stephen4785 New Member Dec 14, 2003 321 0 0 Fort Worth Texas Jan 13, 2004 #1 Jan 13, 2004 #1 Everyone that I tell Iv got a 65 stang keep s saying "Oh thats the small one right?". Are the wheel bases or weight any different than the 66-69?
Everyone that I tell Iv got a 65 stang keep s saying "Oh thats the small one right?". Are the wheel bases or weight any different than the 66-69?
burnout289 Founding Member Jan 3, 2002 1,000 0 36 sun diego Jan 13, 2004 #3 Jan 13, 2004 #3 64 1/2 thru 66 are same body style. 67-68 are a lil more beefy. 69-70 are beefier still and kinda "buff" lookin. after that, they're just plain big.
64 1/2 thru 66 are same body style. 67-68 are a lil more beefy. 69-70 are beefier still and kinda "buff" lookin. after that, they're just plain big.
ozstang65 Founding Member Jul 13, 2002 313 0 0 Queensland, Australia Jan 13, 2004 #4 Jan 13, 2004 #4 For the weights, have a look at: http://www.e2cars.com/mustangpricesweights.htm I know the rear (and assumingly the front also) track is 2" wider on a '67 than a '64-'66, although the spring perch is still the same distance apart. If you have a dig through: http://www.thecarsource.com/shelby/thecars.html you might find some more info about the tracks and wheelbases. Good luck
For the weights, have a look at: http://www.e2cars.com/mustangpricesweights.htm I know the rear (and assumingly the front also) track is 2" wider on a '67 than a '64-'66, although the spring perch is still the same distance apart. If you have a dig through: http://www.thecarsource.com/shelby/thecars.html you might find some more info about the tracks and wheelbases. Good luck
SuperDave Early-Model Mentor Founding Member May 3, 2000 6,361 0 0 Tacoma, WA USA Jan 13, 2004 #5 Jan 13, 2004 #5 The '64 1/2 thru '66 are SMALLER in all demensions than '67 and later.