#19
  • Aug 4, 2009
  • #19
D.Hearne said:
The front suspension's not as hard as you'd think. The whole front suspension on the 05-09's is mounted in a cradle with either 4 or 6 attachment points. Mount the whole cradle, then do likewise with a Cobra's earlier independent rear suspension, which is likewise mounted in a cradle. I've seen the Cobra's rear suspension done in a 67, it only required two attachment points welded to fit it. The other two bolted right in.
Click to expand...

The Cobra IRS isn't a bolt in for classics but DVS sells a kit to make it so. I modded my IRS cradle so that it bolts under my 66 but it took a LOT of test measurements and trial fitting. I'm still using the classic rear shocks too.

Another Cobra IRS swap LOTS OF BIG PICS! - Vintage Mustang Forums
 

EP429

Member
Jun 30, 2007
125
5
18
Central Texas
Aug 4, 2009
#20
  • Aug 4, 2009
  • #20
Loup-garou said:
A Boss '9 would look sweet in an '05-'09 model. Bet the big pushrod beast is no wider than a modular.
Click to expand...

Has already been done

http://www.stangnet.com/2008/11/06/jon-kaase-unleashes-the-boss-nine-589ci-ford-mustang/
 
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
Intro and FB questions
  • gflat65
  • Nov 16, 2025
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
1
Views
197
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Nov 25, 2025
horse sence
J
For Sale 94 Cobra 68K Miles
  • JP44
  • Apr 5, 2025
  • SN95 Mustangs For Sale (1994-04)
Replies
0
Views
451
SN95 Mustangs For Sale (1994-04) Apr 5, 2025
JP44
J
M
Too much for me to repair in my current housing situation
  • My Drama Magnet 04 Gt
  • Apr 1, 2026
  • The Welcome Wagon
Replies
8
Views
261
The Welcome Wagon Apr 14, 2026
Noobz347
Hard to start when engine is cold
  • 86_Capri
  • Mar 11, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
32
Views
889
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jun 21, 2026
CAMTWO1070
S
Fox '87 GT can't get to stay running
  • spilly
  • Mar 29, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
27
Views
684
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jun 20, 2026
spilly
S
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?