I recently purchased a 1965 Mustang. The plate inside the door says that it was built on August 10, 1964. I understand that Mustangs built prior to August 17, 1964 are commonly refered to as 64+1/2 and afterthat date, they are know as 1965's. Also, I understand that Ford changed fromgenerators to alternatorson that date.

So, here is my question... Is it possible that Fordbegan transitioning to alternatorsjust prior toAugust 17th? My Mustang seems to be correct in all other aspects but itis equipped with an alternator and the light on the dash also says "Alt".

 

You may be getting some dates confused. April 17th, 1964 was when the Mustang was first introduced to the public. I've never heard of a hard cut-in day for "full up" 1965s. I think it was more of a transition period during the fall of that year....when they started running fastbacks, installed alternators, changed hoods, etc... It wasn't a 'stop one day with 64 1/2s and start the next with 65s'. It's common to see first generation cars with varied combinations of parts.

 

Those are the reasons I've always thought it was worthless to try to distiguish a 1964 1/2from a 1965.

I mean, if they used the same system they use now (where models are released the fall before), then they would have all been called 1965s.

 

The decision to release the Mustang in April 1964 was market driven (as is almost every product - get it out early and I don't care if it don't work). Up until then, most new car modelswere introduced in October of the year preceeding the model year. Ford did call them a 65 model,identified them as a 65 model for registration purposesbutit was the general publicand more specifically Mustang enthusiasts, that called them 64 1/2 and that was done to distinguish them from a 'different' 65.
Jim

 

that just further's my thoughtsthat its pointless to try to distinguish them. I used to think that there was no such thing as a 64 1/2, but I kept hearing the term so much over theyears that I gotmore relaxed about it. From what you're saying, it looks like I wasright.

 

You are absolutely correct, there is no difference in a 170 CID I6, or a 260 CID V8, or a 289 CID 4V 210 HP V8, or a generator type electrical system, or a few other 'quirks' that only appear in the mysterious 'early'64 1/2 Mustang from a 65. Somehow these 'quirks' did not get carried over to the 'official' 1965Mustang. I got an idea; let's call the 64 1/2 cars -'not-Mustangs'.
Can you spell 'lynch mob'?
Jim

 

August first is the generally accepted date to change form 1964 1/2 to 1965. Now, obviously there are quite a few differences in the two models other than a generator to an alternator change as can be seen in the FAQ.There are leak over parts that Ford had to use up, so didn't waste them. Generally speaking, and I repeat generally, the August 1 date is what is GENERALLY accepted as the date involved with switching from 1964 1/2 to 1965. We all have 1965 on our registration paper though.

 

64 1/2 to 66 : correct me if i am wrong ! I believe most , not all , parts are interchangeable with falcon and comet . The mustang Came into it's own when the wider ( by 3 or 3 1/2 inches , don't remember) 67 was introduced and Ford could start shoeboxing the big FE's in them, starting with the s code 390.

 

Yes and No. Certain parts are interchangeable with a lot of Ford and Mercuryproducts. Mustang did not get is own engine block untl the Boss 302. The C4 was a full size Ford design and Fairlane designed engines are all over the place. In the rear quarter of my 65 and 66 Fastbacks are T-Bird lights. This is the way Ford designed cars.
Jim

 

Jim I thought you hac a couple of GT350's. Guess I was wrong. Here is the *** end of a 65 GT350.