Off topic 1966 Ford Mustang 289...critique or recommendations

[Roadster90]

18 year old son of my gal friend is seriously looking at a 66 coupe with 100k. Has new red paint, a/c that is blowing "cool" air.

Thoughts, comments, suggestions please????....Also are there any known trouble spots/areas to scrutinize or pick apart etc please?

If he was interested or versed in taking care of the/a car himself (he may very well get interested being that it is a classic, and we have bought him a tool set several years ago) I would consider it fine, but a car of that age may have seal and gasket problems as well as other issues that may overcome his enthusiasm............

Opps, price is 7500.00.

Also, being as this is a 2 door sedan or may be called a hardtop/coupe with a 289, would it be referred to as a plain jane "Hardtop" in the CPI or would it be a "GT Hardtop". CPI has a bunch of apparent performance categories but only two engine options with a category by themselves are mentioned (NO 289): a K Hardtop 271 HP, and a S Hardtop 371. This car does have a 289....but there is no 289 listing in the CPI...Just the plain Jane "Hardtop"....would the "Hardtop" be this car?

Thanks,

Nic

[Ronnie]

I'm not a Mustang expert but if the book has no listing for a 289 in 66 you need another book. The engines in 66 were an Inline 6 cylinder and the 289 v8. There should have been two hardtops. The standard coupe and a fastback, sometimes called a 2+2.

[Guest alex_houston]

$7500 seems the right price for a good driver 66. I wouldn't think you would need to do much work to it.I would look for rust in the bottom of rear quarter panels and bottom corners of the doors. If it is a northern car I would be suspect of the floor pans.

Good thing about the 66 Mustangs is there are very plentiful after market parts avaiable including body parts. I venture to guess you will never see that in Reattas.

[Vincent Vega]

I suspect it is a plain'ol Mustang. They are plentiful. Aftermarket parts are readily available and reasonably priced. As Alex noted that's a good price for a driver.

[55chevy]

Frame rails, torque boxes, and cowl vent area are notorious places to rust on a Mustang, and very critical. If these areas are solid then you have a pretty solid car. Cowl vent can be checked with a garden hose, my 66 fastback had been replaced and I never did get it to stop leaking. Put it on a lift and poke around the bottom with a screwdriver, the torque boxes are at the front of the rear springs.

[Roadster90]

Thanks folks! Please keep suggestions coming

We are going to take the car to a friend who has a lift to check it out....possibly this weekend.

[Guest imported_barra]

That era had a 289 and a 289 Hypo ( high performance ). Besides throwing you back into your seat with some very satisfying torque, you could also sit there and watch the gas gauge go down at the same time. No joke. No one ever bought a Mustang to drive it politely after church on Sunday. All the surveys that I have read regarding Mustangs have owners reporting that they are driven "hard".

[jonlabree]

Those 289's sure had some torque. I had ome in a Sunbeam Tiger. 4 speed and holley 4 barrel carb. It left a lot of Corvettes at the stop light.

[Howard]

The 66 Mustang is about as basic as a car can be for the mid 1960's. Parts are easily obtained, yet sometimes, not cheap. As mentioned, rust can be an issue. I would try to put the car up on a rack to look at just what kind of condition the underbody is in before purchase. The price seems about right for a "nice" driver car. On the A/C, check to make sure the drain hose is not cracked or improperly installed, remember the evaporator is in the car. Otherwise, you will have a floor full of water. Speaking of the A/C, the York compressor tends to be very loud when in operation. The sound does not mean there is something wrong with the compressor. These things were loud when new! Speaking of climate control, LOL. Ok, heater. These cars had a bad habit of leaking heater cores. Many owners simply blocked the hoses and never replaced or repaired the core. When someone new comes along, they connect the heater back up only to be greeted with water running on the passenger floor. The core is mounted in the black case above the passenger floor. Next open the trunk. Make sure the fuel filler pipe is in good order. You don't want fuel leaking in the trunk. Much was made of the exploding Pintos of the 1970's. The tank of the Mustang and Cougar are very, very much like the design of the Pintos. In short the floor of the trunk, is the top of the fuel tank. Next, lets talk safety. We now live in an era of ABS, Traction Control, Air Bags, Air Side Curtains, Shoulder Belts, ect. In 1966, these things were unheard of. The car will have seat belts, and belts only, and few other very minor items such as a padded dash and back up lights. So remember this car will not protect in an accident as well as a much newer car. The Mustang fitted with a 289 V8 was not a fuel hog. like say a 1966 Lincoln with a 462 of the period, but by today's standards it is. I don't know who is going to be buying gas, but who ever it is, the gas bill is not going to be even in the same league as our Reatta's. The original Mustang is an American icon. Many thousands are still on the road today. As far as classics (gosh I hate saying that, because I remember when in 1964 when the Mustang first came out and there was a line around our local Ford dealership to see it. I was still a little kid, but I remember) go, the Mustang is perhaps the simplest car to maintain and enjoy. Just remember, the car is 1960's in the form of safety and economy, don't expect more. Good luck. There might just be "a Ford in Your Future" If you do make the purchase, as a gift, you can add this: http://cgi.ebay.com/GMP-1965-Ford-Mustan...0QQcmdZViewItem

[Roadster90]

Thanks everyone for the informative replies. We took the Mustang to a friends with a garage today and he went over the car....has some issues as any 40 some year old car will have (more than I would be comfortable with, but acceptable to the young man). Missy's son wanted the car "badly" so in the end he bagained the price down and purchased it. Only issue that I am REALLY concerned with is the brakes. Mechanical brakes that I had a fairly hard time stopping with when I drove it to the shop. The friend/fellow that did the pre purchase inspection for the family stated that the front drum brakes had been replaced with discs and there was a adjustment valve by the master cylinder that could compensate for the lack of initial braking efficiency .... which I understood the theory....Maybe - I think ?????, but is it possible to provide safe stopping brakes???? I would have had a gread deal of difficulty not rear ending someone if I had to stop quickly as they are....any comments please?

Thanks again for the replies and help....

Nic

[Ronnie]

I would not want to drive a car that had the drum brakes replaced with discs if there is no power assist booster and matching master cylinder installed at the same time. Modern disc brakes (1970 and up) were not designed to have proper stopping power without a vacuum booster. Using a master cylinder designed for drum brakes with disc brakes is a definite mismatch in piston sizes (fluid displacement) between the master cylinder and calipers. I would consider the car dangerous without a vacuum booster and proper master cylinder for a disc brake car.

[Guest alex_houston]

Personally I always demand originality in a car. This is especcially true with the brakes. It shouldn't be too hard to find original brakes to go back with. I highly recommend it. The original brakes were great and should have never been changed.

[DAVES89]

Alex, you have brought forth an opinion I agree with. The problem with modifying a car is that you are the only one who knows what was done. Then the car is sold to someone and that person now has the burden of figuring out what was changed and then probably paying 3 times what the repair normally would have been.

And I really struggle with the brake mods I have been reading about. The problem with those changes is that we, on the most part,are not engineers and are running the risk of endangering other peoples lives to save a few bucks on parts.

This is only my opinion and not meant to offend anyone.

[Guest MauiWowee]

You gotta be kidding me! If the front brakes on this car have been upgraded properly as stated above, they will be FAR superior to the original drums. If I am reading correctly, this car is to be a driver, and safety is much more important than originality. The disc upgrade is very common on cars of this period. One of the first things I did to the '67 camaro that I have been working on for the last three years was to put disc brakes from a 1970 Chevelle on it.

(Oh, by the way, it will eat this Mustang for breakfast)

[Ronnie]

Nic wrote:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Only issue that I am REALLY concerned with is the brakes. <span style="font-weight: bold">Mechanical brakes</span> that I had a fairly hard time stopping with when I drove it to the shop. The friend/fellow that did the pre purchase inspection for the family stated that the front drum brakes had been replaced with discs and there was a adjustment valve by the master cylinder that could compensate for the lack of initial braking efficiency .... </div></div>

MauiWowee,

What part of Nics statement above led you to believe the brakes had been upgraded properly? There is no mention of power assist.

The '70 Chevelle you refer to would have vacuum assisted power brakes. Nic stated the brakes were "mechanical" so I assume they had no vacuum booster to make the disc brakes work properly. Therefore, the brakes would not have been upgraded properly. I stand by what I said previously that changing to disc brakes with NO power assist (vacuum booster) is dangerous.

[Reatta45]

My 66 mustang has factory power disc brakes. They were options in 66.

I bought it in 68 and still have it. KennyV.

[Guest MauiWowee]

I should have been more specific Ronnie. I was talking about the upgrade being done properly as you said.

[Ronnie]

I apologize if I sounded rude. I didn't mean to.

I just wanted to point out to the new owner that simply adding front discs in place of the drums without adding the matching master cylinder and booster could result in poor stopping performance and could be dangerous in certain situations.

[waltmail]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: nic walker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thanks everyone for the informative replies. We took the Mustang to a friends with a garage today and he went over the car....has some issues as any 40 some year old car will have (more than I would be comfortable with, but acceptable to the young man). Missy's son wanted the car "badly" so in the end he bagained the price down and purchased it. Only issue that I am REALLY concerned with is the brakes. Mechanical brakes that I had a fairly hard time stopping with when I drove it to the shop. The friend/fellow that did the pre purchase inspection for the family stated that the front drum brakes had been replaced with discs and there was a adjustment valve by the master cylinder that could compensate for the lack of initial braking efficiency .... which I understood the theory....Maybe - I think ?????, but is it possible to provide safe stopping brakes???? I would have had a gread deal of difficulty not rear ending someone if I had to stop quickly as they are....any comments please?

Thanks again for the replies and help....

Nic </div></div>

I just completed a complete resto mod of the same car, for a friend. A '66 notchback coupe. It is not a valuable finished product as there are so many on the road and not that desirable.

The brake upgrade is a common project for this car and its cousins. Most times the donor vehicle for parts is a Maverick/Granada/Monarch 70's era. Another common swap is 90's Ford Explorer rear discs. The keys to a high efficiency swap is to make sure you have a proportioning valve installed to balance the rear/front stability. I use a generic valve from Speedway Automotive. This unit allows you to dial in the balance usinf the trial and error method. A 60 % front 40 % rear adjustment is a good starting point. Less than $50.00. The other key is to use a large bore master cylinder. At least a 1" bore. The calipers on the disc setup require more volume than the drum cylinders. Use a split cylinder from a 1968 Ford as a good replacement. The perfect swap in is a Borg Warner style 1967 Corvette MC. 1 1/8 " bore. Readily available at any over the counter parts store.

[padgett]

I have had non-power disks in my GTO for years and they work just fine. Pedal is firm but not hard. The key is that it must have the correct master cyl for a disk/drum combo (there is a check valve in a drum brake m/c that you do not want with disks).

There were a number of 289s in '66 (think the 260 had gone away by then) in 2 bbl, 4 bbl, and Hi-Po (271 hp - no 371 that I have heard of)

Most common particularly with a/c was the 2bbl 289 and Cruise-O-Matic (C6 ?) that could start in either 1st or 2nd.

Major disadvantage to mpg were the high numerical (3.00 was common) rear ends of the day - a set of tall rear tires can help - and non-lock-up torque converters. Still, 20+ mpg is relatively easy and the 2 bbl 289 should run on regular (others need hi-test). That engine is very reliable if normal care is exercised.

As mentioned, safety devices were rudimentary (do not think a 66 even has a collapsible steering column) but the car is also very simple to work on.

Sounds like a fun project.

[Guest DTerry]

C4 and the best I ever got was 20...down hill with the wind. Eighteen highway was more common. Bought it new in '66 and drove it for 13 years and 165000 miles. Basically a Falcon in wolf's clothing.

What I don't understand is this: If I can lock the brakes and flat spot the tires, why would I need a brake upgrade? The only thing that would improve stopping would be tires - or road surface, and there's not a lot you can do about that. If the wheels are standing still, they're not more locked with a "better" brake.

For really hard driving, disk brakes won't fade as drum brakes do; but how many of us drive that hard?

Safety devices? Well, it had seat belts in the front, but I don't remember if there were belts in the back or not.

[padgett]

Didn't say over 20 mpg was stock, just easy. Heck, I once tuned a '73 Winnebago "Mini Wini" built on a G20 chassis & with a Chev 350 & QJ to average over 15 mpg - pulling a race car. Is one of the games I have always enjoyed playing. Over 20 with dual AFBs on a SBC was harder but possible with the right jets, rods, and progressive linkage.

Harder these days to improve much since computers are so good and close to the lean limit already, still I usually see 30-35 mpg instantaneous when cruising. Series II can top 40 in the same mode.

It is really more a matter of the right mixture and a really hot spark at the right time and running a torque engine as slow as possible.

If want to work a little harder, a 2.80 axle and 27" rear tires (speedo will be off & need to take care with clearances) will help. Dunno how much work would be needed to swap in a later lockup o/d trans but is the real answer (only consider if real cheap or trans goes). Keep in mind that any money spent will take a long time to earn back in saved gas (but may justify a geen sticker).

[Roadster90]

Thanks again for all the comments and suggestions...He drove the car home late last night when there was no traffic. He is happy, but we will be concerned until there are decent brakes...

Again Thanks,

Nic

[Guest EDBS0]

Congratulations, good decision!!

[rrs814]

I don't think GT. Mine had the 2 seams by rear window (fender seams to trunk) bondo filled and painted over. This is a big "flex" area. Mine cracked and crumbled. I've seen many with this BAD work. Not a cheap fix.