carsofchaos

Hey Guys,
New to the forum but not new to Mustangs, but I have a weird one I'm trying to figure out and hoping someone can help me with it.
So I bought a 65 Mustang, one owner car who bought it new from the dealership. I'm told everything on the car is original. Including the engine. That's where it gets weird. The engine is a 170ci, so early production engine. It does have stickers on the carb indicating it's a 170ci, and I also checked by the firing order stamping which is 153624, indicating a 170ci engine.
However, the title, which VIN# matches the buck tag, is a "T" code (200ci engine) not a "U" code (170ci). Furthermore, on the trim tag, it is a 65A (late production) and the interior is a 26 (late production as opposed to the 56 which is an early production).
So, I'm at a loss here. From all intents and purposes, this appears to be the engine that the car was born with. It appears from the markings to be a 170ci. But from the Title, Buck Tag, and Trim tag, it's a later production car with a 200ci engine.
Has anyone run into this before or shed some light as to what's going on with this car?
Thanks!

bop11

The 170 had four main bearings and the 200 7. The 170 has 3 freeze plugs and the 200 5. The 170 was discontinued in summer of 64 but that doesn't mean some could not have found their way into production of the Mustang.
However in the past 50 years it is more likely that the engine was replaced with a unit salvaged from a junk yard and the owner never missed the extra power of the 200. He may not even remember replacing it or a shop did it and didn't tell him the difference. I can hardly remember where I was working back in the late 70's.

carsofchaos

Hi bop11 thanks for the reply on this. I don't have this car in my possession yet (it was quite aways away from me) so when I looked at it I didn't think to check the number of freeze plugs. However, to further the mystery, the Cruise-o-Matic shifter is a green dot shifter (1964 1/2) and also appears original to the car. The original owner swears up and down that the 170ci that's in the car is the only car that was ever in the car, and I tend to believe him.
I mis-spoke in my original post on one point: the Body code is 65A which is early production (I had said late, 63A is late) so the body code on the tag also lines up with an early production car. Yet as I mentioned the trim code (26) is a code for later production cars, not early. This car was also one of the first 55,000 Mustangs produced (#54,925), according to the tag. So I guess now I'm even more confused than before. Parts of the car indicate early production, other parts (mainly the VIN code for the engine and the interior trim code) indicate a later production car. I don't think this has any impact on it's value, but it is something I'd like to figure out.

bop11

The early 200's, I am told actually were a bored out 170 with the four mains and the 3 plugs, however, I thought these all went into Fairlanes. Now, I am told, that the very early '64-1/2 Mustangs got a 101-105 hp version of the 170. In August 1964 the change was made to the 7 main bearing 200 in the Mustang. So from your last post, it probably does have the 170 in it. With the auto and 105 hp it must be tough to keep up with the old VW's.

carsofchaos

I've seen birds pass this car.....BIRDS! But the car does have a bit low low-end torque and is kinda fun to drive. I read a few other articles that said you can basically disregard the "numbers matching" aspect of early 1965 'Stangs as they were making them so quickly and didn't have a good process set up yet for keeping track of everything. So I suppose it's possible this one has a 170ci engine though the data plate shows a 200ci, combined with the early auto trans, one early production trim code, one late production trim code, etc. etc. etc. And I used to think decoding my Mopars was confusing!

bop11

you could solve the problem by dropping one of your left over Hemi's in with the TorqueFlite pushbutton transmissions.

carsofchaos

I think that's the kinda thing that gets you kicked out of every Mustang club for the rest of your life

trublu07

In the late 90's I had a 65 coupe that was made in April of 1965.
It had the 64 1/2 style hood bumpers on the radiator support.
So I guess anything was possible back then especially with the
very high demand for these cars when new. The assembly line
probably had to use whatever parts they had whether they were
"64 1/2" or "65" parts. But yours is a very interesting one. If nothing
else a nice conversation car.

carsofchaos

Very true on the hodge-podge of parts. Now that I've finally gotten mine into my possession I've been able to go over it a bit better. late production hood and headlights, alternator (NOT generator). Codes are a mix as I said of early and later production numbers. Early style shifter. Horns in the later production location and smaller style. The engine is still the biggest mystery to me as it has the blue air cleaner and valve cover which appear to be original, yet a "170" sticker on the air clear which also looks to be original (along with the original owner's claim that it's a 170). 3 freeze plugs. Yet if it was a 170ci the air cleaner and valve cover should be orange. So, yes it it a bit of an odd one. The one other thing which is odd on this one is that it's got an AM radio which I'm also told is original but instead of saying "FORD" on it, it says "DELUXE". Haven't found another one of those anywhere.

carsofchaos

Just wanted to update this in case anyone was curious or needing the post for reference. I definitely have the 170ci engine. 3 freeze plugs. Engine is original to the car as far as I know. Most other items are of later production such as alternator, later production hood and horns, etc as mentioned earlier in the post. Though the car is a T code car, I was reading an article regarding Falcons of 1964 and they used the T code on their 170ci engines. So, I suppose at that time with Ford anything was possible.