car fax anyone

[1983 glx]

I would like someone to do a car fax history for a 1965 Mustang vin# 5F07D122764. anything would help thanks

 

[runawayabc123]

I could be wrong, but I was under the impression you could NOT run reports on cars old then like 1982 (some year in the 80s) due to the way the VIN system worked out/changed.

So, I think you are out of luck.

 

[jlangholzj]

you would be correct, I tried running it on my car's vin for giggles and because of the different vin set up, you can't run one.

I'll find a decoder and plug it into that in a sec, but it won't say anything other than original color etc. if your looking for an accident report, i have no idea where to go from there.

maybee there would be a way to find out who the first owner was through calling around?? trya that way. also, i think if you tap on the body, you will be able to tell if there's any bondo

if you want to get reaaly ambitious, check between the creases between panels; if they put on a different panel and just painted it with them together, they will probally be different colors.

but if you just look around on the body, you should be able to see if the rivets are factory welds or not.

....have fun!!!!

 

[jlangholzj]

Assembly plant

Code Assembly plant

F Dearborn, Michigan
R San Jose, California
T Metuchen, New Jersey



Body Codes

Body Code Body Style

07 Hardtop
08 Convertible
09 Fastback

Engine Codes

CID = Cubic Inch displacement, V8 = 8 cylinder, I6 = 6 cylinder, V = induction venturi (4V would be a 4 barrel carburetor)

Engine Code Engine Type
A______________V8 289 CID 4V
C______________V8 289 CID 2V
D_____(64½ only) V8 289 CID 4V
F _____(64½ only) V8 260 CID 2V
K______________V8 289 CID 4V High Performance
T______________I6 200 CID 1V
U_____(64½ only) I6 170 CID 1V

 

[jlangholzj]

theres a discrepency in your vin,

according to the decoder, your car has the engine code of "d" which is the 64 1/2 while the first number of your vin is a "5" which indicates that its a 65..

just to be safe, you should also look in the door tag or the under the windsheild, whichever one you didn't look at just to verify the vin.

 

[chromedog]

im sure someone will correct me if im wrong, but i think all first year cars were considered 65's. also,thats a pretty low sequential number, so it is most likely a "64 1/2." my 65 is numbered 67xxxxxxx... post the build date from the door tag,and we can try and decipher the info for you.

 

[jlangholzj]

see that why you older guys are on here, I never knew that! so if that is true, then his 65 is actually a 64 1/2

 

[jlangholzj]

dbl post

 

[RedGTvert]

im sure someone will correct me if im wrong, but i think all first year cars were considered 65's. also,thats a pretty low sequential number, so it is most likely a "64 1/2." my 65 is numbered 67xxxxxxx... post the build date from the door tag,and we can try and decipher the info for you.

You are correct.

 

[chromedog]

while we are on the subject, its my turn...the car im working on, vin#5FO7T756861 has no door tag. does anyone have a vin that is close to the consecutive number so i can have a door tag made up that is at least close to the correct build date?

 

[jlangholzj]

while we are on the subject, its my turn...the car im working on, vin#5FO7T756861 has no door tag. does anyone have a vin that is close to the consecutive number so i can have a door tag made up that is at least close to the correct build date?

make a mention of it in tech, I'm sure that you will get more attention there happy hunting!

 

[spirockp]

1983 glx, if it's info your looking for about your car, just start out by asking questions from who you purchased it from. I have done research on my 66 Coupe and have talked to and or emailed the past 4 owners. Each one knowing the older owner. I also did some research on a 65 my Dad purchased that we thought had a Salvage title. I was able to find out the Insurance Company, I contacted them and received the original pictures of an accident that occured over 15 years ago. You will be surprised what you will be able to find, it just takes some time.

 

[ga289stocker]

see that why you older guys are on here, I never knew that! so if that is true, then his 65 is actually a 64 1/2

No it would still be a 65. 2+2's did not go on sale till Sept of 64 as 65 models.

 

[jlangholzj]

No it would still be a 65. 2+2's did not go on sale till Sept of 64 as 65 models.

hmmm...so even though the came out in 64, just for record purposes they call them 65's??

where did you get the 2+2 from?? according to the code, its a hardtop.

 

[1320stang]

Yeah, there are no real '64.5 Mustangs, they're all '65's.

The 64.5 designation comes from enthusiasts to differentiate the differences between the early and later cars. I guess technically (and you heard it here from me first) there are '67 and '67.5 cars because there were some big changes under the sheet metal.

 

[jlangholzj]

jlangholzj

why does ford have to be so F*n complicated!!?

I spose it makes sense, b/c now that i think of it, wasnt there a early and late 68 too?

 

[1320stang]

yeah, sort of. The reflectors on the quarters are either surface mounted or sunk in.

Ford wasn't trying to make it complicated, on the early cars, they were switching over from generators to alternators. Most of the rest of it was refining some of the design of the car, such as the unfinished front edges of the hood that caused the chamfered headlight buckets, larger MUSTANG fender badges, different colored front turn signals, etc.

In '67 you have the 4 piston to single piston brakes, the suicide steering shaft to the safety shaft, the whacky lower control arms, etc.

I guess the other '68 1/2 were the 428 cobra jets, which might be what you're referring to, and I don't recall if Ford called them '68 1/2 or not.